The National Gallery of London had bought in 1980 from Christie’s a painting representing the characters of the Old Testament Samson and Dalilaallocated to the Flemish master Pierre Paul Rubens (1577-1640), at the record price of 2.5 million pounds (which today corresponds to 6.6 million pounds or 7.7 million euros). But experts have long doubted the authenticity of this table.
Among them, the art historian Euphrosyne Doxiadis said since the 1990s that the work is rather a copy of the 20th century of the painting that Pierre Paul Rubens would have painted between 1608 and 1609 for his Antwerp patron Nicolaas Rockox. The original would be lost. To support his thesis, Euphrosyne Doxiadis made a detailed stylistic comparison between the work and the undisputed paintings of Pierre Paul Rubens, in particular Minerva protecting the peace of March (1629-1630), in his work NG6461 (the inventory number of the table): The Fake National Gallery Rubenswhich will be published on March 12. She maintains that “Fluid and tortuous brushstones that are so characteristic of Rubens are not visible anywhere” in the table Samson and Dalila,, “It’s just poor quality crafts. In the 17th century, this would have been considered unacceptable “.
Furthermore, while contemporary copies of the original – an engraving by Jacob Matham (1571-1631) or a representation of the painting in a painting by Frans Francken Le Jeune (1581-1642) – represent the toes of Samson, which suggests that Pierre Paul Rubens had also painted them, they are not visible on the picture of the National Gallery.
Jacob Matham (1571–1631), Samson and Dalilaaccording to the painting of Pierre-Paul Rubens, engraving.
Euphrosyne Doxiadis is also based on a testimony of the banker and art connoisseur Jan Bosselaers, who contradicts the hypothesis of the National Gallery according to which the painting was stuck on a cardboard sheet “Probably in the 20th century”. He indeed shared an old photograph of the table before its sale in 1980, which shows that the painting was previously fixed on a panel, which raises questions.
Michael Daley, director of Artwatch UK, who had also carried out in-depth research on the table, received a document indicating that he had been bought by a German merchant to a curator named Gaston Lévy, a Brazilian who had been the pupil of the Spanish artist Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida (1863-1923).
Euphrosyne Doxiadis then went to the Sorolla museum in Madrid and had immediately drawn a parallel between the style of the works of Joaquín Sorolla y Bastida and the painting of the National Gallery. “As soon as I saw the painting, I recognized the style. Sorolla and its students, in accordance with the tradition of artistic education in the 19th century, used to copy the old masters to learn classical techniques ”.
She then suggests that Gaston Lévy would have, with the help of his comrades, recreated the work of Pierre-Paul Rubens from copies of the 17th century. Gaston Lévy had indeed made a trip to the Munich museum where the painting made by Frans Francken the Younger was exposed.
Frans II Francken (1581–1642), Dinner at the home of the Rockox bourgmestrec. 1630/1635, 62.3 x 96.5 cm, Oil on oak panel, Alte Pinakothek, Munich, Germany
If this last hypothesis was true, the absence of toes in the table of the National Gallery could be explained by the fact that “When students make a copy of an old master, it is an unwritten law that they must omit something, so as not to seem to want to deceive”had pointed out Euphrosyne Doxiadis.
In 2021, IA tests carried out by art recognition had already questioned the authenticity of Samson and Dalila at 90 %.
The National Gallery and Christie’s have so far refused to comment on the claims of the work.
