A painting that was once sold for just $950 and dismissed by Sotheby's and the Metropolitan Museum of Art as merely a copy has been confirmed as an authentic work by the renowned 17th-century master Caravaggio through advanced artificial intelligence analysis. The painting, known as "The Lute Player," received an 85.7% probability rating of authenticity from AI testing, a score that experts consider exceptionally high for artwork attribution.
The scientific analysis was conducted by Art Recognition, a Swiss company specializing in artwork authentication, in collaboration with Liverpool University and other research institutions. Dr. Carina Popovici, head of Art Recognition, explained to reporters that "everything over 80% is very high" when it comes to probability scores for artwork authenticity. The AI testing showed a strong match with other verified Caravaggio paintings, providing compelling evidence for the work's attribution.
Caravaggio, whose full name was Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, is considered one of the most revolutionary artists in Western art history. He is revered for his radical use of light and dark contrasts, known as chiaroscuro, and the striking realism of his compositions. Only a few dozen works by the master have survived to the present day, making each discovery extraordinarily valuable. When an authentic Caravaggio was discovered in 2019, it was valued at approximately $120 million.
The painting's journey through the art market tells a fascinating story of changing attributions and missed opportunities. In 1969, Sotheby's sold "The Lute Player" as "a copy after Caravaggio" for just £750 (approximately $950). Three decades later, in 2001, the same auction house sold it again, this time described as "circle of Caravaggio," for about £71,000 (approximately $90,000).
The 2001 buyer was Clovis Whitfield, a British art historian and gallery owner who specializes in Italian old master paintings. Whitfield recognized the painting's exceptional quality and noticed that it corresponded exactly with a detailed description found in Giovanni Baglione's 1642 biography of Caravaggio. "Baglione mentions minutely observed details such as the reflection on dew drops on the flowers," Whitfield noted, highlighting the level of specific detail that suggested authentic authorship.
The Badminton "Lute Player" is one of three known versions of this composition. An undisputed authentic version is housed in the Hermitage Museum in Russia, while another version, featuring a female lute player rather than a young man, belongs to the Wildenstein collection and was displayed at the Metropolitan Museum of Art between 1990 and 2013.
The attribution debate intensified when Keith Christiansen, who served as the Met's head of European paintings in 1990, described the Wildenstein version as an original while dismissing the Badminton version as a copy. Whitfield made his purchase in partnership with collector Alfred Bader, who died in 2016. In 2007, Christiansen wrote to Bader stating definitively: "No one – certainly no modern scholar – has ever or ever would entertain the idea that your painting could be painted by Caravaggio."
Whitfield believes that Christiansen and some Italian scholars have been "a bit stuck in the traditional mud" in refusing to accept the new attribution, even though other experts support it. "The AI result knocks Mr. Christiansen off his perch," Whitfield commented, suggesting that the objective technological analysis challenges long-held scholarly opinions.
Interestingly, Art Recognition's analysis also concluded that the Wildenstein version, previously considered authentic by some experts, is not a genuine Caravaggio work. "Our AI returned a negative result" for the Wildenstein painting, according to Dr. Popovici. This finding contradicts decades of scholarly opinion and museum attribution.
Additional evidence supporting the Badminton version's authenticity comes from musical instrument experts. David Van Edwards, a leading lute maker and president of the Lute Society, examined the depictions of the lute in all three versions. He found that the Wildenstein instrument contained "many faults," unlike the accurately rendered lutes in both the Badminton and Hermitage paintings, which show proper understanding of the instrument's construction and appearance.
William Audland KC, a barrister and art enthusiast who is writing a book about "The Lute Player," approached the question from a legal perspective. "As a barrister and a litigator, I look at all the evidence in any case very forensically," he explained. "Taking all the evidence into account, it seems to me that a manifest injustice is being done by any scholar who suggests that the Wildenstein version is authentic and the Badminton version is a poor copy."
Audland argued that "a holistic view of the relevant evidence points to the opposite conclusion, one which has now been corroborated by AI analysis, which is objective, unlike the subjective opinions of scholars which can get in the way." He described the Badminton version as "an astonishing painting" that "takes your breath away when you see it."
The historical provenance of the painting adds weight to the authenticity claims. In 1597, Caravaggio was living as an impoverished artist on the streets of Rome when Cardinal Francesco Maria del Monte provided him with food and lodging, becoming his most important patron. Shortly after receiving this support, Caravaggio painted "The Lute Player" as a way of demonstrating his exceptional talent to his prospective patron.
In the late 1620s, the Del Monte collection was sold following the cardinal's death. Antonio Barberini, who would later become a cardinal himself, purchased five Caravaggio works including "The Lute Player." A century later, the painting was acquired by the 3rd Duke of Beaufort for his estate at Badminton House in Gloucestershire, where it remained for centuries before entering the art market in the 20th century.
The story of this rediscovered masterpiece will be explored in various media formats. Whitfield and Dr. Popovici will discuss the painting in a new podcast series called "Is It?," with the first episode launching on September 27. The podcast is presented by Dr. Noah Charney, who is also preparing an academic paper on the painting. Additionally, art market expert Geraldine Norman is developing a feature documentary that will explore the complete story of the painting's attribution journey.
The painting is currently located in London, and Whitfield has expressed his desire to see it placed in a public collection, similar to recent major acquisitions by institutions like the National Gallery, which recently secured a landmark investment of £375 million for acquisitions.
Despite the compelling AI evidence and supporting research, some in the art establishment remain skeptical. In Sotheby's 2001 sale catalog, the auction house noted that "it has been reasonably suggested that the painter may have been Carlo Magnone, who in 1642 was recorded as having painted a copy after Del Monte's Lute Player." This attribution to a known copyist reflected the scholarly consensus at the time.
George Gordon, co-chair of Sotheby's Worldwide Old Master Paintings department, defended the auction house's previous attribution, describing their 2001 catalog entry as "thoughtful and comprehensive." He noted that many of Caravaggio's paintings were copied by other artists, even during the master's lifetime, as evidenced by early 17th-century Roman inventories and written sources. "I don't think there have been significant changes in Caravaggio scholarship in recent years which would radically alter the 2001 consensus about this work," Gordon stated.
When contacted for comment about the new AI analysis and its challenge to his previous attribution, Keith Christiansen declined to respond. This silence from the former Met curator highlights the ongoing tension between traditional art historical methods and new technological approaches to authentication.
The case of "The Lute Player" represents a significant moment in art history, where artificial intelligence and scientific analysis are challenging long-held scholarly opinions and potentially rewriting the catalog of one of history's most important artists. As museums and collectors increasingly turn to technology for authentication, this discovery may signal a new era in art attribution, where objective analysis complements traditional connoisseurship in identifying genuine masterpieces.
