From Prized Trophies to Faded Presences, The Changing Attributions and Fortunes of Leonardesque Paintings

Ascribed to Bernardino Luini (1480–1532), The Virgin and Child with a Columbine, c.1520–30, Oil on poplar panel, 73.4 × 55.2 cm, The Wallace Collection, London

From Prized Trophies to Faded Presences, The Changing Attributions and Fortunes of Leonardesque Paintings Leonardesque Yvo Reinsalu
Ascribed to Bernardino Luini (1480–1532), The Virgin and Child with a Columbine, c.1520–30
Oil on poplar panel, 73.4 × 55.2 cm, The Wallace Collection, London

The influence of Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) on Lombard painting was so inescapable that it blurred the very boundaries of authorship. This panel embodies the problem. Once acclaimed as a work by Leonardo himself, it was later assigned to Bernardino Luini (1480–1532), yet the attribution has never rested on firm ground. Among the four paintings in the Wallace Collection associated with Luini, it remains the most contested, its uneven handling compounded by the unusually large number of related versions. A close variant survives in the Wellington Collection at Apsley House, while others in Italy and northern Europe confirm the continuing appeal of the design.

The composition joins intimacy with emblematic weight. The Virgin cradles the Christ Child, who reaches for a columbine flower. In Renaissance thought the plant was charged with associations of grief and the Passion: its drooping heads spoke of sorrow, while its sevenfold blossoms could allude to the Seven Sorrows of Mary. To contemporaries, versed in emblem books and devotional verse, the imagery would have lent fresh intensity to a subject already suited to meditation.

Luini’s version reveals his assimilation of Leonardesque manner: the softened physiognomies, the gentle sfumato, the atmosphere of inward stillness. Active in Milan for most of his career, he was widely regarded by contemporaries as Leonardo’s closest follower. Later tradition even imagined him as Leonardo’s pupil or direct assistant, though the evidence is fragmentary. What is certain is that Luini absorbed the master’s idiom with unusual sensitivity, adapting it for Lombard patrons who favoured meditative refinement over rhetorical display. His Madonnas, suffused with quiet piety, stand as some of the most eloquent translations of Leonardesque ideals into a local idiom.

Replication was integral to Leonardo’s circle. Marco d’Oggiono (c.1470–1524), Giampietrino (active c.1495–1549), and Bernardino de’ Conti (c.1460–c.1525) each produced multiple variants of Madonna types drawn from the master, ensuring their diffusion across Italy and beyond. Workshop practice, serial replication, and later imitation further obscured authorship while sustaining the prestige of designs associated with Leonardo well into the seventeenth century.

Today the Wallace Collection places the painting in a discreet corner of the Renaissance Gallery, hung high and enclosed in a modest plaster frame. Its present, almost withdrawn presence contrasts with its former reputation, when it was counted among the collection’s most expensive trophies — a striking measure of how fame, attribution, and the shifting fortunes of connoisseurship alter the destiny of Renaissance treasures.