0:00:02 > 0:00:05£18,500,000... £19,000,000 and £4,000,000...
0:00:05 > 0:00:09The art world, a place of outrageous fortune.
0:00:09 > 0:00:1195, selling at 95,000,000.
0:00:11 > 0:00:14But beneath the surface lurks danger.
0:00:14 > 0:00:18I probably turned out about 200 fakes over a six, seven year period.
0:00:18 > 0:00:22You're committing fraud on a grand scale.
0:00:22 > 0:00:25International art dealer Philip Mould uncovers sleepers,
0:00:25 > 0:00:28pictures with a secret past.
0:00:28 > 0:00:33Now he's bringing his detective skills to solve more mysteries locked in paint.
0:00:33 > 0:00:35In the past we looked at pictures,
0:00:35 > 0:00:37now almost you can look through them.
0:00:37 > 0:00:40I'm Fiona Bruce. As a journalist I'm used to hunting for facts.
0:00:40 > 0:00:44We're teaming up for a new series of investigations.
0:00:46 > 0:00:49This case will be one of the most challenging we've ever faced
0:00:49 > 0:00:52as we try and prove that this little dancer
0:00:52 > 0:00:56was painted by one of the world's most famous artists.
0:00:57 > 0:01:01Our investigation takes us from the ballet in Paris...
0:01:01 > 0:01:03That's it, isn't it? I mean, that is it.
0:01:03 > 0:01:07To Germany, and the biggest forgery scandal of modern times.
0:01:08 > 0:01:10When these paintings were thought to be genuine,
0:01:10 > 0:01:12how much were they worth?
0:01:12 > 0:01:14Millions.
0:01:14 > 0:01:16With cutting-edge science and new research,
0:01:16 > 0:01:20can we persuade the world's experts to accept it as a genuine work?
0:01:22 > 0:01:24If it is a fake, it's a very good one.
0:01:24 > 0:01:26This is, I think, on a knife edge.
0:01:45 > 0:01:47Mayfair, London.
0:01:47 > 0:01:51Where the very well-heeled come in search of jewellery,
0:01:51 > 0:01:53fashion and fine art.
0:01:53 > 0:01:56Fancy a bit of window shopping?
0:01:56 > 0:01:57I wouldn't say no.
0:01:58 > 0:02:03Many a multi-million pound deal has taken place behind these doors.
0:02:03 > 0:02:06So what do you think of that dreamy little Monet?
0:02:06 > 0:02:09That could look rather tasty above your fireplace.
0:02:09 > 0:02:11Now guess how much that is.
0:02:12 > 0:02:14I don't know, you know I hate guessing!
0:02:14 > 0:02:15What would you say?
0:02:15 > 0:02:19- North of a million pounds.- Wow.
0:02:19 > 0:02:21It's amazing, isn't it, just think - it's a piece of canvas
0:02:21 > 0:02:26and just the power of the artist's imagination and you get a value like that.
0:02:26 > 0:02:29Yeah, but it's also because the art world's authorities
0:02:29 > 0:02:32agree on its authenticity.
0:02:32 > 0:02:35I mean, this can be a street of broken dreams.
0:02:35 > 0:02:37I mean, for every picture that's fully accepted
0:02:37 > 0:02:42there are hundreds with question marks above their head.
0:02:42 > 0:02:43Which is where we come in.
0:02:50 > 0:02:53Patrick Rice and his son Jonathan have made an appointment
0:02:53 > 0:02:57to show us a painting that has had a question mark over it for decades.
0:02:59 > 0:03:03- Hi there. You must be Patrick. - Hello.- Fiona, nice to meet you.
0:03:03 > 0:03:06But they believe it's an important work
0:03:06 > 0:03:09by one of the world's most sought-after artists.
0:03:09 > 0:03:10Here's the painting.
0:03:10 > 0:03:14So this is the painting. Can I unwrap it?
0:03:14 > 0:03:15Yes, please.
0:03:23 > 0:03:25Oh, my word!
0:03:33 > 0:03:36- Degas, it says.- Yes.- Gosh.
0:03:37 > 0:03:40It certainly looks like a Degas.
0:03:40 > 0:03:44One of his dancers. Well, that's a typical Degas subject, isn't it?
0:03:44 > 0:03:48- I think it is, yes.- Well, dancers by Degas,
0:03:48 > 0:03:51I mean it's one of those great cliches out there, isn't it?
0:03:51 > 0:03:55Yes, well, it's interesting because obviously in some ways the main subjects
0:03:55 > 0:03:58are the double basses coming out at the front, you know,
0:03:58 > 0:04:01which gives it a rather dark quality
0:04:01 > 0:04:04but I think it's a very interesting painting.
0:04:04 > 0:04:09And how did you come by certainly what looks like a painting
0:04:09 > 0:04:12by one of the great Impressionist masters?
0:04:12 > 0:04:15Well, my father bought it at the end of the war from Knoedler's.
0:04:15 > 0:04:18- Which was an art dealer.- Yes.
0:04:18 > 0:04:21And presumably it wasn't cheap?
0:04:21 > 0:04:24No, no, I think it probably was about the right sort of market price
0:04:24 > 0:04:29- for the time, £800.- £800, just after the War.- Yes.
0:04:29 > 0:04:33- That's the equivalent of £20,000 in today's money.- Yes.
0:04:34 > 0:04:39Patrick's father, Edward Denis Rice, was a gentleman farmer from Kent
0:04:39 > 0:04:43who married an American heiress in the 1930s.
0:04:43 > 0:04:47The family fortune gradually disappeared at the end of the 20th century
0:04:47 > 0:04:53and the painting is one of the few surviving mementoes of a more prosperous age.
0:04:53 > 0:04:57But Danseuse Bleue, the Blue Dancer, doesn't appear
0:04:57 > 0:05:02in the official record of Degas works, the Catalogue Raisonne,
0:05:02 > 0:05:07and one expert who examined it in 2009 expressed doubts about its authenticity.
0:05:10 > 0:05:12What didn't he like about the painting?
0:05:12 > 0:05:14There were a few things.
0:05:14 > 0:05:18The face of the dancer, which I think he called trivial,
0:05:18 > 0:05:24the position of it, I think he said it was not a formal pose.
0:05:24 > 0:05:28And the draughtsmanship of the heads of the double bass and then,
0:05:28 > 0:05:32the other one, I guess the bigger one, would be the signature.
0:05:32 > 0:05:35Did he not think it looked like a Degas signature?
0:05:35 > 0:05:36He had problems with it.
0:05:38 > 0:05:40Without the Catalogue Raisonne,
0:05:40 > 0:05:44without the expert backup, it's extremely difficult to sell.
0:05:46 > 0:05:49If this is Degas, what's it worth?
0:05:50 > 0:05:55Well, it's easier to ask what it would be worth if it weren't by Degas -
0:05:55 > 0:05:57- probably a few hundred pounds.- Yeah.
0:05:57 > 0:06:03- As a work by Degas, possibly half a million.- Yeah.
0:06:03 > 0:06:06So, if you succeed in proving that this is by Degas,
0:06:06 > 0:06:09what do you have in mind for it?
0:06:09 > 0:06:15Well, it was handed on to me by my sister in order to help my side of the family.
0:06:15 > 0:06:20You know, it is very valuable and the best way that it can be useful
0:06:20 > 0:06:23to the whole family is to sell it. I think whatever happens,
0:06:23 > 0:06:27it's going to be extremely interesting to clear up the whole mystery of it.
0:06:35 > 0:06:38The stakes couldn't be higher for Patrick's painting.
0:06:38 > 0:06:41Degas is one of the most popular artists in the world.
0:06:42 > 0:06:45He's been the subject of blockbuster exhibitions
0:06:45 > 0:06:51and his works take pride of place in galleries such as the Courtauld Institute in London.
0:06:52 > 0:06:55I'm going to show you just how high the bar is set.
0:06:55 > 0:06:58I mean, if we're going to prove that Patrick's picture is by Degas,
0:06:58 > 0:07:03it's going to need to have all the hallmarks of the master who did this.
0:07:10 > 0:07:11Just beautiful, isn't it?
0:07:17 > 0:07:20Isn't that feeling of artificial lighting extraordinary?
0:07:20 > 0:07:24The shadow of the rose on her dress, is cast in that very dramatic way.
0:07:28 > 0:07:31It's almost like a snapshot, isn't it,
0:07:31 > 0:07:33frozen in mid-pose.
0:07:35 > 0:07:39I mean what I love about it is, I mean you know like so many women,
0:07:39 > 0:07:42I did a tiny bit of ballet, sort of clumping around the village hall,
0:07:42 > 0:07:45- when I was small...- Clumping?!
0:07:45 > 0:07:49Absolutely, and it is every little girl's kind of dream,
0:07:49 > 0:07:55those impossibly frothy toile, lighter-than-air skirts.
0:07:55 > 0:08:00He used the ballet like some artists used landscapes,
0:08:00 > 0:08:04others used still lives, to conquer all the great quests in art -
0:08:04 > 0:08:08feeling of light, feeling of colour, feeling of atmosphere.
0:08:08 > 0:08:09Feeling of movement.
0:08:09 > 0:08:11And movement of course, yes.
0:08:12 > 0:08:17And do you think our painting can live up to that?
0:08:17 > 0:08:19I mean, it is a tall order, isn't it,
0:08:19 > 0:08:22however this is a much bigger picture.
0:08:22 > 0:08:26Probably you could say rather more ambitious
0:08:26 > 0:08:32and I think there's enough trace elements for us to take Patrick's picture seriously.
0:08:32 > 0:08:35I really don't think this rules it out.
0:08:35 > 0:08:38Trouble is, Patrick's picture is not in the Catalogue Raisonne,
0:08:38 > 0:08:41and this painting of course is.
0:08:41 > 0:08:43Yep, and there it is.
0:08:43 > 0:08:49425, stamped, numbered, provenance there written up.
0:08:50 > 0:08:54I mean, we've got to find a way of getting Patrick's picture into this.
0:09:06 > 0:09:10Back in Philip's gallery, it's time to assess the challenge ahead
0:09:10 > 0:09:13with the help of our head of research Dr Bendor Grosvenor,
0:09:13 > 0:09:19a man with an acute eye for art and a keen instinct for evidence.
0:09:19 > 0:09:23I've been having a look at a high-resolution scan of Patrick's picture here
0:09:23 > 0:09:25and I think once you get your head round the composition
0:09:25 > 0:09:28it's actually quite an intriguing prospect.
0:09:28 > 0:09:30So, we've obviously got a little ballet dancer on a stage
0:09:30 > 0:09:32and then I think to the right of her,
0:09:32 > 0:09:35seems to me like a sort of grotto, background scenery
0:09:35 > 0:09:38and then on the left what looks like a seascape.
0:09:39 > 0:09:42And those dark looming shapes in the foreground
0:09:42 > 0:09:45are in fact double bass heads.
0:09:45 > 0:09:49So, this is an orchestra pit and what we're seeing is a performance.
0:09:51 > 0:09:54Those double bass heads are rather awkward, aren't they?
0:09:54 > 0:09:57Or interesting, depending on your point of view.
0:09:57 > 0:10:02I mean, it would be good to know if Degas painted that kind of thing in that way.
0:10:02 > 0:10:06But he likes a challenge, Degas, he does awkward.
0:10:06 > 0:10:10OK, so what do we know about the picture's history, its provenance?
0:10:10 > 0:10:13Well, very helpfully for me, Patrick still has the original invoice
0:10:13 > 0:10:16from when his family bought the picture in 1945
0:10:16 > 0:10:19and at the bottom of the invoice it says "provenance."
0:10:19 > 0:10:23"This picture was bought direct from the Artist by Goupil & Co."
0:10:23 > 0:10:26They were a famous firm of art dealers in the 19th century,
0:10:26 > 0:10:30"In 1882, and sold by them to Monsieur Emile Heilbuth,
0:10:30 > 0:10:33"Founder and editor of the well-known art magazine
0:10:33 > 0:10:37"Kunst und Kunstler of Berlin, and now comes from his daughter."
0:10:37 > 0:10:40So, we've got a previous owner who was an editor of an art magazine
0:10:40 > 0:10:44who bought it from a dealer who bought it from Degas himself.
0:10:44 > 0:10:46That's pretty compelling, isn't it?
0:10:46 > 0:10:48It is if we can make it all add up.
0:10:48 > 0:10:53Unfortunately I think I've spotted a mistake already in this legend.
0:10:53 > 0:10:56It says here that the picture was bought in 1882 from Degas,
0:10:56 > 0:10:59but we know that Degas was only dealing with another dealer,
0:10:59 > 0:11:04Paul Durand-Ruel, until 1887, so the dates don't quite work.
0:11:04 > 0:11:07So, how worried should we be about that?
0:11:07 > 0:11:08Does that mean it's a fake?
0:11:08 > 0:11:10I don't think we should get too hung up on this.
0:11:10 > 0:11:14This was, remember, 50 years after Degas sold it, it was passed
0:11:14 > 0:11:18from father to daughter, you know, things get lost in that process.
0:11:18 > 0:11:23The crucial thing though is to find it physically written in the Goupil Stock Book.
0:11:23 > 0:11:28Philip, you're always saying that you can tell as much about a painting from the back as the front,
0:11:28 > 0:11:31so is there anything on the back of this painting that can help us?
0:11:31 > 0:11:34I'm glad you remembered that but I'm afraid, in this instance,
0:11:34 > 0:11:37it's a red herring. There is something on the back
0:11:37 > 0:11:39but it's a Christie's stencil.
0:11:39 > 0:11:42And Patrick's family took it to Christie's in the 1970s
0:11:42 > 0:11:44when he was trying to get it authenticated then.
0:11:44 > 0:11:46But it's not necessarily a bad thing that we haven't found
0:11:46 > 0:11:50exhibition labels and signs of it being out in the public.
0:11:50 > 0:11:54This was a private painting that didn't get that light of day.
0:11:54 > 0:11:57Hmmm, well OK, so putting the back of the painting
0:11:57 > 0:12:01and the provenance to one side then, is there anything else
0:12:01 > 0:12:03we can do to establish whether or not this is a genuine Degas?
0:12:03 > 0:12:07I mean this has had some serious accusations thrown against it.
0:12:07 > 0:12:09We need now to try and rebuff those.
0:12:09 > 0:12:13If there's any new evidence we can unearth at all,
0:12:13 > 0:12:16then it might just mean that the people who are compiling
0:12:16 > 0:12:18the Catalogue Raisonne will at last put it in.
0:12:26 > 0:12:30Our search begins in Degas's hometown.
0:12:30 > 0:12:31Paris.
0:12:36 > 0:12:38First stop, the Musee D'Orsay.
0:12:46 > 0:12:50Once a railway station, it now houses one of the world's finest collections
0:12:50 > 0:12:56of Impressionist art, including some of Degas's most important paintings and sculptures.
0:13:00 > 0:13:03So, this is the man, Edgar Degas.
0:13:04 > 0:13:07He was 21 when he painted this self-portrait,
0:13:07 > 0:13:09but he was looking back in those days,
0:13:09 > 0:13:12he's looking back to the Old Masters who really influenced him.
0:13:14 > 0:13:17So, how did this rather stiff, self-conscious looking
0:13:17 > 0:13:21young man turn into the artist who created paintings full of vibrancy
0:13:21 > 0:13:25and movement, and who may have created Patrick's painting?
0:13:29 > 0:13:35The son of a wealthy banker, Edgar Degas was born in Paris in 1834
0:13:35 > 0:13:39and briefly trained as a lawyer before becoming an artist.
0:13:39 > 0:13:44The seriousness of his early work gave way to something altogether more daring
0:13:44 > 0:13:49and expressive when he discovered the bohemian world of the stage,
0:13:49 > 0:13:52as curator Xavier Rey explains.
0:13:52 > 0:13:55Xavier, nice to meet you.
0:13:55 > 0:13:57Nice to meet you and welcome at the Musee d'Orsay.
0:13:57 > 0:13:59Thank you.
0:13:59 > 0:14:02This particular painting, what can you tell us about it?
0:14:02 > 0:14:05This painting is one of the first ballet scenes by Degas
0:14:05 > 0:14:09and it's a view that was very unusual for that time,
0:14:09 > 0:14:12when you see the orchestra in the foreground
0:14:12 > 0:14:15and just the legs of the dancers of the background.
0:14:15 > 0:14:18But you notice something similar to Patrick's picture?
0:14:18 > 0:14:21Of course, the composition with the double bass sticking up
0:14:21 > 0:14:23into the stage area.
0:14:23 > 0:14:26But in the same way that the double basses
0:14:26 > 0:14:32somehow link you with the stage in Patrick's picture, so too this
0:14:32 > 0:14:34seems to sort of, almost like a ladder
0:14:34 > 0:14:36up into all the effervescent colour.
0:14:36 > 0:14:39Well, that's fascinating and it makes Patrick's picture
0:14:39 > 0:14:41seem slightly less outlandish.
0:14:41 > 0:14:44There's a continuity of thought there between this painting and Patrick's.
0:14:44 > 0:14:48You could see, exactly, you could see how the idea evolved.
0:14:49 > 0:14:54In 1874, a radical group of painters called the Impressionists
0:14:54 > 0:14:57staged their first exhibition in Paris.
0:14:59 > 0:15:04Alongside works by Monet and Renoir was a painting by Degas
0:15:04 > 0:15:07that showcased everything he was passionate about in art.
0:15:09 > 0:15:16So, this painting shows what the ballet scenes will be all Degas's career.
0:15:16 > 0:15:21A study of movement, of different poses of ballet dancers
0:15:21 > 0:15:24and also the study of the artificial light.
0:15:27 > 0:15:30Could Patrick's little Blue Dancer claim a rightful place
0:15:30 > 0:15:33on stage with the rest of Degas's ballerinas?
0:15:34 > 0:15:37We need to take our research a step further
0:15:37 > 0:15:41and find out more about how Degas painted his favourite subject.
0:15:49 > 0:15:53It was a real thrill to see the realism of the poses,
0:15:53 > 0:15:56of the dancers, you know, scratching, yawning,
0:15:56 > 0:16:01tying up a ballet shoe, fastening a ribbon, and I don't know enough
0:16:01 > 0:16:06about ballet to assess whether the dancer's pose in Patrick's painting
0:16:06 > 0:16:09is realistic in the way that Degas would have painted.
0:16:09 > 0:16:12No, that's something you need to check out further.
0:16:12 > 0:16:17I mean, we've seen a lot of evidence today, but provenance is an issue
0:16:17 > 0:16:20and it's something I'm going to need to tighten up.
0:16:23 > 0:16:26At the time we think Patrick's picture was painted,
0:16:26 > 0:16:30in the 1880s, Degas was frequently attending ballet performances
0:16:30 > 0:16:33here at the Palais Garnier, a spectacular opera house
0:16:33 > 0:16:35in the heart of Paris.
0:16:37 > 0:16:41I'm following in Degas's footsteps to get an insight into the world
0:16:41 > 0:16:45that inspired him, and to search for evidence that might help prove
0:16:45 > 0:16:47he painted our Blue Dancer.
0:17:05 > 0:17:09I want to find out if the scene depicted in Patrick's picture,
0:17:09 > 0:17:12bears any relation to a performance Degas would have seen here.
0:17:12 > 0:17:16Archivist Mathias Auclair has searched out visual records
0:17:16 > 0:17:19of two ballets that featured a grotto and seascape
0:17:19 > 0:17:23as part of the set, Sylvia and The Tempest.
0:17:23 > 0:17:27We have photographs of the set of Sylvia,
0:17:27 > 0:17:31and you can see it's Greek style with a temple.
0:17:32 > 0:17:36It's a bit of a stretch, isn't it, but I mean there is some water here,
0:17:36 > 0:17:40and a sense of an arch, but that's probably about it.
0:17:41 > 0:17:44The other one that's been suggested is possibly The Tempest,
0:17:44 > 0:17:46have you got anything about The Tempest from this time?
0:17:46 > 0:17:49- Yes, we have...- From 1889.- Design of the costumes.
0:17:51 > 0:17:56Gosh, this wasp waist here. Is that some designer's idealised version of a woman?
0:18:06 > 0:18:13Perhaps this one with the electric blue because it's...
0:18:13 > 0:18:17Yeah, yeah...and the shape and the style of the skirt,
0:18:17 > 0:18:20of the tutu, the headdress.
0:18:20 > 0:18:21Maybe.
0:18:21 > 0:18:24Possibly, yes.
0:18:26 > 0:18:29After a glimpse of the costumes in the archives,
0:18:29 > 0:18:32and those hanging now in the costume department,
0:18:32 > 0:18:35it's easy to understand why Degas once said his chief interest lay
0:18:35 > 0:18:40in rendering movement and painting pretty clothes.
0:18:40 > 0:18:42But I'm still hoping the ballet might provide us
0:18:42 > 0:18:45with more compelling evidence to support Patrick's picture,
0:18:45 > 0:18:48and on the other side of town, Philip is on the hunt for more clues
0:18:48 > 0:18:50about the painting's history.
0:18:57 > 0:19:01According to Patrick's invoice, we should be able to trace his painting
0:19:01 > 0:19:05right back to the moment it left Degas's studio.
0:19:05 > 0:19:07It's a tantalising prospect,
0:19:07 > 0:19:12but all I've got to go on are two names, Goupil and Heilbuth.
0:19:13 > 0:19:19To find out more, I've come to visit the archives of the man who managed Degas's business affairs,
0:19:19 > 0:19:23renowned art dealer Paul Durand-Ruel.
0:19:23 > 0:19:26He was well acquainted with all the players in the Paris art scene
0:19:26 > 0:19:30and his descendants Flavie and Paul-Louis have been searching
0:19:30 > 0:19:34his records for information about the names on our list.
0:19:34 > 0:19:38The first stage in our provenance is that we have a record of the picture
0:19:38 > 0:19:42being sold by Degas to Goupil. Now, who is Goupil?
0:19:42 > 0:19:50Goupil was mainly a seller and producer of lithographs and prints,
0:19:50 > 0:19:54but then Theo Van Gogh, the brother of the painter Vincent,
0:19:54 > 0:19:58worked with Goupil and was a very astute dealer
0:19:58 > 0:20:03and he brought quite a lot of business to Goupil.
0:20:04 > 0:20:06This is good news for us.
0:20:06 > 0:20:10Degas was notoriously picky about who he did business with
0:20:10 > 0:20:12but he trusted Theo Van Gogh
0:20:12 > 0:20:17and sold him some paintings of dancers between 1887 and 1891.
0:20:19 > 0:20:22So, there's a real chance that Van Gogh's brother would
0:20:22 > 0:20:24have bought our picture?
0:20:24 > 0:20:26- Yes.- Well, there's a thought.
0:20:27 > 0:20:31The last owner of this picture was a chap called Emil Heilbuth,
0:20:31 > 0:20:35who had a German connection, can you tell us anything about him?
0:20:37 > 0:20:41Well, Durand-Ruel had quite a long and active relationship
0:20:41 > 0:20:47with Heilbuth, he was sort of an unofficial agent in Germany.
0:20:47 > 0:20:51He knew collectors there and acted as a middleman.
0:20:51 > 0:20:56This is intriguing stuff. Emil Heilbuth, the previous owner of Patrick's picture,
0:20:56 > 0:21:01wasn't just the editor of a German magazine, he was also an art dealer
0:21:01 > 0:21:04and he seems to have been a keen buyer of Degas's works.
0:21:04 > 0:21:11You have here Degas bought by Heilbuth on 25th of October 1895.
0:21:11 > 0:21:15Ah, now that's interesting, because it shows that Heilbuth
0:21:15 > 0:21:17has a particular interest in this artist Degas.
0:21:19 > 0:21:23With Fiona and I following up leads in Paris, Bendor and Jonathan
0:21:23 > 0:21:27turn their attention to the criticisms levelled at the painting.
0:21:27 > 0:21:30The auction house Christie's had expressed interest in the picture
0:21:30 > 0:21:34in 2009 until a Degas expert they consulted
0:21:34 > 0:21:38found fault with the dancer's face and the artist's signature.
0:21:38 > 0:21:41But are there grounds for a second opinion?
0:21:42 > 0:21:46So, we've got here three absolutely authentic Degas signatures
0:21:46 > 0:21:49on different pictures, but I don't know about you, but to me
0:21:49 > 0:21:52they look as if they could all perhaps be by a different artist.
0:21:52 > 0:21:55- That one's very sort of rapidly painted, isn't it?- Yeah.
0:21:56 > 0:21:59And what I like about this one at the bottom is your expert
0:21:59 > 0:22:01said that the G was a little bit problematic
0:22:01 > 0:22:03but I find that quite similar to yours.
0:22:03 > 0:22:04Yeah, absolutely.
0:22:04 > 0:22:07And then here we've also got the sort of hook of the D.
0:22:07 > 0:22:11Yeah. And I think with your picture it's quite interesting
0:22:11 > 0:22:15because it's quite small it's different from doing a...
0:22:15 > 0:22:18a signature on a big finished painting, and it's a little bit like
0:22:18 > 0:22:20when you're trying to sign your own signature
0:22:20 > 0:22:23on the back of a credit card. You always get it wrong, don't you,
0:22:23 > 0:22:25it doesn't quite look like your normal signature,
0:22:25 > 0:22:29but maybe that's what was going on with Degas here.
0:22:29 > 0:22:32If I was forging that picture, I think I would go out there
0:22:32 > 0:22:34- to make the signature look...- Look really good.
0:22:34 > 0:22:37More like a Degas signature. So, the fact that it looks peculiar,
0:22:37 > 0:22:40- could actually be an argument in its favour.- Hmm.
0:22:41 > 0:22:44What else did the connoisseur not like about your picture?
0:22:44 > 0:22:47He had concerns over the face of the dancer.
0:22:47 > 0:22:49The face of the dancer, right.
0:22:49 > 0:22:51He described it sort of "trivial features".
0:22:53 > 0:22:56I mean, I suppose you can see what he means in a way,
0:22:56 > 0:22:58because it is a little bit awkward, isn't it?
0:22:58 > 0:23:01With that funny little sort of grimace
0:23:01 > 0:23:04and that funny little pair of eyes.
0:23:04 > 0:23:06Well, it's a very subjective thing.
0:23:06 > 0:23:09Even though it is sort of very simply drawn
0:23:09 > 0:23:12I think it's also very sort of competently drawn.
0:23:14 > 0:23:16Well, I've been having a little look amongst other Degas.
0:23:16 > 0:23:20What I think's really interesting is that the faces of these little figures
0:23:20 > 0:23:23- are actually, you could call them trivialised too, couldn't you?- Yeah.
0:23:23 > 0:23:25I mean, this one here looks like it was drawn by a five-year-old.
0:23:25 > 0:23:26Yeah, it does.
0:23:26 > 0:23:28And we've got some more examples here.
0:23:28 > 0:23:31Again you could say that these are rather trivial faces,
0:23:31 > 0:23:32couldn't you?
0:23:32 > 0:23:34So, I think what we're dealing with here is...
0:23:35 > 0:23:38It's quite difficult to actually make a firm opinion on a little face
0:23:38 > 0:23:42like that because in real life it's tiny,
0:23:42 > 0:23:45isn't it, I mean look, it's not even half a centimetre big.
0:23:55 > 0:23:58The Degas expert who examined Patrick's painting
0:23:58 > 0:24:00was also critical of the dancer's pose.
0:24:02 > 0:24:04As an artist, Degas was meticulous about the way
0:24:04 > 0:24:08he portrayed his dancers, depicting realistic ballet positions.
0:24:10 > 0:24:13But can we prove that the dancer in Patrick's painting
0:24:13 > 0:24:16is balanced in an authentic ballet pose?
0:24:22 > 0:24:25Back in the Palais Garnier in Paris,
0:24:25 > 0:24:29I enlisted the help of the head of ballet, a dancer, and a photographer
0:24:29 > 0:24:31to try and recreate the scene.
0:24:36 > 0:24:40We have here a picture which may or may not be by Degas,
0:24:40 > 0:24:45but the important thing I wanted you to look at is the pose of this dancer.
0:24:45 > 0:24:48Viviane, is this pose wrong?
0:25:00 > 0:25:03Well, what we're wondering, Leonore, is if you could take that position,
0:25:03 > 0:25:07we could catch a snapshot of it and then we could compare it with this.
0:25:07 > 0:25:09- Yes.- Yeah? Great.
0:25:09 > 0:25:12Sebastian, do you want to, let's see if we can capture that.
0:25:21 > 0:25:26Degas was fascinated by the new technique of photography.
0:25:26 > 0:25:28He got his first camera in 1895
0:25:28 > 0:25:32and used it to take photos of himself and his artist friends.
0:25:35 > 0:25:39But in an age when taking a photo was a slow and laborious process,
0:25:39 > 0:25:41Degas still had the edge in his art,
0:25:41 > 0:25:45capturing the turn of a heel or the twirl of a skirt
0:25:45 > 0:25:49in a way that the early photographers could only dream of.
0:25:49 > 0:25:51Now I don't want to be fussy but I think she's looking down.
0:25:51 > 0:25:54- Ah yeah, yeah, yeah.- I think she's looking down like that.
0:25:54 > 0:25:57C'est un problem?
0:25:57 > 0:26:00Is that a problem, would you not naturally do that, or...?
0:26:00 > 0:26:04Or it's OK? Oh, brilliant, OK.
0:26:04 > 0:26:06SHE SPEAKS IN FRENCH
0:26:06 > 0:26:08So, the position's not fixed, you're swaying.
0:26:08 > 0:26:09IN FRENCH
0:26:21 > 0:26:25So, so, yes, looking down, facing forward.
0:26:35 > 0:26:38That's exactly it, I think. That's it, isn't it?
0:26:38 > 0:26:39I mean, that is it.
0:26:41 > 0:26:43Good.
0:26:43 > 0:26:45Thanks very much.
0:26:56 > 0:26:58The third one.
0:26:58 > 0:26:59That's it.
0:26:59 > 0:27:03I mean, that's real progress for us. Degas could have painted that.
0:27:05 > 0:27:08Oh, look at that.
0:27:08 > 0:27:10I have to say that is better than I expected.
0:27:10 > 0:27:13Thank you, thank you, Leonore. That's just great.
0:27:17 > 0:27:21After a fruitful trip to Paris, we reconvene back at Philip's gallery.
0:27:21 > 0:27:24Bendor has been looking for hard evidence to back up the story
0:27:24 > 0:27:27on Patrick's invoice and he thinks he's found it.
0:27:29 > 0:27:33Now, I've been having a look in the Goupil & Co Stock Books
0:27:33 > 0:27:36and there is a reference to what could be our picture,
0:27:36 > 0:27:42it's here in 1889, stock number 19873
0:27:42 > 0:27:45and the title of the picture is Danseuse Bleue Et Contrebasses,
0:27:45 > 0:27:47which means Blue Dancer and Double Basses,
0:27:47 > 0:27:50and it was bought from Degas for 600 francs.
0:27:50 > 0:27:54Then in the final Goupil Stock Book instalment,
0:27:54 > 0:27:58we find that the picture was sold to Heilbuth.
0:27:58 > 0:28:02On paper the provenance is all very convincing, but we need to prove
0:28:02 > 0:28:05that the painting Patrick has now was the same picture
0:28:05 > 0:28:08that's in all these stock books from earlier on.
0:28:08 > 0:28:11But I've been going through the Catalogue Raisonne here,
0:28:11 > 0:28:14with which I've become very familiar, and unfortunately here's a picture
0:28:14 > 0:28:18- I think you might recognise.- Gosh, that's almost identical, isn't it?
0:28:18 > 0:28:20- To Patrick's painting.- Mm-hm.
0:28:20 > 0:28:22It hangs in an art gallery in Hamburg
0:28:22 > 0:28:26and it was given to them in the 1920s by a collector,
0:28:26 > 0:28:32who bought it in the 1890s from our friend Emil Heilbuth.
0:28:32 > 0:28:33Heilbuth?
0:28:33 > 0:28:38That's extraordinary because we're dealing with the same provenance,
0:28:38 > 0:28:41well, sounds like it, the same composition.
0:28:42 > 0:28:46So, we have to ask ourselves, is that going to be a problem?
0:28:48 > 0:28:51This is our first serious obstacle.
0:28:51 > 0:28:56If the entry in the Goupil Stock Book actually relates to the Hamburg painting,
0:28:56 > 0:29:01is Patrick's picture just masquerading as a genuine Degas work?
0:29:01 > 0:29:04- Bendor, can we see both pictures side by side?- Yes.
0:29:04 > 0:29:07Because surely, I mean look at them, we have to at least consider
0:29:07 > 0:29:11the possibility that Patrick's is a copy, you know, a fake?
0:29:11 > 0:29:13Well, I share your concerns.
0:29:13 > 0:29:16Though presumably if it was fake that would be before 1945,
0:29:16 > 0:29:20because after that date it was in the possession of Patrick's family,
0:29:20 > 0:29:24- we know that.- Yes, although unfortunately the mention of that year, 1945,
0:29:24 > 0:29:27slightly rings alarm bells in our world, wouldn't you say?
0:29:27 > 0:29:31I have to say that chilling date can be the kiss of death
0:29:31 > 0:29:33to an otherwise decent provenance.
0:29:33 > 0:29:37I mean, if you can imagine you've got the end of the Nazi era,
0:29:37 > 0:29:39the end of the Second World War chaos...
0:29:39 > 0:29:42There are literally thousands of masterpieces that go missing
0:29:42 > 0:29:45and it becomes a wonderful smokescreen for forgers
0:29:45 > 0:29:49to try and pass off their fakes as those missing originals
0:29:49 > 0:29:52and in fact in Germany the police have just been prosecuting
0:29:52 > 0:29:55a master forger who was doing exactly that.
0:29:55 > 0:30:00Well, maybe then we could talk to the German police about our painting
0:30:00 > 0:30:02and see how they spotted their fakes.
0:30:10 > 0:30:14I've come to Berlin, to follow up Bendor's lead
0:30:14 > 0:30:19about a major investigation into fake artworks with stolen provenances.
0:30:20 > 0:30:23I've secured a meeting in the grandly named
0:30:23 > 0:30:27State Criminal Police Office Department of Art
0:30:27 > 0:30:30with Marcus Schonfelder, one of the detectives who helped convict
0:30:30 > 0:30:36Europe's most prolific modern forger, Wolfgang Beltracchi.
0:30:37 > 0:30:43He was jailed for six years in 2011 for creating 14 fictitious works
0:30:43 > 0:30:47by renowned modern artists, but police believe he faked many more.
0:30:50 > 0:30:53We've got French, we've got Dutch, we've got German,
0:30:53 > 0:30:58we've got Modernism, we've got Cubism, Surrealism.
0:30:59 > 0:31:02I mean, he could turn his hand to anything, couldn't he?
0:31:02 > 0:31:04Yeah, it seemed so.
0:31:04 > 0:31:07When these paintings were thought to be genuine,
0:31:07 > 0:31:08how much were they worth?
0:31:08 > 0:31:11- Millions.- Millions?
0:31:11 > 0:31:12- Millions.- Wow.
0:31:12 > 0:31:15The most valuable I think is the Derain.
0:31:15 > 0:31:19For more than 4,000,000.
0:31:20 > 0:31:25Wow, and I mean he managed to trick art experts,
0:31:25 > 0:31:28gallery owners, museums.
0:31:28 > 0:31:33Yes. For a long time, I think for more than 20 years.
0:31:34 > 0:31:38The genius of Beltracchi's crime lay in the way he researched paintings
0:31:38 > 0:31:41that had gone missing during the Second World War.
0:31:41 > 0:31:44He then created his own versions of them, claiming the paintings
0:31:44 > 0:31:48had suddenly resurfaced from long-lost Jewish art collections.
0:31:50 > 0:31:52He made fake labels for the collections,
0:31:52 > 0:31:55soaking them in coffee so they would look old.
0:31:57 > 0:32:00Beltracchi's partner Helene even posed beside the fakes
0:32:00 > 0:32:07in period dress in a photograph that was doctored to look like it had been taken in the 1920s.
0:32:07 > 0:32:09A trick that was only exposed when the police discovered
0:32:09 > 0:32:13they'd bought the bronze sculpture in 2003.
0:32:16 > 0:32:19And how many did he paint?
0:32:19 > 0:32:24In the last interview I heard that he painted works from 50 artists,
0:32:24 > 0:32:27so you could count..
0:32:27 > 0:32:30- Dozens and dozens and dozens. Hundreds?- Perhaps.
0:32:30 > 0:32:34I don't know, really. That's his knowledge and his...
0:32:34 > 0:32:37- And he's keeping it.- And he's keeping it.
0:32:37 > 0:32:45So, presumably there are Beltracchi fakes on museum walls still?
0:32:45 > 0:32:48- In collections, in galleries? - Perhaps.
0:32:49 > 0:32:51The art world fell for Beltracchi's fakes
0:32:51 > 0:32:55because they had the provenance of the original missing work.
0:32:55 > 0:33:00Could someone have played the same trick on Patrick's father in 1945?
0:33:02 > 0:33:07Looking at the possible Degas, the sale letter talks of,
0:33:07 > 0:33:10it was sold in 1945 and it's written,
0:33:10 > 0:33:13a history of who it belonged to.
0:33:13 > 0:33:17- But that could be made up, we just don't know.- Yes.
0:33:19 > 0:33:22Beltracchi was finally caught when forensic tests
0:33:22 > 0:33:25on a suspicious picture revealed the presence of a pigment
0:33:25 > 0:33:29that didn't exist at the time it was supposed to have been painted.
0:33:32 > 0:33:37My advice would be to go to a scientist to analyse the pigments,
0:33:37 > 0:33:39the layers, everything.
0:33:40 > 0:33:44- So, expert connoisseurship on its own is not enough?- No, not really.
0:33:51 > 0:33:56The Beltracchi case shows how important science can be in exposing fakes.
0:33:58 > 0:34:01To be sure that there are no suspicious pigments
0:34:01 > 0:34:05in Patrick's picture I've come to University College London
0:34:05 > 0:34:09to meet Kathleen Froyen, an art historian with a high-tech gadget
0:34:09 > 0:34:12that wouldn't look out of place in a James Bond film.
0:34:15 > 0:34:19An art gun that can identify the chemicals in oil paint
0:34:19 > 0:34:22and trace them right back to the artist's palette.
0:34:24 > 0:34:29We're looking for chemical elements, and from the combination of elements
0:34:29 > 0:34:33that we find we can deduct which pigments were used.
0:34:33 > 0:34:35I see, so every pigment has its own, as it were,
0:34:35 > 0:34:38DNA that this gun can pick up.
0:34:39 > 0:34:43Yes. On average we'll find about ten to 15 elements.
0:34:45 > 0:34:48This is good cos we've actually found mercury here
0:34:48 > 0:34:52which means that he used vermillion to paint this very bright red.
0:34:52 > 0:34:57I see, so mercury is the sort of bed-fellow of vermillion as it were.
0:34:57 > 0:35:00- Yes, it is.- What does vermillion tell us?- Well, the Impressionists,
0:35:00 > 0:35:03and Post-Impressionist painters, were particularly attracted to this pigment
0:35:03 > 0:35:08because it was a brilliant scarlet, so they loved using it, it really caught their eye.
0:35:08 > 0:35:14There is one pigment that we just don't want to find in Patrick's picture.
0:35:14 > 0:35:17Titanium White.
0:35:17 > 0:35:21Only in use a year after Degas's death in 1917,
0:35:21 > 0:35:24its presence would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt
0:35:24 > 0:35:26that the painting is a fake.
0:35:27 > 0:35:30- So, you're going for the bonnet of the dancer?- I am, yes,
0:35:30 > 0:35:33it's the most obvious area where there's white present.
0:35:50 > 0:35:53Well, this is very encouraging. As you can see here
0:35:53 > 0:35:59the main elements found are lead, which is good because it indicates that probably lead white
0:35:59 > 0:36:01was used and not titanium white.
0:36:01 > 0:36:03- As opposed to the dreaded titanium. - Yes.
0:36:03 > 0:36:04Phew.
0:36:06 > 0:36:09Also a combination of copper and arsenic, that we found here,
0:36:09 > 0:36:13indicates that most likely he used emerald green,
0:36:13 > 0:36:18which is fascinating because it was used a lot in Degas's time,
0:36:18 > 0:36:21but throughout the 20th century, kind of phased out
0:36:21 > 0:36:27because it was poisonous and the pigment was eventually banned in the 1960s.
0:36:27 > 0:36:29Oh, right. Well, that helps us a bit.
0:36:33 > 0:36:36The pigments in Patrick's painting seem to be consistent
0:36:36 > 0:36:38with the Impressionist period.
0:36:39 > 0:36:44There's even evidence of certain colours specific to Degas's palette.
0:36:50 > 0:36:55But to be more confident that it isn't just a copy of the one in Germany,
0:36:55 > 0:36:59I've brought Patrick and his painting to Hamburg's renowned art gallery.
0:36:59 > 0:37:01For the first time in his life
0:37:01 > 0:37:06Patrick will be able to compare the two paintings side by side.
0:37:06 > 0:37:10Can his Blue Dancer hold its own next to a genuine work
0:37:10 > 0:37:13with remarkable similarities?
0:37:15 > 0:37:16Ah, there it is.
0:37:17 > 0:37:19Ah, yes.
0:37:19 > 0:37:22That's an extraordinary moment for me.
0:37:24 > 0:37:28Yes, fascinating as the double basses are placed almost exactly
0:37:28 > 0:37:31in the same position. It's extraordinary.
0:37:31 > 0:37:33Yes, the most obvious
0:37:33 > 0:37:36and sort of distinctive difference is in the tone.
0:37:37 > 0:37:40This is possibly a more brightly lit scene
0:37:40 > 0:37:44and that's a bit more twilight, wouldn't you say?
0:37:44 > 0:37:48This has got a... Yes, it is a twilight, heavier look to it.
0:37:52 > 0:37:55- This is much more modern looking, really.- Yes.
0:37:55 > 0:37:58- It's slightly brasher.- Yes, yes.
0:37:58 > 0:38:02There's a chunkiness about it which is very pleasing,
0:38:02 > 0:38:04actually I think it's lovely.
0:38:04 > 0:38:06You're about to say you prefer this.
0:38:06 > 0:38:07No, no, no.
0:38:10 > 0:38:13Comparing the pictures on the wall is one thing,
0:38:13 > 0:38:17but the gallery have agreed to help us go one step further
0:38:17 > 0:38:21and take their painting out of its frame for closer inspection.
0:38:27 > 0:38:31Meanwhile, I've arrived in Hamburg with a mission of my own.
0:38:31 > 0:38:35This was the hometown of the mysterious Emil Heilbuth
0:38:35 > 0:38:38and I want to know more about the man who figures prominently
0:38:38 > 0:38:39in the provenance of both paintings.
0:38:41 > 0:38:46I've come to the gallery's archive to meet historian Dr Alex Bastek.
0:38:46 > 0:38:49He's written about Heilbuth's life and career
0:38:49 > 0:38:51and shows me the only known photo of him.
0:38:53 > 0:38:56He attended the art college in Munich,
0:38:56 > 0:39:01and we know that there must be paintings by Heilbuth as well
0:39:01 > 0:39:05but we've no images of these at all.
0:39:05 > 0:39:09We know him best as an art critic, he wrote for several art magazines
0:39:09 > 0:39:14like Kunst und Kunstler, in fact Heilbuth was the first art critic
0:39:14 > 0:39:19to write a favourable article about Claude Monet in Germany.
0:39:19 > 0:39:22So, he was a supporter of Impressionism in Germany?
0:39:22 > 0:39:24- Yes, right.- Now you say he was an art critic but obviously,
0:39:24 > 0:39:28I mean, he owned Patrick's painting, so he was, what was he, a collector?
0:39:28 > 0:39:32He collected art to re-sell it, he was occasionally working
0:39:32 > 0:39:37as an art dealer as well, but most of all to teach the public
0:39:37 > 0:39:43what is modern art. He held lessons at the Weimar Kunst Academy
0:39:43 > 0:39:46with his three Monet paintings he possessed.
0:39:46 > 0:39:50So, he saw it as his mission, did he, to convert people
0:39:50 > 0:39:53- to Impressionism and to painters like Degas?- Yes, very much.
0:39:53 > 0:39:57We have a quite interesting letter here written in 1893,
0:39:57 > 0:40:01where he describes the painting of Degas.
0:40:03 > 0:40:06"Greater beauty and achieved with these simple means
0:40:06 > 0:40:08"I can not imagine".
0:40:09 > 0:40:11That's what he wrote about Degas.
0:40:13 > 0:40:17Heilbuth's passion for Degas made him a convincing salesman.
0:40:17 > 0:40:20He sold the painting that now hangs in the Hamburg gallery
0:40:20 > 0:40:23to a wealthy German collector who proudly displayed it
0:40:23 > 0:40:25alongside his Old Masters.
0:40:28 > 0:40:30You can just make out the double basses there,
0:40:30 > 0:40:32can't you, in the foreground.
0:40:38 > 0:40:42Without a photograph of Patrick's painting hanging on Emil Heilbuth's wall,
0:40:42 > 0:40:45we can only assume that he kept it all his life
0:40:45 > 0:40:49and passed it on to his daughter, as the original invoice suggests.
0:40:49 > 0:40:52The fact that Heilbuth never sold the painting
0:40:52 > 0:40:54that Patrick certainly believes is by Degas,
0:40:54 > 0:40:55do you think that's unusual?
0:40:55 > 0:40:59No, there might be several paintings he kept just to possess them,
0:40:59 > 0:41:03and to be an art collector as you expect someone to be.
0:41:03 > 0:41:05So, not necessarily because he couldn't sell them,
0:41:05 > 0:41:07because he didn't want to sell them?
0:41:07 > 0:41:11No, just because he loved this one and wanted to possess it.
0:41:12 > 0:41:15Back in the gallery's library,
0:41:15 > 0:41:17the moment of truth has arrived for Patrick
0:41:17 > 0:41:21and me as curator Jenns Howoldt unveils their Degas dancer
0:41:21 > 0:41:26and we get the opportunity to make a direct comparison with Patrick's painting.
0:41:26 > 0:41:28Hello there, how nice to meet you,
0:41:28 > 0:41:32and thank you so much for taking this painting out of its frame for us.
0:41:38 > 0:41:40I have to say this is a terrific moment, isn't it,
0:41:40 > 0:41:44I mean, there is no better way than comparing art
0:41:44 > 0:41:47- than in the flesh like this, is there?- No, absolutely.
0:41:50 > 0:41:54I have to say something strikes me, now we're seeing the two,
0:41:54 > 0:41:58the two patients, as it were, naked, without their clothes on.
0:41:58 > 0:42:03Your picture is thicker, the paint has a little bit more depth.
0:42:03 > 0:42:04Yes, I noticed that.
0:42:04 > 0:42:08The Hamburg painting seems altogether more spontaneous,
0:42:08 > 0:42:15even the ground layer of white paint that the surface has been primed with is doing some work.
0:42:15 > 0:42:17This makes this picture so interesting,
0:42:17 > 0:42:20because this has to do with light,
0:42:20 > 0:42:28and he uses this areas of the priming as a light source.
0:42:28 > 0:42:32And I get the impression that there's more...
0:42:33 > 0:42:36..more of a sense of evolution in your painting
0:42:36 > 0:42:39as if he's trying to arrive at the composition.
0:42:39 > 0:42:43Yeah, I think so, it seems to have involved more of a struggle really.
0:42:43 > 0:42:47The other one maybe came much more easily.
0:42:47 > 0:42:48Yes, I mean, in your picture,
0:42:48 > 0:42:51it looks as though the solution has been arrived at
0:42:51 > 0:42:54and he's playing, you know, he's playing with ideas and colours.
0:42:54 > 0:42:56Exactly, it's got a lighter touch altogether.
0:42:56 > 0:43:00Degas was an experimental artist who liked to try out different
0:43:00 > 0:43:02techniques and materials.
0:43:02 > 0:43:04As an alternative to canvas,
0:43:04 > 0:43:07he occasionally painted on wooden panels.
0:43:07 > 0:43:12Patrick's picture is on mahogany, but what about the Hamburg painting?
0:43:12 > 0:43:15Do you happen to know what wood yours is made from?
0:43:15 > 0:43:18Yes, this is, um... Obviously, it's mahogany.
0:43:18 > 0:43:21- It's mahogany?- Yeah.
0:43:21 > 0:43:24I mean, there are quite a few possible choices of wood,
0:43:24 > 0:43:29so the fact that they're both mahogany I find very encouraging.
0:43:29 > 0:43:33And although yours is covered with brown paper
0:43:33 > 0:43:36you can see that the edge has been similarly bevelled,
0:43:36 > 0:43:40which allows you to fit it into a frame better,
0:43:40 > 0:43:42apart from anything else.
0:43:42 > 0:43:47But one immediate thing that I've just noticed is this stamp
0:43:47 > 0:43:49on the back. Now I wasn't expecting to see that.
0:43:49 > 0:43:52Do you know anything about that?
0:43:52 > 0:43:59Not exactly, we can read one single word, this is "Paris".
0:43:59 > 0:44:04- I should think it's the artist's supplier.- I think that's quite possible.
0:44:04 > 0:44:08- But it gives us a lead, another lead. - Yes, yes, yes, it does indeed.
0:44:10 > 0:44:14What we've seen today is actually really encouraging
0:44:14 > 0:44:18and we've seen two paintings that share very much the same characteristics,
0:44:18 > 0:44:21I mean, the same approach to the subject matter,
0:44:21 > 0:44:25the same support, seeing how they're both on mahogany.
0:44:25 > 0:44:29I have to say I'm slightly more optimistic than I was,
0:44:29 > 0:44:31but I still think we've got quite a way to go.
0:44:35 > 0:44:37How did you get on?
0:44:37 > 0:44:39INAUDIBLE RESPONSE
0:44:39 > 0:44:42We both had cause for optimism after our visit to Hamburg,
0:44:42 > 0:44:46but we still needed to find out why the painting suddenly appeared
0:44:46 > 0:44:49in a London art dealers at the end of the Second World War.
0:44:53 > 0:44:57If Patrick's picture is genuine, we have to believe it was in the hands
0:44:57 > 0:45:00of Emil Heilbuth's family until this point,
0:45:00 > 0:45:05and the only people who can confirm that are Heilbuth's descendants.
0:45:09 > 0:45:11But we've made a thrilling break-through.
0:45:11 > 0:45:15We've tracked down Heilbuth's great-granddaughter Hilary.
0:45:15 > 0:45:19She lives in America but she's flown over here to give us some answers.
0:45:20 > 0:45:22Hilary, thank you so much for coming.
0:45:22 > 0:45:23Oh, it's a delight, thank you.
0:45:23 > 0:45:26Can you trace back the family connection for me?
0:45:26 > 0:45:31Emil Heilbuth married an Englishwoman and they had a daughter, Katie,
0:45:31 > 0:45:35my grandma, and she had a son Claude, my father,
0:45:35 > 0:45:38and there he is when he was at Oxford.
0:45:38 > 0:45:41And then it ends with you, for the purposes of our story.
0:45:41 > 0:45:42Yes, he had me.
0:45:42 > 0:45:47So, is there any specific family memory about the sale of the picture
0:45:47 > 0:45:48we're looking into?
0:45:48 > 0:45:51Oh, yes. My father specifically recalls
0:45:51 > 0:45:57my grandmother having to sell this Degas ballet dancer painting in 1945
0:45:57 > 0:45:58because she needed money.
0:45:58 > 0:45:59It's fascinating.
0:46:01 > 0:46:06Hilary's grandmother Katie married an Austrian Jew, in 1933.
0:46:06 > 0:46:09They lived in Vienna until the rise of the Nazis forced them
0:46:09 > 0:46:11to flee with all their belongings.
0:46:11 > 0:46:14She had the foresight to get to London,
0:46:14 > 0:46:18because that was where her family was, and where my grandma went,
0:46:18 > 0:46:22the collection went, after Emil died and left it to her.
0:46:22 > 0:46:25So, your grandmother inherited a whole collection from Emil Heilbuth?
0:46:25 > 0:46:29- Hmm.- So what sort of names are we talking about?
0:46:29 > 0:46:32There were two Manet lithographs, large ones,
0:46:32 > 0:46:35there was a Munch painting.
0:46:35 > 0:46:37We've still got this little Degas dancer,
0:46:37 > 0:46:39is what we've always known it as.
0:46:39 > 0:46:41This is a reproduction of it.
0:46:41 > 0:46:44It's a very sweet-looking little sketch, isn't it?
0:46:44 > 0:46:45It's charming.
0:46:45 > 0:46:48So, in terms of the provenance of this painting then,
0:46:48 > 0:46:50we're doing pretty well, aren't we?
0:46:50 > 0:46:57I mean, if we're tracing it from Degas to Goupil, Degas's dealer, to your great-grandfather...
0:46:59 > 0:47:02Down through the family, to your grandmother,
0:47:02 > 0:47:05to your father who remembers this painting being sold,
0:47:05 > 0:47:07we then pick up the trail at Knoedler's,
0:47:07 > 0:47:12the dealers, where we have the document saying it was sold to the Rice family.
0:47:14 > 0:47:18I mean, that is an unbroken line of provenance.
0:47:18 > 0:47:21- Yes.- Doesn't get much better than that, does it?
0:47:21 > 0:47:24I mean it's the sort of evidence that would convince a jury,
0:47:24 > 0:47:27but will it convince the Catalogue Raisonne writer?
0:47:29 > 0:47:31Hilary's story is compelling
0:47:31 > 0:47:34but Bendor might just have found the hard evidence
0:47:34 > 0:47:38we need to back it up. A separate entry in the Goupil Stock Books
0:47:38 > 0:47:44that proves Emil Heilbuth did buy two virtually identical Degas dancers.
0:47:44 > 0:47:49I've found a little nugget of provenance which I think is going to help our cause.
0:47:49 > 0:47:53It turns out that the picture in Hamburg, which we know belonged to Heilbuth,
0:47:53 > 0:47:57has its own provenance going all the way back to Degas in 1889.
0:47:57 > 0:48:01So, there's no question of the provenance of Patrick's picture
0:48:01 > 0:48:03being muddled up with the picture in Hamburg.
0:48:04 > 0:48:07In fact, the Hamburg picture, ironically,
0:48:07 > 0:48:10could actually help us prove Patrick's,
0:48:10 > 0:48:12because it could easily be some sort of variance,
0:48:12 > 0:48:16some sort of first idea, for the Hamburg painting.
0:48:16 > 0:48:18I mean, we sell versions of things all the time.
0:48:18 > 0:48:22I mean, Henry VIIIs and Nelsons, coming out of our ears.
0:48:22 > 0:48:25Patrick's painting could be a study for the other one,
0:48:25 > 0:48:27I mean artists did this, we know that Degas did this
0:48:27 > 0:48:31and added to which, they're both on almost identical panels.
0:48:31 > 0:48:34Well, I've done some research into the label
0:48:34 > 0:48:38which you found on the back of the panel of the picture in Hamburg
0:48:38 > 0:48:43and it comes from a firm of artists' suppliers called Rey & Perrot
0:48:43 > 0:48:46and their headquarters were just round the corner from Degas's studio.
0:48:46 > 0:48:50Annoyingly, we haven't got that stamp on the back of Patrick's picture,
0:48:50 > 0:48:52but I have had Patrick's picture X-rayed
0:48:52 > 0:48:57and it shows at the very least that it was prepared with a base layer
0:48:57 > 0:49:01or a ground layer of lead white paint, which is just how people
0:49:01 > 0:49:06like Rey & Perrot used to prepare the panels they sold to artists in Paris.
0:49:06 > 0:49:12OK, so both paintings are on the same professionally prepared
0:49:12 > 0:49:1619th century artists' supplier panel.
0:49:16 > 0:49:18Which is circumstantial at best really,
0:49:18 > 0:49:22but then if we add in the pigment analysis that you did
0:49:22 > 0:49:26and the provenance, does this mean we are now ready to submit
0:49:26 > 0:49:29Patrick's painting to the people who write the Catalogue Raisonne then?
0:49:29 > 0:49:31Nearly, but not quite.
0:49:31 > 0:49:36There's a woman I would love to show this to - Anthea Callen.
0:49:36 > 0:49:40She's seen as an oracle on this whole subject of Impressionism.
0:49:40 > 0:49:44If we can get her blessing for this picture
0:49:44 > 0:49:47I'd feel so much more comfortable taking it out to France.
0:49:51 > 0:49:55Getting an audience with Dr Anthea Callen hasn't been easy.
0:49:55 > 0:49:59She divides her time between Britain, France and Australia
0:49:59 > 0:50:04and her expertise as an authenticator is always in demand.
0:50:06 > 0:50:09She's reviewed the results of our forensic tests on the pigments
0:50:09 > 0:50:14and the panel but will she buy into our theories about the signature
0:50:14 > 0:50:16and the face of the dancer?
0:50:17 > 0:50:21She agreed to meet us at the Courtauld Institute in London
0:50:21 > 0:50:22to offer her opinion.
0:50:26 > 0:50:32Anthea, hello. What do you make of our little painting?
0:50:32 > 0:50:35It's an interesting problem. It's an interesting problem.
0:50:35 > 0:50:38There are all sorts of things that are good about it
0:50:38 > 0:50:42but I think there are definitely some serious queries as well.
0:50:43 > 0:50:46So, you've seen the tests now we've had done,
0:50:46 > 0:50:48the chemical analysis of the pigments,
0:50:48 > 0:50:51and they all seem to suggest that they're late 19th century
0:50:51 > 0:50:54or were certainly used at that date, now how do you respond to that?
0:50:54 > 0:50:57I think the pigments are very characteristic,
0:50:57 > 0:51:01both of the period and of Degas.
0:51:01 > 0:51:06What you find a good deal of in the results is the earth colours.
0:51:06 > 0:51:10Like red iron oxide, or yellow ochre for example,
0:51:10 > 0:51:16which aren't characteristic of most of the Impressionist painters' palettes,
0:51:16 > 0:51:21but nevertheless were regularly used by Degas, so that's all good.
0:51:21 > 0:51:23What about the signature, how does that look to you?
0:51:23 > 0:51:26Because that has been raised as an issue in the past.
0:51:26 > 0:51:32Yes, the signature goes very woolly after the D.
0:51:32 > 0:51:40The D I can accept but between the D and the S it goes rather sort of blurred and woolly.
0:51:40 > 0:51:42I mean, the signature did keep changing, though.
0:51:42 > 0:51:48Oh, absolutely, yes, absolutely. It's possible but it's...
0:51:48 > 0:51:51Give me something which you think is really against,
0:51:51 > 0:51:54because your expression suggests that you stand both sides of the line.
0:51:54 > 0:51:58Well, I would be concerned both about the...
0:51:58 > 0:52:03in a sense, the draughtsmanship, the construction of it.
0:52:03 > 0:52:10For example, in the heads of the double basses, for me the drawing is not quite right.
0:52:10 > 0:52:16He hasn't fully articulated the forms of those bass heads
0:52:16 > 0:52:21which he does in other work, so he clearly knows the instruments really well.
0:52:21 > 0:52:27One of the least convincing elements is actually the face.
0:52:27 > 0:52:29It's almost too cute, too pretty.
0:52:29 > 0:52:32I have to say I love what I'm hearing in a way
0:52:32 > 0:52:34because this is connoisseurship in action.
0:52:34 > 0:52:37Sure, but with the greatest respect to you, Anthea,
0:52:37 > 0:52:40obviously connoisseurship is an opinion and there will be several opinions.
0:52:40 > 0:52:44- Of course, but some people are more informed than others.- Absolutely!
0:52:44 > 0:52:48With Anthea sharing some of the same concerns as the Degas expert
0:52:48 > 0:52:52who examined Patrick's painting in 2009,
0:52:52 > 0:52:57the idea that someone else had a hand in the work still can't be ruled out.
0:52:58 > 0:53:01Have you ever seen other Degas in inverted commas,
0:53:01 > 0:53:03that look like this?
0:53:05 > 0:53:07No, I haven't actually, I haven't.
0:53:07 > 0:53:10So, I mean if it is a fake it's a very good one.
0:53:10 > 0:53:14Whoever has done this knows what they're doing.
0:53:14 > 0:53:18- So, either Degas, or a master of crime.- Exactly.
0:53:18 > 0:53:20This is, I think, on a knife edge.
0:53:22 > 0:53:26With one of the world's leading Impressionist experts finding
0:53:26 > 0:53:31it too close to call, are Patrick and Jonathan still happy for us
0:53:31 > 0:53:34to submit the painting to the Degas Catalogue Raisonne in Paris
0:53:34 > 0:53:36for final judgement?
0:53:38 > 0:53:43Given that we have this slightly double-edged response from Anthea,
0:53:43 > 0:53:46are you prepared now for us to go forward?
0:53:46 > 0:53:52Oh, definitely yes and I think on balance it's good news
0:53:52 > 0:53:55and we have to just accept what happens at the next stage.
0:53:55 > 0:54:00The case we've built up makes it a far easier judgement
0:54:00 > 0:54:03to say that it is by Degas than it's not.
0:54:04 > 0:54:09The Blue Dancer is making the most important journey of her life.
0:54:13 > 0:54:16All we can do is wait.
0:54:16 > 0:54:20The fate of the painting now lies in the hands of Galerie Brame and Lorenceau,
0:54:20 > 0:54:24the Parisian firm who control the Catalogue Raisonne.
0:54:24 > 0:54:28They have the sole right to rule on the authenticity of Degas's work,
0:54:28 > 0:54:35and in the art world, new and previously unknown Impressionist paintings are a rare discovery.
0:54:40 > 0:54:43But after more than a month of intense scrutiny,
0:54:43 > 0:54:50the Blue Dancer is back in England and a letter has arrived from Paris.
0:54:53 > 0:54:54Depending on what's in this letter
0:54:54 > 0:55:00Patrick's painting is either worth a few hundred pounds or a few hundred thousand pounds.
0:55:00 > 0:55:02- Are you ready?- Mm-hm.
0:55:04 > 0:55:06Oh, my God, I'm trembling slightly.
0:55:12 > 0:55:14"Brame and Lorenceau.
0:55:14 > 0:55:17"Nous avons le plaisir... We have the pleasure to confirm to you
0:55:17 > 0:55:20"That the painting described below, which you have submitted
0:55:20 > 0:55:23"For our appreciation is an authentic Degas."
0:55:23 > 0:55:27- Oh, my God!- That's fantastic. - Oh, my goodness!
0:55:27 > 0:55:29We've done it, we've done it!
0:55:29 > 0:55:32That's the shortest, sweetest, most fantastic letter I've ever read.
0:55:32 > 0:55:35Oh, my gosh. Oh, I just can't believe that. I was convinced...
0:55:35 > 0:55:38- So was I.- When I woke up this morning that...- Ah, ye of little faith.
0:55:38 > 0:55:41Yeah, this was not going to be. Oh, my God!
0:55:41 > 0:55:45And have you noticed it's already begun to change.
0:55:45 > 0:55:46THEY LAUGH
0:55:46 > 0:55:47It's shining.
0:55:47 > 0:55:49Patrick and Jonathan are going to be here any minute,
0:55:49 > 0:55:51and I can't wait to tell them.
0:55:56 > 0:55:59After more than 60 years of uncertainty,
0:55:59 > 0:56:03Patrick and Jonathan are about to get the proof they've dreamed of.
0:56:05 > 0:56:07Hi there, nice to see you both.
0:56:08 > 0:56:10The results are in here.
0:56:12 > 0:56:14How are you feeling?
0:56:14 > 0:56:18Well, I think we both feel absolutely on the edge,
0:56:18 > 0:56:21because we know how tricky the whole business is.
0:56:21 > 0:56:24We think it's unlikely that it got through.
0:56:24 > 0:56:26Well, brace yourselves.
0:56:28 > 0:56:31"We have the pleasure to inform you that the painting described below
0:56:31 > 0:56:33"That you have submitted for our appreciation
0:56:33 > 0:56:38"Is an authentic work by Edgar Degas."
0:56:38 > 0:56:42That's absolutely fantastic. That is, thank you.
0:56:42 > 0:56:45- Isn't that great? Are you shocked? - Congratulations.
0:56:45 > 0:56:48Thank you so much.
0:56:48 > 0:56:52- It's congratulations to you actually, or everyone here.- Here is your Degas.- Brilliant.
0:56:52 > 0:56:55- You're completely shocked.- No I am, I am really shocked.
0:56:55 > 0:56:57I mean, I think it's a real kind of lesson in not giving up
0:56:57 > 0:57:02because I really didn't think it was possible.
0:57:04 > 0:57:07With this letter, the line at the bottom here says
0:57:07 > 0:57:10"This painting will be reproduced in the second supplement
0:57:10 > 0:57:14"Of the Catalogue Raisonne of the work of Degas."
0:57:14 > 0:57:18Now that is the seal of approval that you need.
0:57:18 > 0:57:22If you're going to sell this painting, that's what you need, you've got it.
0:57:22 > 0:57:24I mean, what would that be worth now?
0:57:24 > 0:57:26Well, I can see, you know, for a pocket-sized Degas
0:57:26 > 0:57:29there would a lot of collectors out there who would love this.
0:57:29 > 0:57:35A ballet image by the great name, I could see it being worth half a million if not more,
0:57:35 > 0:57:36half a million pounds if not more.
0:57:36 > 0:57:42Yes, yes. Obviously with my children the best thing would be that it were sold
0:57:42 > 0:57:46- and it would help with their mortgages and everything else.- Do you feel your dad should do that?
0:57:46 > 0:57:49- I'm not going to tell him not to. - That was the arrangement.
0:57:49 > 0:57:52I think this calls for some champagne, I don't know about you.
0:57:52 > 0:57:54Most definitely.
0:57:55 > 0:57:57Cheers.
0:57:58 > 0:58:00To the christening of the new Degas.
0:58:05 > 0:58:07I'm so thrilled for them.
0:58:07 > 0:58:11You know, to think that one letter has made all the difference.
0:58:11 > 0:58:16And you know so often in this world that I occupy,
0:58:16 > 0:58:18I've seen people's dreams crushed,
0:58:18 > 0:58:23but equally on occasions I've seen lives transformed.
0:58:23 > 0:58:25And do you know,
0:58:25 > 0:58:27I'm already looking forward to the next painting that turns up.
0:58:32 > 0:58:33Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd