Forensics for Art's Sake

I’m sure nobody becomes a forensic scientist expecting to be thrust into the limelight.  I’ve worked on many high profile cases in my career, but have generally stayed under the radar.  However, I was lucky enough to be asked to examine a signature on a painting, thought to be a missing work by the much-loved English artist J M W Turner.  As a result, I have had my 15 milliseconds of fame, to mis-quote Andy Warhol. 

The painting, entitled ‘Fishing Boats in a Stiff Breeze’ was bought at auction for £3700 ($5980).   It is signed ‘JMW Turner’ in dark brown paint; the year ‘1805’ is written after the signature in the same paint.    

After an initial OMG moment - if the signature was genuine, then the value of the painting was estimated to be of the order of £20 million ($32.4 million) - I realised I should treat this examination the same as any other forensic signature examination, although I would also have to research the handwriting styles of the period. 

My essential requirements were examples of Turner’s signature written around 1805, or within a few years either side; a sample of 10 signatures would be ideal. 

This is when I discovered that Turner only signed his paintings when he either sold them or gave them away as presents.  I had expected to use the large collection of Turner paintings in Tate, London, as my source material.  However, they had been bequeathed to the gallery after his death; not a single painting was signed.

To cut a long story short, I did not get my 10 examples of Turner’s signature, but I did get to handle (with gloves, of course) some of his sketchbooks, which were a good source of comparison material.  When you have been used to reading death threats, ‘poetry’ expressing feelings of violence or sexual depravity and other generally unpleasant things routinely encountered by forensic scientists, it was a real privilege to be involved in a project where the questioned signature was on a beautiful painting and where most of my comparison writings were contained in books of exquisite drawings.

Although I wasn’t able to examine as much reference material as I would have liked, I saw enough to form an opinion about the authorship of the signature and date on the painting. 

In the meantime, a pigment analysis of the painting had been carried out, and the brown paint used to write the signature and date was considered to be contemporary with the rest of the work.  Modern forgery could therefore be ruled out.

My opinion, in summary, was that on the balance of probabilities, it is more likely that Turner did sign and date the painting than that he did not. 

So, along with other experts, I had helped to authenticate a missing Turner painting.  Last week the news hit the press.

 Missing Turner Painting Resurfaces

On Wednesday night, we presented our findings to an invited audience from the art world.  Beforehand, some of us were interviewed for a local BBC news programme.  It was fun – not a word normally associated with forensics. 

Are you planning to give your forensics characters their OMG moment?