Han van Meegeren was born on October 10, 1889, in the Dutch town of Deventer. From a young age, he showed a gift for drawing and classical painting, though his father, a strict schoolmaster, discouraged any pursuit of art. Van Meegeren initially studied architecture at the Delft University of Technology before switching to art full-time, enrolling in The Hague’s Royal Academy of Art. His early works were grounded in realism, strongly influenced by the techniques of the Dutch Golden Age masters.
In the early 20th century, the art world was moving quickly toward abstraction and modernism. Van Meegeren’s finely detailed, realistic paintings were seen as old-fashioned, and critics dismissed his style as unimaginative. Despite some local success as a portraitist and illustrator, he failed to gain the critical recognition he desired. This rejection would sow the seeds of bitterness and a desire to retaliate against the very art world that had cast him aside.
Van Meegeren’s Grudge Against the Art World
By the 1920s and 1930s, van Meegeren’s frustration had hardened into resentment. He believed that modernist critics had misled the public into accepting distorted, abstract images as superior art. In his view, true craftsmanship had been discarded in favor of gimmicks and theory. He saw himself as a guardian of traditional skill, scorned by tastemakers who preferred artists like Picasso and Mondrian over the timeless beauty of Vermeer and Rembrandt.
Rather than adapting to modern trends, van Meegeren made a deliberate choice to strike back. His goal was not just to make money—though his forgeries would earn him millions—but to humiliate the critics who had rejected him. He wanted to prove that even the most revered experts could be fooled into praising his work, if only they believed it came from the hand of a master. It was a con with a mission: revenge disguised as rediscovery.
From Obscurity to Infamy
Van Meegeren began his forgery operation in the mid-1930s. He studied the works of Johannes Vermeer intensely, choosing him as his target for a number of reasons. Vermeer was admired but still mysterious; only about 35 paintings were confirmed as authentic, and many scholars believed more could exist. Crucially, Vermeer’s life included a long undocumented period, which left room for invention.
In 1937, van Meegeren unveiled The Supper at Emmaus, a supposed Vermeer that depicted a biblical scene. It was praised almost immediately by one of the world’s foremost Vermeer experts, Dr. Abraham Bredius, who declared it “the masterpiece of Johannes Vermeer of Delft.” This endorsement gave van Meegeren not just credibility but validation. The painting was purchased by the Rembrandt Society and displayed at the Boijmans Museum in Rotterdam. He had fooled the entire establishment—and no one suspected a thing.
Key milestones in Van Meegeren’s life:
- 1889: Born in Deventer, Netherlands
- Early 1920s: Career as a portrait painter and illustrator
- 1937: Created The Supper at Emmaus, falsely attributed to Vermeer
- 1943: Sold Christ with the Adulteress to a high-ranking German official
- 1945: Arrested for collaboration and revealed the forgeries
- 1947: Died in Amsterdam before serving his full prison sentence
Forging a Master: How Van Meegeren Created “New” Vermeers
Choosing Vermeer as the Perfect Target
Van Meegeren chose Vermeer strategically. Vermeer was respected but elusive, and his surviving works left scholars with gaps in his timeline—particularly in his early career and so-called “religious period.” Van Meegeren capitalized on these gaps by creating religious-themed paintings, a subject Vermeer had only lightly touched, making the works seem like plausible “missing links” in the painter’s evolution.
He also understood that rediscovering a lost Vermeer would be more than an academic achievement; it would be a source of national pride. The Netherlands had suffered cultural and political humiliation during World War I and the years following. To find a forgotten work by Vermeer, a Dutch national treasure, would be seen as a triumph. Van Meegeren offered scholars exactly what they wanted, and in doing so, bypassed their skepticism.
Techniques Used to Fool the Experts
Forging a Vermeer took more than talent. Van Meegeren spent years developing methods to replicate the materials and appearance of 17th-century paintings. He obtained original period canvases, often by purchasing lesser-known Dutch works and scraping off the paint. He created pigments from old recipes, carefully matching the muted tones and limited color palette of the era.
His most ingenious innovation involved mimicking the aging process. He added bakelite, an early synthetic resin, to his paint to harden it quickly. Then he baked the finished canvas in an oven, creating cracks—known as craquelure—that would normally take centuries to form. To embed the paint deeply into the canvas fibers, he used a roller to simulate the effects of time and handling. Experts were impressed by the “authentic” wear and aging, which passed chemical tests available at the time.
Materials and methods Van Meegeren used:
- Antique canvases from 17th-century paintings
- Homemade pigments mixed with bakelite
- Baked paintings to simulate age cracks
- Roller application to mimic embedded paint layers
- Religious iconography based on 17th-century themes
The Role of Experts and National Socialist Collectors
Art experts played a crucial role in validating Van Meegeren’s fakes. When The Supper at Emmaus was authenticated by Abraham Bredius, it opened the floodgates. Other historians, museums, and collectors followed his lead. Van Meegeren’s later forgeries, including The Last Supper II, Christ with the Adulteress, and The Washing of the Feet, were all attributed to Vermeer and accepted as genuine.
During World War II, the demand for prestigious European art increased. High-ranking figures within the National Socialist regime competed to acquire great works of art—both for personal prestige and to legitimize their own cultural power. In 1943, Van Meegeren sold Christ with the Adulteress to Hermann Göring. The forged Vermeer was traded for 137 original Dutch paintings, making it one of the most lucrative art deals of the era. Neither Göring nor his art advisors realized they had been duped.
The National Socialist Scandal and Van Meegeren’s Trial
Selling to Göring: A Forgery’s Infamous Buyer
The sale to Göring brought Van Meegeren enormous wealth and notoriety—but also dangerous consequences. After the war ended in 1945, Allied forces discovered the fake Vermeer in Göring’s private collection. Believing that Van Meegeren had sold Dutch cultural heritage to the enemy, Dutch authorities arrested him and charged him with treason.
The penalty for collaboration was severe—possibly death. To save himself, Van Meegeren made a shocking claim: the painting was not a Vermeer at all, but his own creation. Authorities were skeptical, assuming he was trying to avoid execution by inventing a story. But under investigation, the claim began to hold weight. Paint samples, x-rays, and expert reexaminations supported his confession.
Confession and Spectacle in the Courtroom
To prove his story, Van Meegeren agreed to paint a new “Vermeer” under official supervision. Over several weeks in 1945, confined to a small studio in the Weteringschans prison in Amsterdam, he recreated his process for a new work titled Jesus Among the Doctors. He used the same materials, same techniques, and same stylistic tricks that had fooled Europe’s top art historians.
The demonstration was a media sensation. Dutch newspapers published images of the artist working under guard. What began as a potential treason trial evolved into a strange courtroom theater, with Van Meegeren recast as a clever trickster who had humiliated both the art elite and the German leadership. He had, in a sense, turned his trial into a final performance.
Media Frenzy and the Verdict
Public opinion turned in his favor. Many Dutch citizens, still recovering from occupation, saw Van Meegeren not as a criminal but as someone who had struck a symbolic blow against a hated enemy. In a nation looking for moments of pride and humor after years of suffering, the story of a man who had tricked foreign collectors with counterfeit paintings had wide appeal.
In November 1947, Van Meegeren was found guilty of forgery and fraud but acquitted of treason. He received a light sentence: one year in prison. However, he suffered a heart attack before beginning his sentence and died on December 30, 1947, at the age of 58. Though disgraced in academic circles, he died a free man—and a folk hero to many.
Legacy and Lessons from Van Meegeren’s Forgeries
Long-Term Impact on Art Authentication
Van Meegeren’s deception had a profound impact on how paintings were authenticated. Prior to the exposure of his forgeries, connoisseurship—essentially expert opinion based on visual analysis—dominated the field. After his works fooled the most respected art historians of the time, institutions and collectors began to lose faith in visual judgments alone. The revelation that a modern forger could so convincingly mimic a 17th-century master forced the art world to reevaluate its approach to authenticity.
As a result, scientific methods were adopted more widely in museums and academic institutions. Techniques such as X-ray imaging, ultraviolet light examination, and chemical analysis of paint pigments became standard tools. Scholars began insisting on full provenance records, tracking a painting’s ownership history in meticulous detail. Van Meegeren’s success had shown just how easy it was to fabricate not only the image but also the myth surrounding it.
Debates About Talent vs. Fraud
Van Meegeren remains a controversial figure in art history. Some view him as a skilled craftsman whose talents were never properly recognized due to the shifting tastes of his time. His ability to reproduce the technical nuances of Vermeer and other Dutch Golden Age painters was undeniably impressive. He studied historical techniques with obsessive care, replicating them with such precision that even seasoned curators were misled.
However, others argue that Van Meegeren was not a genius but an opportunist. His works, when stripped of the Vermeer name, are often considered clumsy and lacking the subtlety of the originals. Critics point out the stiffness of his figures, the overuse of symbolism, and the overly dramatic lighting—elements that don’t align with Vermeer’s authentic touch. To them, he was more of a clever mimic than a true artist.
The Market and Value of the Fakes Today
Ironically, Van Meegeren’s forged paintings have become valuable in their own right. Though they were once considered worthless upon exposure, today they are collected as historical curiosities. Museums and private collectors are interested in them not because they resemble Vermeers, but because they tell one of the most fascinating stories in modern art history. Each forgery stands as a document of deception, ingenuity, and the vulnerabilities of cultural institutions.
Several of his forgeries, including The Supper at Emmaus and Christ with the Adulteress, are now housed in museums—but clearly labeled as fakes. They are used to educate the public about forgery techniques and the dangers of over-reliance on authority. In some ways, Van Meegeren succeeded in his original aim: his name endures, not as a forgotten artist, but as the forger who fooled the world.
Key Takeaways
- Han van Meegeren was a Dutch painter who forged several paintings in the style of Vermeer during the 1930s and 1940s.
- He chose Vermeer due to gaps in the artist’s known works and the national pride surrounding the Dutch Golden Age.
- Van Meegeren’s use of aged materials and chemical techniques helped him deceive experts and collectors.
- One of his forged Vermeers was sold to Hermann Göring during World War II, leading to a postwar trial.
- His exposure led to major changes in how art is authenticated, emphasizing science and provenance.
Frequently Asked Questions
What motivated Han van Meegeren to create forgeries?
He was driven by resentment toward the art world, especially critics who dismissed his traditional style. He wanted revenge and to prove he could outsmart them.
Why did Van Meegeren target Vermeer specifically?
Vermeer was ideal because of the limited number of known works and a large gap in his biography, allowing room for “lost” paintings to appear plausible.
How did Van Meegeren fake the aging of his paintings?
He mixed bakelite into his paints and baked the canvases to create cracking and hardening that mimicked centuries of age.
Did Van Meegeren serve prison time for his forgeries?
He was sentenced to one year in prison in 1947 but died of a heart attack before serving the full sentence.
Are any of Van Meegeren’s forgeries on display today?
Yes, several are housed in museums as educational pieces, now recognized as important examples of 20th-century art fraud.
