Beckett suppressed a smirk.
‘No jokes, please,’ he continued, to head off the quip that the journalist was obviously on the verge of uttering. ‘I’m not resilient enough yet. I was wondering if you wanted a nice story.’
‘Is the Pope Catholic? Course I do. Depending on what it is. As long as you remember I can’t pay anything for it.’
‘I don’t want anything like that. To see it in print would be enough.’
Argyll then retold the story of his discovery and the incursion of Sir Edward Byrnes, ending with his night in the cell. ‘My discovery. Pinched. Just like that. Could you write something so everyone knows what really happened? Otherwise Byrnes will get all the credit as well as all the money.’
‘Nice story,’ commented Beckett, finishing off another whisky and moving straight on to a large grappa. ‘But the lead is the Raphael, not your being diddled. However, an expert hack like myself will be able to do it. Great discovery, famous artist, etc., etc. Then a bit of stuff about you further down, undermining the whole thing and making Byrnes out to be a proper toad. Easy.
‘You’ll forgive me, though, but I must check up on the story first. A few phone calls, here and there, that sort of thing. OK? Feel better? You don’t look as though you’ve been greatly enjoying the eternal city.’
‘I haven’t. The only good thing that’s happened so far has been having dinner with that policewoman last night...’
‘That does sound bad.’
‘Not at all. She’s very lovely. Remarkably lovely, in fact. As I’ve got to go back to London tomorrow, it doesn’t really matter, though.’
As Beckett explained in a letter a few weeks later, it wasn’t really his fault, and he sent his original article to prove it. He had written the story as promised: revelation about a possible new Raphael, attributed to ‘museum sources’; a quotation of cautious optimism from Byrnes, a few comments from a couple of art historians, then some quite well-researched background about other remarkable discoveries in the past few years. From there on, Beckett had written about Argyll and had clearly and concisely got the message across. Young graduate student cheated by machinations of sly dealer. It didn’t actually say that, of course, but the general implication was crystal clear. It was a good article.
Unfortunately, it was a bit too good. He had sent it off to the editor of his paper in New York and this man had been excited by it. So it had gone on the front page, left side, single column, instead of in the arts section as Beckett had expected. But it was a busy time of year. A summit meeting was in the offing, another bribery and corruption scandal had broken out among local politicians, the administration was indulging in another spate of Libya-bashing. The editor hadn’t wanted to run the story over on to an inside page. So he made it fit by cutting it down a bit, and had sliced off the bottom seven paragraphs. With these went all mention of Argyll.
In every other respect, the article worked wonders, and stimulated enormous public interest. Over the next few months, all of Argyll’s predictions to Flavia about the Raphael came true. The story of the eighteenth-century fraud and its discovery captured the imagination. The New York Times colour supplement, and the arts supplement of the London Observer, duly carried lengthy accounts of the art-historical detective work which had led to the pot of gold. They, also, neglected to mention Argyll, but were otherwise solidly written. Byrnes’s sales campaign was well under way.
Argyll indulged his sense of mild masochism by collecting the articles. All sorts of critics and historians invaded what he had previously considered to be his turf. The diligent research of others produced dozens of little fragments to complete his partial picture and show the results of his haste. One article reproduced letters from the Earl’s brother-in-law indicating he had died of a heart attack from shock at the fraud, and that the family had covered up their loss for fear of embarrassment: ‘Rest assured, dear sister, no fault attaches to you for the attack. Such an event was entirely due to his own injudicious choice and hasty character. But these matters will remain between us alone; the disgrace to our family, and the scorn of certain of our friends could not be tolerated...’ That particularly outraged him. He had seen the same letter, but had decided it was inconclusive. Now everything else was clear, so was the letter.
What was worse was that all these little articles meant that even the modest piece he had planned for the Burlington Magazine was not possible; everything had already been published at least once. He avoided his friends and found a peculiar form of solace in going back to the Life and Times of Carlo Mantini, 1675–1729. At least he could finish that. It wouldn’t be so good now that one of his central chapters had become about as original as the plot of Romeo and Juliet, but it would do.
He was also correct in assuming that Byrnes, one of nature’s salesmen despite his mild manner, would turn the whole process of cleaning and restoration into a media event. The best restorers from the museums were called in to scrape away the paintwork of Mantini and remove the layer of protective varnish over the precious object underneath. Almost every week, bulletins on television would show the team of white-coated professionals — half scientific, half artistic — applying a variety of exotic solvents that could be relied upon to do their appointed task and no more. Then yet more programmes and articles in magazines monitored the second cleaning process, which would restore the painting to its original perfection.
Almost everybody knew by now that underneath the painting by Mantini there lay a portrait of Elisabetta di Laguna, the mistress of an earlier Marchese di Parma and, by repute, the most beautiful woman of her age. What someone like Raphael, who had made much less attractive women look like veritable Venuses, would have produced with such a sitter was anybody’s guess. Critics from the London Standard to the Baltimore Sun speculated freely. Some even ventured to suggest that Leonardo’s Mona Lisa would be knocked off its perch as the world’s favourite painting.
While the picture was under wraps, the jockeying for position got under way amongst the likely buyers. The Louvre indicated its interest, if it could afford the price. Two large New York banks and three pension funds in Tokyo also let it be known they might attend the auction. In an attempt to frighten off the opposition, the Getty Museum in Malibu Beach hinted that it might unleash all its vast buying-power to take possession. And all over the world, lesser millionaires and billionaires assessed their position, counted their money and attempted to work out whether they could, in a few years, sell it for a profit. Many decided they could.
When the picture was finally revealed to the public, the event was stage-managed in exquisite detail. The unveiling took place in a large meeting-room at the Savoy Hotel in the Strand, and hundreds of people were invited. The picture stood on a raised platform, covered with a large white sheet. Before the great moment, a presentation was made to the assembled press, television cameras, dignitaries from the worlds of museum and art-history faculties. The senior curator of the Louvre sat alongside the local staffer from Associated Press and the great Japanese collector Yagamoto; while the keeper of western art from the Dresdener Staatsgalerie was sandwiched between his great rival from one of the richest museums in the American Midwest and a sweaty individual from one of the London tabloids.
All of them had been served with champagne, courtesy of Byrnes Galleries, and all listened with appropriate attention as Byrnes himself ran through the now well-known story of how the painting was discovered; long forgotten in the little church in central Rome, and covered by another painting as a result of one of the greatest artistic fraud attempts of all time. Byrnes did a competent job of it, but was far from coming across as the archetype of the smooth art dealer. A small, timid-looking man with horn-rimmed spectacles and a bald head which ducked and bobbed nervously as he spoke, he was not at all like most people’s image of an international aesthete.