A photo was found at Churchill's residence with this St Paul de Vence fountain, so its been named a REAL Churchill painting as of 2022.

@EconMBAStudent

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for sharing this

@Bethgael

Жыл бұрын

I hope this was discovered in time for the gentleman to save his farm and all those jobs.

@allenschmitz9644

Жыл бұрын

@@Bethgael winnie to the rescue!.

@suzzanahbessette6989

Жыл бұрын

Look at you, out here being the real hero!

@frenchartantiquesparis424

Жыл бұрын

@@Bethgael I think he had already sold the farm in France. There is a good article online.

Best part of this episode is when sweet Fiona comforts our shook up painting owner!

What a stroke of luck that that old newsreel mentioned Churchill painting there.

@phmwu7368

Жыл бұрын

Book hint: Winston Churchill: Painting on the French Riviera ( 2020 hardcover 208 pages by artist/author Paul Rafferty ). It has on page 51 the photographic evidence of Sir Winston Churchill holding the painting on the terras of Chateau l'horizon in Golfe Juan - France ! Photo series taken by Lady Doris Castlerosse found in the chartwell archives - 2022.

@tamaliaalisjahbana6849

Жыл бұрын

@@phmwu7368 Wow! Thank you. I shall try to get the book.

The circumstancial evidence is good enough for me: the painting was found in the house of Churchill's daughter, and Churchill painted the fountain, and no other painting of the fountain exists. Find another expert.

I’ve been watching this with great enjoyment, especially following the journey of the Churchill painting. My dear old mum who passed away recently kept a trailer near St. Paul de Vance, and she collected many paintings from the area, which are hanging up here in her home, which is mine now, and something about the Churchill scene drew me in, and when you got to the BBC film and I saw the fountain I realized that I have a painting of it painted from the vantage point of the characters in Churchill’s painting looking out through the arch. It’s hanging in a bathroom here and I just looked at it and realized it is the same scene!!! [in reverse).

@andrewmacdonald1904

Жыл бұрын

How absurd that with all the evidence and provenance that someone felt reluctant to authenticate Churchill’s painting. Ridiculous.

I think the expert refused to admit his initial opinion was incorrect, even when so much evidence of it's authenticity had been collected. He's done far more damage to his reputation than if he'd admitted his first impression of the painting was wrong.

Wow. The clip of Keating. I’ve seen several forgers on this show, but he gave me the chills.

Finding the actual real life site of the Fountain scene - a very moving moment as a person watching, let alone the actual owner of the Churchill painting. Overwhelming emotions took him - as too viewer watching this walking back in time history unfold. 🥇🥇🥇

The biggest thing exposed by this is the inheritance tax. They will tax you every step of the way. Grow your wealth, create something, pass it on and they will try to take it away, disgusting.

@carlotta4th

Жыл бұрын

That's why you give away as much as you legally can per year before you die. It varies by country but there's a certain amount accepted for gifts.

@seanfaherty

2 ай бұрын

yeah, Inherit money, pay less percentage of tax than a shop girl, don't spend a farthing to grow the county's economy and then expect to give it away, again paying a smaller percentage of tax than a shop girl then hire a lobbyist to try to keep more money. That is the beauty of Conservative economics. I wonder why they are having a hard time in the opinion polls ?

What about the film saying Churchill painted by the fountain, what about the Lady with the story of the paint request? I think The gentleman was short changed.

@Bethgael

Жыл бұрын

What about Churchill's WIFE saying she knew it?

@benediktmorak4409

Жыл бұрын

Well, for all your expertise, see FrenchArtExpertise Paris' comment below (here's the quote): "A photo was found at Churchill's residence with this St Paul de Vence fountain, so its been named a REAL Churchill painting as of 2022." The expert was wrong.

@charlestaylor1693

Жыл бұрын

Some of these experts give an initial opinion and thereafter are intransigent in the face of additional evidence to the contrary. I think that was the case here. I'm thrilled to see the comment by Benedikt Morak indicating that the painting has now been declared a bona fide Churchill.

@phmwu7368

Жыл бұрын

Book hint: Winston Churchill: Painting on the French Riviera ( 2020 hardcover 208 pages by artist/author Paul Rafferty ). It has on page 51 the photographic evidence of Sir Winston Churchill holding the painting on the terras of Chateau l'horizon in Golfe Juan - France ! Photo series taken by Lady Doris Castlerosse found in chartwell archives.

@mariashelly4812

Жыл бұрын

The status of that so-called expert should go down the toilet.

17:49 I work in a suburb of Hamilton, New Zealand which is called Chartwell. It was so named in honour of Churchill, and there is a metal plaque with a brief note from the man acknowledging this. When I was younger I endeavoured to find out why Chartwell, and now can recognise the place from just about any angle 😁 Useless superpowers indeed

I was waiting for the paint analysis, brands Sir Winston used, to the contrast of the ones loaned to him.

@nancymilawski1048

Жыл бұрын

He might not have stuck to a particular brand. During and after the war materials were hard to get.

Wow, I never thought I would see my hometown Philadelphia!!! I am a fan of this show and love art immensely. It is great to see wonderful things happen to those who wait especially this episode.

This show is always so interesting & informative. I love art & artists & am an amateur myself. Thank you for your hard work on this series.

I thought your investigation proved that it is a Churchill painting. Unfortunately, the 'expert', was too apprehensive to fully commit to authenticating the painting for fear of 'tainting' their reputation. I thought your accumulated findings were sufficient. The video was quite interesting to watch. My condolences to Charles...I hope he was able to save the farm.

@WJACOTT

8 ай бұрын

yep... he had it all in his lap, but they want to be as important as the artiststhemselves. talentless wanna be artists who turn into "experts"

Interesting episode, seems pretty odd that the painting by Churchill which comes with a huge amount of corroborative evidence should be nearly dismissed by the "expert". Churchill was a an amateur painter, not a bad one but not a master either, I would have thought trying to judge a Churchillian painting by its style or colour with an amateur painter, who's technique would be rougher and less established, would be significantly less reliable than the very persuasive history that the team here had managed to accumulate. Again, very odd - I'd still lay odds this was a genuine Churchillian painting - perhaps the other "odd" thing is that it could be so valuable

I was so hoping for good news on both paintings and I am so happy of the outcome. Best wishes to all for such a captivating and moving insight into the glorious and intoxicating world of art & painting. This is such a wonderfully enlightening series which surely must continue 🙏

It just amazes me that the so called Art Experts have so much power, in this case the painting was obviously by WSC but the anorak expert didn't agree.

This is a brilliant series . I have watched as many as I can find :)

Exciting, thanks for the update

Wonderful production.

I love this show. Thanks

I love Art all forms off ,and what beautiful story ,

17:17 This is not entirely related to the subject of this episode, but to whoever was in charge of the music for it: I was pleasantly surprised to hear this bit of the 'How to Train your Dragon' score in it! It's one of the most beautiful scores ever written, it deserves to be more known.

This is the problem I have with people who “do” art. Saying that figures in a painting are “weak” while at the same time characterizing them as “bold” and “plucky” is contradictory to say the least. I feel the respect for Churchill as an historic figure is clouding judgement and good sense. Also putting Churchill down as an amateur is disturbing. Grandma Moses was also a rank amateur but the people who “do” art will drown you in steaming heaps of bullshit trying to convince you she was a genius. Edit: And now the guy who supposedly knows Churchill’s work better than anyone else says the figures in the painting are too good to be Churchill! 🤣 You couldn’t make this stuff up!

I'm literally gobsmacked that the expert is ignoring all of the circumstantial evidence gathered as regards the Churchill - the signed photo dated Oct 1 1945 given to the tea shop lady, the corroboration in the Times stating Churchill had recently returned from the south of France dated Oct 5, 1945 (support for the signed photo being genuine), the reporting from 1949 stating Churchill had been in the village and painted said fountain (so the memory of the locals was still fresh), the conclusive evidence linking the location the painting was found in with Churchill's daughter and just going by the feelings in his gut about the style of the painting!! So glad additional evidence was found to link the painting to Churchill conclusively in the end. Mind you - I'll bet the expert kicked and screamed and still didn't want to accept it as genuine even after that. I really don't get how people can look at the evidence assembled and still not accept an alternative narrative.

I'm shocked that Mr. Coombs was not convinced by all the evidence that was provided to him. Dates, contemporary accounts and similarities to Churchill's other works.

@ 47:47 I just love his jacket, it is Boss Fabulous, that green is so delicious! This man has some hip, or his Clothing Advisor certainly does. Excellent!

@EconMBAStudent

Жыл бұрын

Gorgeous jacket, I admired a Nehru (collarlesss) standup collar at the end of a grand masters sleuthing, figured it might be an Armani but not sure, yes stays man has style

Nice story...artlife always i2f the artist...one love...blessings

Winston Churchill, what a story he lived, with great guts, he plowed into situations of Life, and with the same he explored his creative. By our 3D Physical Reality, that an A+ for "expeeiencing life". Beth Tennessee, USA

What picture did he paint that day, if not this one?

I love that the How To Train Your Dragon soundtrack just shows up sometimes :D

Book hint: Winston Churchill: Painting on the French Riviera ( 2020 hardcover 208 pages by artist/author Paul Rafferty ). It has the photographic evidence of Churchill holding the painting !

@tropicalgardenvlogs

Жыл бұрын

But the Churchill expert considered that only conclusive evidence that the painting and Churchill were once in close proximity and not absolute proof he had painted the piece himself.

Im usually very skeptical of found paintings, but. With so much evidence and the affirmation that he had been at that vety location in 1945, it seems highly likely that it is an authentic Churchill. With the massive amount of provenance the painting could be sold to a private collector aware of the details.

Thank You for another Great Episode! God the Father Jehovah and Jesus Christ Bless You all!

Doesn't that letter make it clear that Churchill and Maas painted after lunch at the same time so the painting in question is by one or the other, seems to me.

A darn shame that the farm was sold. At least the history of the paintings makes a really, really good story.

Check out David Irving on Churchill. Nuff said

@brianjacob8728

Жыл бұрын

yeah, churchill faked french impressionist paintings and signed them under an assumed name to bump up their price. Churchill was a fraud.

The moment I saw the Churchill painting, I thought it looked exactly like his style of the ones shown in his book "Painting is a Pastime", and others. So I disagreed with the expert on that. All I needed to see then was the provenance, and I thought they had more than enough. Can't believe the expert wouldn't authenticate it, but I see from a recent post it has since been authenticated with more evidence. Doesn't surprise me. I guess with all the fakes out there, experts have become super cautious even when presented with a lot of provenance.

What year was this produced?

《It seems incredible that Sir Winston Churchill should have found time to add to an already formidable list of talents the one of painter....》 JOHN DİEFENBAKER CANADA PRIME MINISTER OTTAWA 1958 🍃🍁🍃

@allenschmitz9644

Жыл бұрын

FDR knew 'forgery' was winnies hidden talent.

I find it extremely annoying that artworks are sold at tremendously high prices based on who created them, rather than how well they are made. There are so many truly good artists out there who have to sell their works for an egg and a slice of bread. But as long as rich people are prepared to pay for the names of the artists rather than the quality of an artwork, the rich will continue to get richer, and artists will stay in the position they have always been in. This is very demoralizing for all the unknown artists in this world. No wonder the forgeries are piling up.

@mariashelly4812

Жыл бұрын

I agree. I found an artist in New Mexico that is fantastic. I have purchased four of his paintings and wish I could afford more. The first one was $700, the second cost me $750 , the third $800, and the last $1,200 and now they have gone up to about $8,000. But when he first started out, I was told he was selling them for a "meal" at a restaurant. I believe he is now deceased.

@Auxius.

Жыл бұрын

@@mariashelly4812 I do agree with Le Chat, artists need support more than ever, who ever it may be. I am happy for this man and the preservation of history of this particular painting too though.

It is a lovely painting,Churchill or not.

@benediktmorak4409

Жыл бұрын

Well, for all your expertise, see FrenchArtExpertise Paris' comment below (here's the quote): "A photo was found at Churchill's residence with this St Paul de Vence fountain, so its been named a REAL Churchill painting as of 2022." The expert was wrong.

*(Channel Host: please see my impression below, I had an "intuitive moment")* I never knew that Winston Churchill had such a Passion for Painting. Having 1 of my degrees in History, and a continued affinity for History, I've watched documentaries and read some articles on the Life 9f Churchill. This show, however, offers me a greater glimpse into the Personality of Mr Churchill, and one that further reflects the energy of his unique ways. His Military focus, his Political Interest, and then his gathering the necessary energies to protect his country, it's people's, and the Western World. He is one of the most under-realized, characters from History's World Stage. He also "feels" very different than any other character of Britain. This coming from an Irish American, 3rd generation on one side and 7th generation on the other, of County Kerry lineage. Although, I was born in Chicago, I'm "very aware" of *"the History"* involving Ireland and Britain. Further, I've made a point to evolve my mind, applying Conscious Thought+ Higher Mind, which is a realizing of people as individuals and understanding how influenced each are by those whom are the Power and own the Information Flow aka News Medias. Therefore, I realize the public is just now coming into the realization of this influence and it being targeted at our Lower Mind aka Ego Mind. This is a method of Understanding Human Behaviors, very necessary for my other degrees, Sociology and Journalism, most particularly Sociology. I remain of the perspective that Winston Churchill has really not been understood by those whom have written his Bio-Documentaries, highly underestimated in his depth and Wisdom, I truly feel him unique to his time, people, and station. He remains my most respected Brit, and I offer this from my professional, personal, and intuitive perspective. BTW: I "feel the Churchill Painting is Authentic" and it will come to be proven so, on the other hand, I feel there is something the Gentleman, "Expert" that viewed the Painting, is holding back, either for: (something to do his own profits or something he is trying to conceal, and to keep from being discovered). This is an Intuitive feeling, (I'm what 8d defined as Claircognizant and Clairsentient), we shall see what comes to unfold. (Today is January 26, 2023). a Sociologist/Behavioralist, Historian, ... and Artist (no degree in Art, it is a God given talent I treasure).

@helengren9349

Жыл бұрын

👍Agree...🙌☘️ He'll buy Churchills painting for less, then later coming with 'evidence' it is Churchill and sell with big profit.🤔. By the way, lady on that old film said Churchill was there painting fountain... Isn't that evidence enough..? 🤔 Blessings 🙏🌟🕊️🎆

@helengren9349

Жыл бұрын

PS Well, sadly this vid is from 2020...(at the end, one can see MMXX in the red box on the left side).. And one person commented that case is solved 2020, as Winstons painting.. DS

@bethbartlett5692

Жыл бұрын

@@helengren9349 Excellent, where did you find this!

@helengren9349

Жыл бұрын

@@bethbartlett5692 One of the persons here in comments wrote it has been solved. I can ask him/her, as well as i can check info on the net about it. 👍

@gordonfrickers5592

Жыл бұрын

You may like to know, painting was not Churchill's only hobby. Example, he enjoyed brick laying, building walls. As for this painting, as a trained artist and historian, at first glance it does not look to me typical of Churchill's painting for several reasons. It's also worth remembering, the Art world is an ocean full of hungry sharks looking to feed. Much as I revere Churchill, he was not an outstanding painter. I'm yet to see a 'good' painting by Sir Winston and yet I'll agree to own anything created by that very great man would be wonderful. My first impression is the drawing and colouring of the architecture untypical, it's to precise. Churchill was much influenced by the 19th century French painting techniques which I too have learned in France. However, to be more sure I'd want to see the original and other's known to be by Churchill's painted around the time this one is alleged to have been painted.

37:40 Wow. Even if it's scripted can't help but have the chills.

Paints where loaned - on Winston’s - as he started to run out -where they same manufactured paints - are ingredients the same - if same colour is used in different areas of the painting - can the paint samples of same colours be compared . ? Manufacturers ingredients may vary .

21:39 I'm a bit disappointed that Minnie hasn't lined up the legs on her table with the stripes in her carpet. Standards seem to be slipping these days.

At 1:05 in the intro Fiona states that some authority is declaring that a painting they have been consulted on should be seized and destroyed. Does anyone know which episode this is from?

@alanframpton2640

Жыл бұрын

I think it was about a Chagall that came from Russia

@gonzalogonzalez4220

Жыл бұрын

@@alanframpton2640 That's the episode. Thanks!!

Not sure how they could have doubt about the Churhill painting after all that you discovered. From were it came from , and the old video stating Churchill had painted the exact scene along with the different paints. I guess I would ask , was Churchill in the habit of buying other artists works bringing them back to England or his wife and children buying other people's artwork and used them as models for work he planned to paint In the future Because that could only be the only reason Churchill family could have had it in a house they occupied. Interview them quick to find out from the ones still living if Churchhill did this Great show

These "authorities" are just ridiculous. Their criteria is arbitrary, their egos too easily bruised, and little incentive to accept anything as real. Just catching them on a different day in a different mood could make all the difference.

Wow. Some number of paintings there at Chartwell. Must be some monies worth.

Just out of curiosity: is this "Henty" family related to G. A. Henty, teacher and author of about a hundred books on historical subjects written for young lads in the late 1800's and early 1900's. I have a collection of about 75 0f his books!

Churchill was a great guy indeed, he deserves a nice Hollywood movie guys, get in action everybody plizzzzzz

@Auriflamme

Жыл бұрын

It's been done: "Darkest Hour" with Gary Oldman.

What a great episode this was and what a pity that inheritance taxes are so high as to create a possible loss of the inherited property -- and this to support the monarchy? Toward what end!

What nice to see the perspective from the place it was painted. The emotion is big..! (Minute 28…)

Churchill was a bit naughty during hard times ... he was known to exhibit his paintings in French Exhibitions under the name of another collectable artist 'Charles Morin' - a real French painter, who died in 1919... they don't describe it as forgery, they describe it as 'nom de plume' .... ha ha ....

My relatives then,Winston and I have 42 common ancestors wow!

@eljanrimsa5843

8 ай бұрын

If you go back far enough, everybody has the same ancestors.

A fun programme thank you, I fully agree one needs to 'see' the original before being definitive. As a noted, trained painter myself, with two large websites, I'm well aware that this is the case with any decent painting. Photography and less so the Internet never does full justice to an original painting. As for this painting, as a trained artist and historian, at first glance it does not look to me typical of Churchill's painting for several reasons which I touch on below. To the best of my knowledge Churchill did holiday in to France in 1945 "The British Primer Minister decided to enjoy some holiday time with his wife, and they decided to do so at the Basque village of Saint-Jean-de-Luz ." Picturesque Saint-Jean-de-Luz, today still well worth visiting, is on the Atlantic coast near fashionable Biarritz, not near the Mediterranean. It's also worth remembering, the Art world is an ocean full of hungry egoistic sharks looking to feed, dealers with a vested interest in hyping prices. Much as I revere Sir Winston Churchill, I grew up in the 1950's near his home Chartwell, he was not an outstanding painter. I'm yet to see a 'good' painting by Sir Winston and yet I'll agree to own anything created by that very great man would be magical. My first impression is the drawing and colouring of the architecture untypical, it's to precise. Churchill was much influenced by the 19th century French painting techniques which I too have learned in southern France in a line descended from Cezanne. A mystery yes, thank you, to be more sure I'd want to see the original and other's known to be by Churchill painted around the time and find more evidence that Sir Winston was where this programme claims when it claims. The witnesses and loaded questions leave much doubt. The mystery remains was this as alleged to have been painted by Sir Winston? Your thoughts?

Is there a slight chance that Churchill expert could be wrong. ?

@Bethgael

Жыл бұрын

I reckon he is. One thing I have noticed in every one of these episodes that I have watched (and I don't claim to have watched all of them) is that the experts NEVER change their minds from their first standing. I recall that episode regarding the painting that had 2 great houses [one French and one English] argue over whether it was authentic and despite the evidence for authenticity being overwhelming (including it having literal provenance from painter to gallery by the French house!) the English "expert house" REFUSED to authenticate it. Even the hosts were, like, politely "steady on...". I think the American expert was honest: "I'm not sure; I'll have a look" and so I had hopes. But the moment Coombes said "I have my doubts", I knew for certain this poor bloke would have to sell his farm. I think the expert knows it's a Churchill and he will later say so, when he can "suddenly" solve the mystery of one of the paintings in his catalogue. Then again, maybe I'm just seeing egos where no malice exists. I'm often wrong. :D

@gordonfrickers5592

Жыл бұрын

Possible yes, I fully agree one needs to 'see' the original before being definitive. As a noted, trained painter myself, with two large websites, I'm well aware that this is the case with any decent painting. Photography and less so the Internet never does full justice to an original painting. As for this painting, as a trained artist and historian, at first glance it does not look to me typical of Churchill's painting for several reasons which i've touched upon in a post in this series.

@Bethgael

Жыл бұрын

@@gordonfrickers5592 Well, for all your expertise, see FrenchArtExpertise Paris' comment below (here's the quote): "A photo was found at Churchill's residence with this St Paul de Vence fountain, so its been named a REAL Churchill painting as of 2022." The expert was wrong.

The munnings would be so easy to fake since the artist painted so many versions of that location 🤔

I know art is subjective. Still, I want to say that the Churchill's painting looks much better than the winter landscape.

. 39:33 " Tom Keating .............. Artist " Well that's one way to put it . .

As to the "experts" comment about the "weakness" of the perspective of the Churchill painting is to me a rather rude comment. I am not a artist of any kind nor an art critic, but the perspective of the artist in the BBC film is to me cramped and dominated by that bulbous fountain and the more inclusive trough fountain is totally obscured, where Churchill's perspective opens up the scene and brings the trough to fore. It also gives you a view down the side street which again gives more to see than just a fountain. Mr. Churchill had a very good compositional eye that I find very rewarding to the eye.

51:16 Churchill had his first stroke in 1949 . So the announcement that he was confined to his house , because of a sore throat , may have been a bit of a fib . .

Charles was a very handsome young man.

Dear Nicholas, Greetings from Canada and congratulations upon the grand celebration of the coronation of King Charles!! All the very best during this momentus occasion. Sincerely, Gina Laderoute

Is David Coombe still in the employ of Chartwell we wonder?

No expert needed for Churchill’s.

It angers me for just one person to be able to make or break the decision. One person should not have so much power.

First he bombed the area and when the fire department got there he fire bombed the area such a great man Winston was

The Guy I See In The Pulpit, the Auctioner ? Is an Actor ! Better than Jack

Winston Churchill was born in the house opposite me. Blenheim Palace. A lad from our village. He wasn't much of a brick layer, and he was a worse painter.

@brianjacob8728

Жыл бұрын

and an even worse politician, despite what you've been told.

The Eisenhower Museum in Abilene Kansas had a display of one work each by Churchill, Hitler, and Eisenhower. The Hitler work was a nice architectural study, the Eisenhower a typical old-man-takes-up-painting work, and the Churchill an awful daubing.

Could have been given to Churchill by the artist for the cigars.

👍👍👍

Winston Churchill is artist

❤❤😢😮

The only person that couldn't see it was a real Churchill was the supposed expert. With all that evidence... come on!!

It is nothing like a Munnings

What is a coal hall?

@dorotapogubila4427

Жыл бұрын

Coal storage.

@markwood3389

Жыл бұрын

@@dorotapogubila4427 Thanks. I never heard of it. It's a British thing?

@Jo.And-so-on

Жыл бұрын

@@joa8227 Yes, they are in Holland too.;-)

@markwood3389

Жыл бұрын

@@joa8227 interesting. Thanks for explaining that!

@nancymilawski1048

Жыл бұрын

@@joa8227 Canada too. Probably all northern countries that used coal for heating.

What Is In A Name ? Keatimg , like Cheating . Like Faking A Manning . Like Faking A Winston’s .

Clemmy Churchill .Rather forward .Lady Clementine Churchill is who she related too

*Why does Britain have such an overwhelming inheritance tax? I have heard this but don't have a clear understanding of the purpose.* I shall attempt to Google an explanation.

@lynnbetts4332

Жыл бұрын

It may be the French inheritance tax. The two small farms are in France.

@helengren9349

Жыл бұрын

Royal family need money... 🤔 Can you imagin how many charities, galas, concerts, private donators and all charityshops are "pulling in" for cancer, starving children, and still there is cancer, starvation, no water, war... 🤔

@helengren9349

Жыл бұрын

@@lynnbetts4332 Isn't that based on nationality..? If citizen in UK, one pays taxes accordingly to that country..? 🤔

@lynnbetts4332

Жыл бұрын

@@helengren9349 Have no idea. Those estate taxes may be a combination of taxes due in both countries.

@Bethgael

Жыл бұрын

It's a combination. He'd be paying taxes in both countries. The UK have inheritance tax based on value, at about 40%, but the tax is usually paid by the estate (he's trying to avoid selling the farm, so it is possible the estate doesn't have enough cash to pay said taxes). In France, inheritance tax is based on income and is paid by each individual beneficiary. He's being dipped by both countries, because in the UK it's based on whether you, as the inheritor, get a capital gain, whereas in France it's about the person who leaves the land (ie his uncle) and the change of ownership of the land. If his uncle had more beneficiaries, his individual tax load in France would be less. Having said that, the "Royal family" do not receive the taxes. They're government taxes in both countries, and go to government coffers and the general budgets of both countries. It's also worth noting that the late Queen Elizabeth 2 paid income taxes, VAT and capital gains taxes until her death, and has done so since 1993. Charles, despite being exempt, will also continue to pay income taxes (they do receive income from their estates). The French have no royal family, but I imagine you can google how their government uses their tax coffers.

Fez or Eze.....hmmmm...

Churchill was not really a very good painter, although I admire his efforts in consideration of all else he had to attend to, so if a painting is very excellent I believe it must not be by him.

Chruchill couldn't paint so he had paint by numbers by artists done on canvas.

I wouldn't call that Munning's a masterpiece.

@Amtcboy

Жыл бұрын

They were studies, preliminaries.

they still sell these tourist paintings....bet churgill bought it on a vacation too....

WHAT MAKES IT A MASTER PIECE ???????? WHO SAYS SO ?????

@artlifealways...

Жыл бұрын

Tru...artlife always i2f the artist...one love...blessings

@gordonfrickers5592

Жыл бұрын

As an artist with some 70 years experience I'd not call this painting a 'masterpiece' or even a Churchill original. The other, Munnings, is probably a fake by the famous Thomas Patrick Keating (1 March 1917 - 12 February 1984). However with so much money at stake sooner or later the 'art world' will claim it is both are masterpieces, one by Churchill.

What a shame. So much rode on this. I can’t help but wonder, if the expert hasn’t seen it first…first impressions are hard to change… And shame on France. In my county, you only pay inheritance tax on property if you sell it.

British painter vs Austrian painter 💀

Interesting, but ads ads ads ads ads

Rich people selling art so they can be richer.

A commercial cuts conversations in half every 3 minutes - blech! PS - since bitching in the 27th minute ..... all the commercials have ended thru 45th minute ??? PPS immediately got another commercial after PS posted PPPS at least 10 commercial breaks overall in less than an hour PPPPS the last commercial told me I can pay utub for commercial-free groan groaning groaned

How to stretch a 5 min video to 58 mins.

It must be a new fictional story because nowhere in his biography has ever mentioned anything about his painting activities

It’s hardly a masterpiece. Overuse of that word dilutes all art. Please refrain.

This painting does NOT look like Churchill's hand imo, as an artist.

@aujay

Жыл бұрын

....As an Artist.....You obviously don't know Churchill's hand all that well as the painting is in fact by his hand ! ....As an Artist.....

@gordonfrickers5592

Жыл бұрын

Artist to artist I agree with you as for "Sorry but it is, this case was solved in 2020", with so much money at stake and knowing the art world yes sooner or later, it would be 'solved'.

Oh god, not provenongz again. No-one says guvvernongz, happenstongz, insistongz, a chongz encounter, going to dongz a waltz. Say the word as it is spelled, dammit. Prov-a-nance. Pretentious tomfoolery detracts from professionalism - and from credibility - every time. Next rant: ommarzh for homage.

@guybrushwayne4388

Жыл бұрын

Ermagerd

@davidmorris6254

Жыл бұрын

It's a French word and that is how you pronounce it, especially when you are well off born in Europe. You may be looking at it from a different perspective is all?

@steelcrown7130

Жыл бұрын

@@davidmorris6254 Nope. About 45% of English derives from French but we don't change from native English pronunciation to a sort of mangled French every time we say "beef" or "table" or "delicious" or "city" or "person". Provenance is not a French word, and has not been for centuries. It entered the language via French about 200 years ago and was quickly pronounced according to its spelling in English: the pretentious fake French pronunciation is a very VERY recent thing. If people did the same thing with "ignorance" or "arrogance", which have similar derivations, others would rightly regard them as idiots. Sorry but it's not just a different perspective, it's research and scholarship. Even though I used the 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary, even all the non-paper-based, not-respectable sources I can find on the Internet all say the same thing. I know it's not the word you were specifically addressing, but "ommarzh" as I said is another bugbear of mine, and it is breeding like a plague among the arty-but-ignorant crowd. It also has not been a French word for centuries - in this case about 500 years. The English word homage (hommidge) is Middle English, which means it has been a naturalised English word since at least 1500. The Modern French word is *hommage* with a double m.

@Bethgael

Жыл бұрын

@@steelcrown7130 Not so, re pronunciations always being Angolified. Many of our weird pronunciations for similar spellings have been kept in English. School : k: Greek Chef: Sh : Oh, look, French. tch: OE often via Welsh. Different people say things differently. eg, in Australia, twat, would be pronounced "twot" because an a after a w sound is often pronounced "o". I smile every time an English person says "non" for "none" because here, we say "nun" for the same word. People are wonderful, and reverse snobbery is also snobbery.

@steelcrown7130

Жыл бұрын

@@Bethgael Sadly your comment consists of four points unconnected in any way by a common thread and almost completely missing the point of what I wrote, so I'll deal with them separately, as you have: 1. "Not so, re pronunciations always being Angolified." Apart from inventing Anglofied to mean Anglicised, you are contradicting something I never came close to saying. I *never* said pronunciation is always anglicised. In fact I suspect I am in total agreement with you. I did say about 45% of English is derived from French but we don't change from native English pronunciation to a sort of mangled French ... and then I gave a few example words derived from French to demonstrate that most French-derived words are fully assimilated into English and are correctly pronounced as English words. *Provenance is one of them* . Of course many French words have kept their Frenchness: hour, heir, honour, ballet, chef (I'll call your chef and raise you "cliche", "pastiche" and "moustache"), restaurant, cafe, naive ... My gripe with provenance (as with homage) is that the word was pronounced as a natural English word for centuries and then a bunch of pretentious fools began to parade their non-existent poshness by re-Frenching it. The problem is the project fails every time: any attempt by an English speaker to say "provenongz" sounds nothing like the actual French pʁɔvnɑ̃s. 2. "School : k: Greek Chef: Sh : Oh, look, French. tch: OE often via Welsh." My point (and yours) exactly. We agree. Let's move on. 3. "Different people say things differently." Well, derrr Fred (yes I am Australian too, and I suspect in the same city). Interestingly the particularly rude word you used as an example I have heard as both rhyming with "hat" and rhyming with "what" in Australia in about 50/50 proportions, and I am in the "hat" camp. Similarly I too have noticed the "non" and "nun", and I'll also raise the odd new UK pronunciation of "says (sez)" as "sayz (like daze)", and the bizarre Estuarine turn toward "us" as "uz", or even "əz". Again, we agree totally - different people have their own personal pronunciations. However, where we differ is that I believe that without a common relatively stable core that accommodates these personal quirks, we would eventually no longer understand each other. 4. "People are wonderful, and reverse snobbery is also snobbery." Hmmm, straight out of left field a massive truism and then a direct character judgment with no evidence. Nice try to pin that one on me. No false dichotomies please: there are many gradations between snobbery and reverse snobbery, and pointing out one does not immediately scoot you down to the other extreme end of the spectrum. I wasn't railing against snobbery anyway, just ignorance and pretension. Every time we correct someone for a howler it does not mean we have placed ourselves at the other end of the scale and proclaimed we are God; we all make mistakes and should be grateful if someone helps us not to sound foolish: my doctor recently pointed out the difference between "nauseous" and "nauseated" and I took it like a lamb. All the best.

This is all so much BS. Great art should be judged on its own merit, not who painted it. Caring about the who degrades art to the level of hollywood celebrity. Merit is irrelevant, fame is everything. Nonsense and foolishness.