This 17th century painting is at the height of controversary over a missing body part. The original was once engraved by another artist in its mirror image. A second copy was made not long after, but inside another painting, that is, a painting within a painting. Both copies have this body part exposed, whilst the supposed original, in the London National Gallery doesn't, which has caused concerns that what they have is a fake. Which painting is it, who painted the original and what one other discrepancy appears between the copies and the 'original'?

lanfranco

This is the Rubens "Samson and Delilah" (ca. 1610). In the London version, Samson's toes are cut off at the right edge of the painting, which has raised doubts about its originality. Questions have also been raised about the handling of Samson's ear: http://afterrubens.org/home.asp Jan 29 06, 8:32 AM

peasypod

Yes, Frankie, and exactly the site I stumbled on too. The ear thing was one discrepancy but if you look ahead further on that site on the 'flash movie' eyewitness section, it reveals an interesting feature about how many soldiers are depicted in the doorway. The National Gallery painting appears to have 5, yet Matham and Francken only saw 3 soldiers when they copied the original. Jan 29 06, 5:22 PM

lanfranco

I had a professor who, among his other specialties, studied the manner in which engravers and copyists dealt with originals. As he would point out, it was quite common for modifications to be made by such people, and these changes can sometimes reveal much about how a painting was "read" in its time. In other words, what copyists do is not necessarily an indication of a painting's originality. The foot and ear problems are of greater importance, since 1609/10 was still relatively early in Rubens' career in Antwerp. (He had only recently returned from Italy.) He would not have been receiving vast numbers of commissions that were turned over to the large staff of assistants he employed later. Jan 29 06, 5:32 PM