The Getty Kouros

The kouros statue owned by the J. Paul Getty Museum was purchased in 1986 for $9 million. As pictured, the statue depicts a nude youth and was used as a dedication to the gods. Kouros statues similar to this piece would be found in sanctuaries and as grave monuments throughout Archaic Greece.

The sculpture dates from 530 B.C. but is suspected to be a more modern forgery. The museum’s online entry describes how the kouros embodies many different ideals from the aristocratic culture of Ancient Greece. They define this statue as a representation of youth itself. One such ideal of this period was arete, a combination of moral and physical beauty and nobility. Arete was closely connected with

kalos kagathos, a composite term for beautiful, good, or noble. In the sixth century B.C. these statues epitomised society’s value on youth and male beauty.

Recently, the authenticity of this particular statue has come into question, causing many curators to take a second look at its origin. Many different arguments have been presented analyzing whether this statue was forged or authentic.Some speculate that the statue is fake due to the usage of dolomitic marble the only kouros to use this material as well as the dissimilarities in physical proportions to other kouros pieces, which feature styles from both older and newer eras. However, the chemical weathering of the magnesium from the marble confirmed the statues age to be a couple thousand years, though geologists traced the stone to have been taken from an ancient Thasos quarry an unexpected location to conjure stone for such a project. Despite knowing these crucial factors, the sculpture was purchased and put onto display. Unfortunately, not long after, research showed that the weathering process can be replicated in a lab; it was then denounced as fake. Following the conclusion, further investigation was conducted revealing the curator who had sold the kouros forged the documents for the statue.

The Fragmentary Imitation Kouros

In 1990, art historian Jeffrey Spier discovered pieces of a kouros statue that have since become collectively known as the Fragmentary Imitation Kouros. This kouros was quickly identified as a forgery, but Spier believed it provided critical insight for the aforementioned Getty Kouros. He argued that the similarities in characteristics and art style between the two pieces proved the illegitimacy of each kouros, finally ending the debate on authenticity. Taking this into account, scholars immediately began research on the possibility of the statues sharing a creator, but were quick to discard the idea. The Fragmentary Imitation Kouros was deduced to have been manufactured by modern tools, while the style in which the Getty Kouros was erected remained consistent with the targeted time frame it should have been assembled in. Since the controversy, the Getty museum has obtained the Fragmentary Kouros as well in order to use it as a subject for studying modern forgeries of artifacts.

In 1992, the Getty Museum hosted an event in Greece in an attempt to publicly open up the debate to experts worldwide. Transporting the statue to Athens, nineteen experts in classical Greek artifacts were called to provide their collective insight on the topic. Despite compelling arguments from both points of view, the group was unable to come to a common consensus, and the Getty Kouros’ authenticity remains unsolved. The Getty Museum’s online entry explains that there is no exact conclusion to this issue, and while it does not specifically state that the statue is forged, it does acknowledge that the organization has limited knowledge on the subject of Greek sculpture. Therefore, the label ‘dated about 530 B.C. or modern forgery’ was used.

Head with Horns

The Head with Horns sculpture, sometimes referred to as the Gauguin statue, was purchased by the Getty Museum in 2002 and was believed to be a rare sculpture by the famous artist Paul Gauguin. This work was said to have been completed sometime prior to 1894. It was originally held in a private collection in the Marquesas Islands, Nuku Hiva, and was first photographed in 1894. Little is known about its whereabouts until it appeared in a private collection in Switzerland in 1993 . Shortly after, the sculpture was displayed for the first time at an exhibition at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City. The Getty Museum later purchased the object for approximately $3-5 million and it was one of their hero objects on display until 2015.

Scholars began disbelieving the sculptures’ authenticity, provoking the Getty Museum to remove the sculpture from display early that year. In large part, Fabrice Fourmanoir, a collector of 19th century art, provided key insight in debunking the theory that Gauguin created the wooden statuette. Fourmanoir ran an art gallery in Tahiti and was particularly interested in Gauguin’s work. He became involved shortly after seeing a photo taken of the ‘Head with Horns’. Fourmanoir stated that he saw two key differences between the head and other works by Gauguin. Gauguin was known for making his sculptures rough and primitive, contrasting greatly with this sculpture’s smooth and refined look. Additionally, the base of the sculpture was a kind that Gauguin never used. After hearing about the purchase, Fourmanoir reached out to offer his assistance to the Getty Museum in verifying the piece’s origin.

In his travel journal Noa, Noa, Gauguin had kept two photos of Head with Horns. These pictures were initially used as evidence proving the authenticity of the sculpture, however, as it turned out, they were actually taken by the photographer Jules Agostini. Furthermore, Agostini had notated the photos as “Marquesan Idol,” not referencing Gauguin at all. As a close friend of Gauguin, it seemed uncharacteristic of Agostini not to credit the art to its creator.The most compelling argument against the piece being a Gauguin, however, came from the photographs’ dates finally being confirmed. Agostini’s picture of the idol turned out to be from 1894, a year before he and Gauguin became friends. This means that the piece was created before Gauguin traveled to Tahiti, making the construction of such a work impossible.

Following the confirmation that Head with Horns was merely influenced by Gauguin, the Getty Museum revised its online entry. The artist was changed to ‘unknown’, with the description citing this change being a result of scholarly research over recent years by Getty professionals and other experts in the field, including significant new evidence that was not available at the time of its acquisition.