The record-union., 1897-01-31
VENUS De Milo.
Light Thrown Upon the Mystery Of Its
Creation.
rlarquis de Trogoft-Lavaux Saw the
Statue Intact, and SO
TeStifieS.

| was its author? At what period was
it conceived? And what was the posi-
ton Of those missing arms? NJ. Mar
celles, in 1854, remarked: 1T will not
be very long before there is no one
| living who will be capable of lifting the
mist of mystery which enshrouds the
origin of the Venus de Milo
| In this statement he was mistaken.
The very seemingly impenetrabe mys-
| terry which enshrOuded this goddess, but
Whetted the impatience of the archae-
| ologiStS to unravel it. In 1874, just
| twenty years after NJ. Marcelles had
| spoken these words, a manuscript re-
| port was discovered by M. Jean Aicard,
over the signature of one Dumont d Ur-
Vile, written at Milo April 16, 1920.
| D'Urville claimed to have been one
of the first to see the treasure. He was
at that time only an Ensign on board
| La Chevrette, a French naval vessel.
| In this report, addressed to his COM
mandant he relates the details of the
discovery, which, according to him, was
| made at the end of the month of March
and he adds:
she 0he statue) represents a nude
holds an apple the right grasps a man
tie, which is draped in graceful folds
around the hips and falls to the feet,
but unfortunately both the arms have
been mutilated and are actually de-
tached from the body
Several foot notes by Lieutenant Mat
terer, another officer of the Chevrette,
We're added to this manuscript
When NJ. d'Urville and myself" he
writes, first saw the statue, the left
arm was still attached to the body.
The right was broken off at the wrist,
but the left was still almost perfect.
The hand was uplifted and held an ap-
pie. If NJ. d'Urville called this antique
statue Venus VictriX it was because
she was holding the apple in her left
hand. Had both arms been broken
do not think this idea would have oc-
| CURED to him.
According to NJ. Matterer, Dumont
d'Urville had misrepresented the truth
little in his official report One nat
urally asks what could have been his
object? This object was explained
later in a memoir written by NJ Mat
terer, in 1893, sixteen years after the
death of his illustrious friend. Dumont
d Urville had been obliged to make an
official statement which could be used
as a safeguard against certain poSsi-
bilities
AS every one knows, the Milo statue
was purchased by NJ. de Marcelles for
the Marquis de Riviere, then French
ambassador at Constantinople, and was
shipped on board the gunboat Estafette.
This acquisition and embarkation met
with many more difficulties than We're
given out to the public at that time. For
instance, there was considerable hag-
Cling over the price with the peasant
whose spade had discovered the treas
ure, a very warm dispute with an Arme-
nian priest and much red tape with the
Pinnates of the island.
The truth, learned later by an ad-
mission made by NJ. Brest, Vice Consul
of France at Milo, and by the revela-
tions of NJ. Matterer still later. was that
fearing to lose the precious treasure on
account OF all the obstacles placed in
their way the officer of the Estafette de-
cided-encouraged perhaps, by NJ de
Mdrcellus-to carry the statue away by
force
Then ensued a regular BATTLE re-
lates NJ. de Brest, ''between the Grecian
and Turkish sailors and the Frenchmen.
and it was in this hand to hand strug-
gle that the statue was mutilated.'
AT that time diplomatic incidents
were not so easily managed as at the
present day. The most important thing
was to keep this squabble secret, not
only to save the sailors from blame, who
had only sinned in their excess of zeal.
but also to save NJ. de Marcelles from
the accusation of vandalism. 1t was
therefore decided that the Venus of
Milo must be represented to the world
as having been discovered by the peas
ant George as incomplete and mutlated
as she was when given into charge of
the officers of the Estafette, and later
those of the LdOnne, upon which ship
she was transported to Marseilles.
These official documents, however.
failed to modify the opinion of those who
had seen the statue intact, or very near
ly so, and when, in 1893, NJ. Henri. Roch-
effort, who was entirely unacquainted
with the text of NJ. Dumont d'Urville's
report, or of NJ. Matterers memoirs.
came into the question through a letter
written by him and published in 'I'Art
Francais," in which he related Soma
family legends on the subject. his rev.
elations fell in the midst of the archaa
ologists like stone in the middle of
pond full of frogs. NJ de Saint-Maur
had been the brother-in-law of the Mar
quis de Riviere before marrying the
writers aunt, and Henri de Rochefort
had heard his uncle relate time and time
AGAIN the incident relating to the statue
oelng offered by NJ. Dumont d'ITryille
she holds" he had said to NJ. R1viere
an apple in one hand, the apple which
mas just been given her by Paris. and
WITH the other she is slightly lifting her
robe
NOT long ago a letter was received
from naval officer which is almost like
voice from the dead Here If is.
Messleurs-I have just learned by
cpance of the scientific discussions
which have been going on for the past
lew days on the subject of Venus de
MILO, and of which was in entire ignor-
ance, owing to a fifteen years absence
from Europe. l claim for the SQUADRON
or the Levant. commanded by M Ia Ra-
ron des Rotours, the honor of having
been the first to see. in the month of
March, 1870, the celebrated Venus de
Milo. with her arms
rms squadron was composed of the
cruiser Esperance, commanded by des
Rolours, Captain of the vessel: the
gunboat Estafette, commanded by
Robert. and the transport Lionne. com
manded by Duval daily.
If you will now have the kindness to
glance over the maritime notes attached
to my fathers log book you may decide
that they bring a new element to the