NEW AI ANALYSIS BLOWS AN OLD CONTROVERSY WIDE OPEN

For decades, The National Gallery has been deflecting common sense questions about the authenticity of the Samson and Delilah, one of its most prized paintings.

But they will struggle to ignore groundbreaking new AI analysis of the painting, first reported by the Observer on September 26th. The study, which has yet to be published in full, shows it is overwhelmingly unlikely that the painting is by Rubens. 

This should come as no big surprise. It looks markedly different to any of Rubens other works. And while we do know that Rubens painted a Samson and Delilah in 1609, the version that hangs in the Gallery differs dramatically from two contemporary copies of that original.

Responding to the new AI analysis, the Gallery has said it "always takes note of new research" and will "await its publication in full so that any evidence can be properly assessed".

But similar promises have been made before. Back in 1997, in the face of growing pressure, the Gallery committed to hold a public debate on the painting’s authenticity. No debate ever took place, and a series of subsequent analyses and evidence has fallen on deaf ears.

If the Gallery does now respond to the new AI report, it should do so publicly. And its response should also address the many other unanswered questions about the painting, summarised in this new 3-minute video. To see more of the evidence in depth, visit our Resources and FAQ pages which we will add to over the coming weeks. 

Whether you agree or disagree, please let us know on social media using #InRubensName.

And if you think both of sides of this argument should be heard in a public debate, please sign the open letter to the National Gallery.