Tilting at Duccios

James Beck is at it again, and while art historians are rolling their eyes, the newpapers are lapping it up:

A PAINTING that was hailed as a 14th-century masterpiece when it was bought last year by the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York for a reported $50 million is a 19th-century fake in the view of a leading American scholar.

"Leading" in what sense? In recent years Beck has chiefly distinguished himself as a gadfly -- and mostly on issues of restoration, not attribution. When you see Beck on one side and everyone else on the other, it isn't hard to pick the likely winner. Previous posts on the painting here and here.

ADDENDUM: Letter to the Times of London from Keith Christiansen here.

Posted by David on July 7, 2006 1:43 PM