“LA GIOCONDA.”

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXI, Issue 52, 16 October 1911, Page 8

“LA GIOCONDA.”

A DARING CHIME. Tho theft of Leonardo da Vinci’s masterpiece, “La Gioconda,” was announced on Tuesday, August -2nd. The absence of tnc picture was actually noticed on the Monday morning, at 8.30, by the head watchman or keeper of the Salon Carre, hut the higher officials of the Louvre did not come to know of it till noon next day. More than twenty-four hours, therefore, had elapsed between its disappearance and the moment when tnc police were informed and active search was begun. The picture was still in its place on the Monday morning at 7.30. Positive evidence of tins was furnished by a master mason, who was called before an examining Magistrate. The master mason stated that lie was accompanied by an assistant mason. Ho had been given some repairs to do, and on his way to his work ho passed through the Salon Carre. He stopped before the “Gioconda” to point it ditto his assistant and to remark to him that it was considered the finest painting in the Louvre. ’This was about 7.30 in the morning. An hour later, exactly at 8.30, the chief keeper of the Salon Carre passed through tho hall with a subordinate. Ho saw that the “Gioconda was nob at its place, and turned to his assistant to ask him where it was. r J he assistant said without hesitation that it had been taken away to he photographed. It was merely an idea that came to his mind, as he could not have imagined that it would be taken away for any other purpose. -.His chief took his reply in the same way, never doubting for a moment that the picture was in the hands of some photographer. They went away, and nothing more was thought o) it. Thus the “Gioconda” had disappeared, and nobody for twenty-four hours thought of looking for it. When tho keepers were again at their posts on Tuesday and the time came for opening the rooms to tho public, tho absence of the picture was again remarked by a mnr.uor of employees. An inquiry was then begun. Tho various photographers who have a special authorisation for removing poctures and photographing them were telephoned to. They knew nothing about the. picture, of course; and then the higher officials were informed. There was a rapid inquiry, and by noon only was it realised that tho picture was stolon. Ales sages were sent to the Ministry and to tiie Curator of the Louvre, M. Homollo. An examining Magistrate, was appointed to inquire into the affair, and before be arrived a remarkable discovery was made. The beautiful frame in' which tho panel had been placed was found in a. dark corner in a small back stairs. Tho picture is painted on a thick wooden panel, 90 centimetres high by 70 centimetres wide, or about 36in. by 28in. The panel had been taken out, and tho frame, which only increased tho bulk, had been left in tho stairs. After this discovery the officials hoped that the panel also might he found somewhere still in the Louvre, as it seemed impossible that anyone should have left by any of tho doors or gates, which are well guarded, with an object of that size. However, night came, and no trace of tho panel could be found, although every room, hole, and corner had been inspected and searched by the keepers and tho police. THEORIES OF THEFT. AN INTERESTING SUGGESTION. The only two possible theories, says the “Daily Telegraph,” are that the criminal is a maniac or a practical joker . The second is tho more hopeful. Is the culprit some practical joker who has a grudge against an official at the Louvre? Let ns hope so. In that case the picture may be supposed to i)o safe. Tiie man, in this supposition, knows tho value of the oioture, and would not dare to harm i't. If ho is in his senses, lie would aarclly venture to destroy it, even to escape detection and subsequent punishment,, which will not bo lenient. ■ Suppose -the thief is a maniac? Strange forms of madness are known among artists and collectors and other crazy men, with no interest in art, have-slashed pictures in museums before now. Any public librarian, for instance, knows scores. The collector’s mania has overcome all moral sense in otherwise sane and honourable men. This possibility is tho most fatal; for, if tiie mania ho strong, no consideration will,prevent the present possessor of the picture from damaging it beyond repair if his madness lies that way. One trembles to think that “La Gioconda” may already by new have been destroyed. The fame of “La Gioconda” lias preyed upon weak minds. It is a fact, strange as it may seem now, that tho picture had always been “specially guarded.” No one had ever iinigin.ed the possibility of its being bodily removed, but some maniac’s act, such as slashing it with a knife or splashing it with liquid, was always feared. A “special” had been told off to watch the picture. What lie was doing on Monday doc not appear. On public days Monna Lisa seemed to have a morbid fascination for many men. The attendant says that he used to watch them often gazing for amirs in a kind of trance at the mysterious smiling Florentine. Actually numbers of letters, lull of love, despair, appeals and laments have been in the past received at the Museum, addressed “La- .1 oconde an Louvre.” Has tl’.e mad writer of one of these letters planned and carried out with that successful method madmen often exhibit the abduction of Monna Lisa? Perhaps some maniac is now sitting in his room gloating alone over the* smile of “La Gioconda.” T lie worst would be if his madness took a destructive turn, and lie were to wreak ,-i mad revenge on the notoriously and disdainfully smiling woman, which would moan a disaster to art that nothing could retrieve. PR EVIOUS LOU A RE THEFTS. It is recalled by “Le Temps” that many bold and skilful attempts have been made in the past to deprive the Louvre of some of its treasures, and that very few arrests have resulted. On October 30th, 1900, for instance, a statuette of Isis disappeared from die room that is devoted to Egyptian antiquities. The statuette was nearly eighteen inches high, and weighed, ,\icli its marble pedestal, more than |()lb; but it was lifted from tho position that it had occupied for twenty years, in l tho company of throe statuettes of the same class, that were left undisturbed . Tho investigation that followed showed that one of the doers of the room that was reserved for the use of officials, and should have been kept closed, had been left open. There the discoveries ceased. The statue would never have' been recovered but for an anonymous denunciation of the thieves which was received long afterwards. i Only six days after lids daring theft I a leaden statuette, about four inches I high, representing’a Phoenician prinj cess, 1 hat had been discovered in jSpain, disappeared from its place. II I was of great archaeological value, of

great antiquity, and was regarded as one of the great treasures ol GraecoPhoenician art, so that the loss was a serious one; but neither the statuette nor the thieves were ever discovered. Sometime afterwards an attempt wa.s made to remove a glass panel for the purpose of gaining access to the “Alarie Antoinette” room, in which there are a great 11(11111)01' ol valuable exhibits; but the culprits were never traced. And on January J7th, .1908, some person still undiscovered cut witli a diamond a pane of the “Charles IX.” _ window and thereby made his way into the “Appollo” Gallery. As he removed nothing, but contented himself witli changing the positions of some of tho exhibits'by way of proving the fact of Ids visit, it is supposed that ho was an art amateur anxious to impress upon tho authorities the dangers to which tho treasures under their care were exposed.