Evening star., 1920-09-19

as Is pertinently pointed out by
Lafenestre & Richtenberger. in their
maintained that this other picture
No. 1605-was the portrait of La
Belle Ferronniere. But how could
even Bailly know much about the
facts, as facts. by tradition hum
dred and fifty years after the death
SO, who went to America with Capt.
Hahn?
Not La Belle Ferronniere. (a) be-
cause 1t isn't she, and (b) beca
she's here. and not Lucrezia Crtvellf,
for exactly the same reasons. Leo
Of Crivelli. one of the ladies in wait
ing of the duchess in the court Of
Ludovic Sforza. called II Moro. back
there in Italy. because of the follow
ing epigram of the time:
Hq5us guam sernis nomen Lacretia: Divi
Rara huic forma data est; pinxit Leonafdus.
amavit.
To whose hs name Son
here. all gifts Of God came with a
generous hand. Rare beauty was
given her, Leonardo painted her. II
MCrro loved her. one the greatest of
painters. the other the greatest of
dukesD
But. following Eugene Muntz. Va
sari. Richter and the rest of the
crowd, McCurdy. latest biographer of
Leonardo. puts it downright that "of
the portraits of Lucrezia Crivelli and
Cecilia Gallerani all record ceases at the
outset!''
And yet she must be somebody.
Who, she: Why. this original Leon
ardo of Kansas City Junction. who is
better than the Louvre. The French
government appraised her at 100000
francs and. by exceptional favor to
on Av,on .st al ha fr
quit French soil and the patrimony of
French art without paying the 100 per
cent export tax on the value of works
of art originating before 1880. which
has recently stopped so many other
Americans from taking their own
you buy a thing. it is your prop
erty. isn't 1t? Well. whether 1t be
paintings. furniture or other art OBJ
jects before 1880. you may not take
them out of France without paying
the export tax on its selling value
ity. 1t is so per cent up to 100000
francs and 100 per cent (exactly the
amount of it's selling value in France)
above 100000 francs. 1t is a purely
French tax designed. while furnish
ing after-war revenue, to slow up the
draining of Frances art antiquities.
particularly to America-where they
had been going.
The only regular way to avoid it is
to bring in a painting. etc. made since
1880. or an old 'un on whose selling
value lin FranceD 50 per cent will be
zero or as nehr thereto as possible.
So. do not hope to duplicate other
wise the luck Of La Belle Ferronniere.
which must have been exceptional.
Yet in the Sunday newspaper story
of July 4 they make no beans Of the
intention to hand over the painting
nj
magnate Of Tulsa. Okla
The French government vouches,"
quote. for the authenticity Of the
painting. and appraised the work for
a sum equal to about $3.50. 900 Ameri-
can coin. It is not improbable that
command $1.00o.ooO today II offered
in the auction mart Of New York or
London. One can imagine the RI
valry in bidding for 4 Mona Lisa or
a la Belle Ferronjere.' For many
years the picture known as La Belle
Ferronniere was a treasured posses
sion in the family Of the Chateaubri-
ands. ana was inherited by a young
woman. descendant Of this noted
French family. etc. etc. The prohibi-
French government has placed upon
art would have prevented the pic
ture from leaving France. except for
the fact that the owner of the por-
trait became the bride Of an Ameri-
can citizen"
(Here IL a proud privilege Of
American citizenship which the most
of us must possess without know
ing itD
"Conhicting reports prevail as to
the final destination Of La Belle Fer
ronniere.' it continues. "It was first
reported that the picture was to be
installed in the new Museum of Art
at Kansas City. The report has been
denied from Kansas City. and accord
ing to another dispatch from the
west. the painting has been acquired
by a wealthy oil magnate of Tulsa.
Mystery is admitted.
There is a veil of mystery envelop-
ing this picture.' says the syndicated
information for art lovers and mil
lionaires. which has been handed
down from generation to generation by
members of the Chateaubriand fam
lily from the time Of Napoleon.
there were two paintings with the
title of La Belle Ferronniere"; and
some art historians attribute the por-
trait in the Louvre to be q likeness of
Lucrezia Crivelli. who was a favorite
of Ludovic. called II Moro. the
Sforza. who was a noted patron Of
art and literature. Other authorities
declare that it Is a portrait of La
Belle Ferronniere," favorite of
Francis I. King of France. Who can
say which opinion Is correctr'
Who could muddy the waters more
ingenuously? OF course. there were
two paintings which carried the title,
at different times. of the Belle Fer
ronniere"-these two of the Louvre
Gallery. Nos. 1900 and 1905. But what
has that to do with Tulsa. Okla?
And the conclusion. to swing US to
Tulsa:
when art historians disagree, who
shall agree? (Ah. nonD Other critics
state that the picture of La Belle
Ferronniere in the Louvre does not
represent the work of the distin-
guished Leonardo himself. but is the
skilIful work of a pupil. copied, per-
haps, from a lost original of the mas
ter. And now we come to an inter-
esting supposition: Is the picture OF
La Belle Ferronniere in the Louvre a
COPY. or the original, or IL the paint
ing now in America the original por-
|rrait, painted by Leonardo?
All, non! ah, non! ah, non. as the
French say.
Its chief claim to being Leon
ardo is that Leonardo painted a Belle
neither Of these two tstili in the
i.ouyre) Is either Of those two in
history! STERLING HELLO.
COMMUNE LEADER