Leonardo da Vinci's La Belle Ferronnière. Analysis

The painting known as La Belle Ferronnière , universally attributed to Leonardo da Vinci , has its roots in the artist's first stay in Milan, a period characterised by intense creative activity and study.

During his stay in Milan, which lasted from 1482 to 1499, Leonardo da Vinci entered the service of Ludovico Sforza, known as il Moro, Duke of Milan. This period was extremely productive for the Florentine artist and scientist , as he was able to express his talent not only as a painter, but also as an engineer, scientist and architect. Among his most famous works created in Milan is The Last Supper, painted between 1494 and 1498 in the refectory of the convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie.

BOOK THE ARTWORK FOR YOUR HOME

In addition to his artistic activities, Leonardo worked on civil and military engineering projects for the Sforza family, including studies on architecture, hydraulics, and the design of war machines. Milan represented an intellectually stimulating environment for Leonardo , where he could interact with other artists and scientists and further develop his knowledge of anatomy, botany, and mechanics.

However, his stay in Milan was abruptly ended in 1499 by the invasion of French troops, which forced Ludovico il Moro to flee and Leonardo to leave the city.

The work presents strong stylistic analogies with other portraits of those years, such as the Portrait of a Musician and the famous Lady with an Ermine. Among the most striking aspects is the refined play of light, the result of the studies on optics that Leonardo was deepening in that period, evident above all in the reflection of the red dress on the cheek of the female figure portrayed.

The title of the painting, La Belle Ferronnière , comes from a cataloging error dating back to the late 18th century. The term Ferronnière does not refer to the woman depicted, but rather to the jewel that adorns her forehead, a ribbon or chain with a pendant, at the time called a lenza or slenza. A Slenza is a type of medieval jewelry, typically used as an ornament for clothing. In particular, it was a kind of decorative buckle or clasp that was used to fasten cloaks, dresses or other garments. Slenzas were often made of precious metal such as gold or silver and decorated with gemstones or enamel.

These accessories were not only functional, but also symbols of status and wealth, and were often worn by nobles or people of high social rank.

The error led to the belief for a long time that the figure represented Madame Ferron, alleged lover of Francis I of France, but this identification is now considered unfounded. It is in fact believed that the woman was linked to the court of Ludovico il Moro, perhaps identifiable with Lucrezia Crivelli, one of his lovers, or with Cecilia Gallerani, portrayed at a more mature age than the famous portrait preserved in Krakow.

Other theories suggest names such as Beatrice d'Este, wife of the Moor, or his sister Isabella, but none of these hypotheses have found unanimous confirmation among art historians.

Another interesting element is the comparison with a drawing preserved in the Uffizi, executed in pencil and watercolour and attributed to Leonardo by Father Sebastiano Resta in the 17th century. The drawing, which shows a young woman in half-length, has often been linked to the portrait of Beatrice d'Este. Critics such as Karl Morgenstern and Dalli Regoli have argued that it is a copy of a lost original by the master.

The resemblance to La Belle Ferronnière is remarkable, particularly in the torsion of the torso and the position of the head, which seems to respond to an external call, creating a sense of tension and psychological introspection that gives the figure an aura of mystery.

The lady's face, although partly turned towards the viewer, avoids direct eye contact, fueling a feeling of enigma and detachment. This compositional choice, typical of Leonardo's works , suggests an emotional depth, almost a restrained vitality that emerges from the figure's lateral gaze. As in the portrait of Cecilia Gallerani , here too the clothing is carefully curated without appearing excessive.

The lady wears a dress with a rectangular neckline and interchangeable sleeves, enriched by laces that reveal the white shirt underneath. A notable detail is the two-tone necklace that falls delicately on the chest, tied to a ribbon. This type of sobriety in clothing , combined with the choice of a few but elegant accessories, is very reminiscent of the style of the Milanese court of the late fifteenth century.

The introspective aspect of the painting also recalls Leonardo da Vinci's theories on the "motions of the soul", or those subtle emotional manifestations that the artist tried to capture in his subjects to create a more natural psychological representation.

This search for sentimental and psychological naturalness, expressed by Leonardo also in his Treatise on Painting of 1540, is reflected in the work in question. The woman's gaze is not limited to remaining two-dimensional on the canvas, but suggests an emotional movement that involves the observer. The sensation of emotional tension and psychological complexity emerge through a volume that gives dynamism to the work, making it more than a simple static image.

The connection between painting and sculpture, particularly evident in this play of depth and perspective, is linked to the artist's training in the workshop of Andrea del Verrocchio. During this Florentine period , the artist was able to explore the relationship between the two disciplines, combining sculptural precision in the volumetric rendering with pictorial refinement. This multidisciplinary approach made it possible to enrich the painting with a three-dimensionality that goes beyond the flat surface, transforming the work into a complete artistic experience, where painting meets sculpture in a visual and emotional dialogue.

Leonardo's work on chiaroscuro is evident in the delicate fusion of the shadows of the face with the reflections of the dress, which seem to merge the figure with the surrounding environment.

The entire painting focuses on the female figure, without superfluous distractions: the black background is deliberately simple and anonymous, helping to emphasize the refined details of the lady's clothing, hairstyle and jewelry.

La Belle Ferronnière is also at the center of a curious legal and commercial affair that occurred at the beginning of the 20th century. A painting identical to the original, owned by the Hahn family, was presented as a work by Leonardo da Vinci. However, the critic Joseph Duveen disputed the authenticity of the painting, preventing its sale as a work by Leonardo.

Art critic Joseph Duveen, one of the most influential figures in the art market in the 1920s, publicly stated that a version of the painting owned by an American couple , Andrée and Harry Hahn, was a fake and not a work by Leonardo da Vinci. This claim was made without Duveen having ever seen the painting in person, based only on his experience and knowledge of Leonardo's works.

The Hahns, who were trying to sell the painting, had it authenticated by a French expert and expected to realize a substantial sum from the sale. However, following Duveen's comment, the deal with the Kansas City Art Institute fell through, and Andrée Hahn filed a libel suit against Duveen , seeking $500,000 in damages. The trial ended in 1929 with a hung jury, and Duveen chose to settle, paying the Hahns $60,000 to avoid a second trial. Despite the plea bargain, the painting's reputation remained tarnished, and its authenticity continued to be disputed over the following decades.

Only in 2010 was the work sold at auction by Sotheby's, but it was attributed to a follower of Leonardo, made before 1750, and sold for 1.5 million dollars, confirming once again the complexity and fascination surrounding this masterpiece.

Leonardo da Vinci's works are shrouded in an aura of mystery that seems to persist through the centuries. This is due, in part, to his extraordinary ability to merge art and science in ways that often defy immediate comprehension. His works are never simply portraits or static scenes, but true reflections on the natural world and the human soul. A famous example is the Mona Lisa , whose enigmatic expression continues to be the subject of interpretation and theory, and whose nuanced background remains equally ambiguous.

Another aspect that contributes to the mystery of Leonardo's works is the use of innovative and complex techniques, such as sfumato, which makes the outlines of the figures indistinct, creating an effect of depth and ambiguity. His work The Last Supper is another example : the composition and the use of perspective make each observer have a different perception of the scene, and many symbolic interpretations have been proposed over time.

Finally, the numerous unfinished projects and his cryptic codices, full of scientific studies and futuristic inventions, fuel the fascination and mystery surrounding his figure. Leonardo was not only an artist, but also a visionary , and this makes his artistic and scientific legacy perpetually open to new discoveries and interpretations.