How do you solve a problem like a Goya?

This isn't about summer school. (That said, where are all the photos people were promising?! I want pictures, damn it !!)

But the issue IS interesting and I couldn't think of a better place to discuss this. I deal in 'stuff' now, rather than art, but I'm still an art historian thanks to years of pain, anguish and high tuition. Stories like this one don't come around all that often, at least not about major works, and it's gotten lots of people in a huff.

Goya's Colossus is not by Goya. Really? My, my, my. You can read about it here.

Now, I'm no expert on Goya, and I'm not even sure I've seen a Goya in real life, but it seems to me that the arguments given about anatomy and the painting of the animals don't really hold up. I can think of several examples of his work, off the top of my head, that show broad, hurried brushstrokes and a lack of care around anatomy and fine details, for instance, Yard with Lunatics, the famous Shootings of May 3rd, 1808 which to some looks almost cartoonish, The Witches Sabbath and so on. Generally, I find that when he's examining social issues, his work becomes less structured, more emotive than rigid.

I always thought that The Colossus was something of a harbinger of his style to come, in his later years, after he'd done his time as Court Painter to the Spanish Crown and didn't need to fill canvases with fluff.

So, from a museums stand-point, should the Prado have sat on this bit of news? Should they have kept it under wraps until they could offer a firm attribution? Do you think they're right?

What does the question of false attributions mean to museums in general? What impact does it have on a museum's "authority"? How can a museum turn potentially devastating discoveries into positives?

Discuss amongst yourselves !