New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-09-17

in order to complete the record 1t is
fitting that we should note the sequel
to the publication in THE Burlington
Magazine" this summer of certain am
davits regarding the English origin of
the now celebrated piece of sculpture
In the first place. It should. perhaps.
be stated that The Burlington Maya
zine" the leading English art periodical.
has, OF course. its regular staff of edi-
tors, but also relics upon the advice OF
a consultative committee" formed of
a number of the leading archRologists.
critics and connoisseurs OF Europe. The
names of these gentlemen are printed
in every number. and high in the list
has hitherto stood that Of DR. Bode-
Naturally. however, its presence there
could rot relieve the editors Of their re-
sponsihility in SO important a matter as
that of the wax bust, and in dealing
with 1t they were constrained to adopt
the hypothesis that Lucas had done the
work This has dispieased Dr.. Rode.
and that the consultative committee
will know him no more is shown by the
following letter from him TO the editors
lished in the August number:
You published in the June number Of
your magazine the affidavits of Messrs.
Lucas and Whithurn. together with intro
ductory remarks Of your own that left no
room for doubt as to your position in the
matter, but without communicating their
contents to me beforehand. AS have
been member of the consultative com
mittee of the magazine since the first year
of its existence, ] had right to expect
least this much.
Though another attack directed against
me was published in "The Burlington
out preliminary notification to me, /
would vet have hesitated to resign from
your committee, because L am one OF the
founders of the periodical, and was able to
render it an important service IN the crit
ical period Of its first year. Had / been
in your place and decided that the puo-
Iica ton of these affidavits was necessary,
would have pointed out that Iucas,s ana
Whitburns declarations. though undoubt,
men Of advanced years and concerned facts
that, according to them, took place sixty
four years ago. I would also have men
toned that former statements OF these
portant particulars to the aHirTnatonS
now made by them; and that all critical
have testified to the great antiquity of the
bust and against its authority by the
older Lucas Only such a declaration on
Your part would have fitted the case
Since however. you unhesitatingiy take
part against me, and do not state my at
titude in the matter at all. [ am forced,
much to my regret. to request YOU TO re-
move my name from the consultative COM
nlttee of your pubfCat ton
know that more than one of your LEAD
ing ccnnoiSseurs agrees with my view OF
the matter, as they have repeatedly ex-
preWef to me- their discomfort with the
man- - of the attack upon the genuine
ness of the bust. and with the affldaTfs
feel assured that You will publish this
statement In The Burlington Magazine.
In publishing this statement the ed
itors express their deep regret at losing
DR.. Bode from the consultative commit
tee, testifying to his having been a true
friend to the magazine from it's inception
and to the invaluable service he has rem
dered to il. They add these perfectly
reasonable words:
The iatrdnssgedrt attitude adopted by Or.
Rode with reference TO the va bust of
Flora in the Berlin Museum would seem
70 render It Impossible for him TO CO
operate in a. friendly manner with those
who take a more tolerant view of artistic
disa gree11lents, and who hold that such dis
agreement on any particular point of &C.
pert,se need not. and should not. lead TO any
breach of friendship. . d. r is with the
authenticity Of the bust that art critics and