Sir Peter Paul Rubens’s painting of ‘Samson and Delilah’ in London is a 20th-century copy art historian Euphrosyne Doxiadis claims in her new book ‘The Fake Rubens’. ‘Complete nonsense and not based on facts,’ responds Bert Watteeuw, director of the Antwerp Rubens House.
‘Fake Rubens in London’s National Gallery? This painting is genuine" counters Rubens House director Bert Watteeuw
Colin Clapson
Published:
Around 1609, Sir Peter Paul Rubens painted the biblical scene ‘Samson and Delilah’ for his friend, Antwerp mayor Nikolaas Rockox. A work bought by the National Gallery in London in 1980 for many millions. But is this a genuine Rubens?
Not for the first time, reservations about its authenticity are emerging. For instance, the work is said to differ in style and composition from other earlier copies. A Swiss AI scan dating from 2021 also pointed in that direction. Now, writing in the British newspaper the Guardian, art historian Euphrosyne Doxiadis also fuels concerns, by arguing that the work is a fake Rubens.
‘This is a real masterpiece’
‘To begin with, I do not know this art historian and that is a sign. Most researchers on Rubens have passed by our Rubens House and the Rubenianium, the Rubens Library, in the search of sources and information,’ says Bert Watteeuw, the director of the Antwerp Rubens House.
‘Moreover, Doxiadis has an agenda of her own: to promote her book and that seems to be working well. In such cases conspiracies à la Dan Brown are more interesting than science.’
For Watteeuw, this personal criticism is secondary to the essentials. ‘The painting ‘Samson and Delilah’ in London is a genuine Rubens, a masterpiece. It is logical that the National Gallery does not want to comment or discuss its authenticity,’ he says. But why is the Rubens House so sure?
Sources and wood analysis
Antwerp is home to the largest archive on Rubens in the world. ‘The provenance of this painting is very well known throughout the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. A provenance that can be trusted is always crucial. We possess it thanks to descriptions of people’s estates, inheritances and so on. For example, this work has been in the collection of the Princes of Liechtenstein. The National Gallery also investigated its provenance before purchasing it in 1980,’ says Watteeuw.
There is also dendrochronological research on the wood in the frame and in the rear of the work. ‘Based on the year rings in that wood, we can determine an exact date. So there are lots of ways to verify authenticity,’ says Watteeuw. ‘But these factors are not taken into account in Doxiadis's allegations.’
Watteeuw also dismisses AI research dating from a few years ago. ‘When that appeared, we engaged in extensive behind-the-scenes dialogue with that Swiss firm that had carried it out. AI can only work if you train it with an artist's entire oeuvre. That was not the case at that time.’