Starting in 2007 this blog documents the multiple attempts to write a book about Leonardo da Vinci, with random thoughts and posts along the way. In early 2016 I finally gave up (or in?) on that and it was the most free'ing decision I've ever made. Maybe i'll go back to it eventually but now i'm able to focus on my other passions. The things I wanted to do "Once I finish, someday." I learned what I didn't like and what didn't work. Now it's time to figure out what I do want and what does.
The Battle of Anghiari
A copy of Leo's original by Peter Paul Rubens
The Battle of Anghiari
This paintings is usually referred to as Leonardo's Lost painting or "the Lost Leonardo." It was painted around 1505 and represents the battle of Anghiari that took place in 1440. Researchers believe that it is in the in the "Salone dei Cinquecento (Hall of the Five Hundred) in the Palazzo Vecchio" and hidden under another fresco painted by Leonardo's first biographer Vasari. When da Vinci was given the commission in 1504 Michelangelo was also hired to paint another mural in the same room and was the only time they worked together. Both of these murals were either 'lost' or covered later. There is controversy as to whether Leonardo's painting is still there and why it was covered up. Researchers took samples and found paint that was similar to the type used for the Mona Lisa and St. John the baptist.
Since this painting was documented and copies were made of it, by Vasari especially, it's strange that Vasari would have covered it over? In my book I assert that the title "Mona Lisa" which was first coined by Vasari - was used intentionally to contain the anagram "Mon Salai."
Since it didn't go by this title until after Leonardo died and was used by Vasari first - I found it problematic that it could have been the title da Vinci himself intended. Why wouldn't he have just titled the painting "Mona Lisa" himself? It wasn't until I read about this Vasari/ Battle of Anghiari correlation that I could find a direct connection. If Vasari saw this painting and then "covered it up" (Literally) it seems that there would have to be a reason. There are also some strange anomalies in his biography of Leonardo that also allude to him providing clues to da Vinci's works. I'm unsure on the details but there seems to be an extended collaboration between the two which would have had to been facilitated by an intermediary person(s) or directions left behind by Leonardo himself. I think that Leonardo left behind a secretive set of directions or clues to his companions/ collaborators that would set up and expand on the "puzzles and riddles" embedded in his works. Kinda like he said "After I die make sure X happens" or that his last wishes were willed to certain people that would place other pieces of the puzzles that he couldn't during his own life time. As I call it "A premeditated advertising scheme."
(The "Savior of the World" that I am referring to in this post was not the painting being considered to be by Leonardo. It was one of his apprentices. Click on the image above to go to the blog that is about the correct painting.
It is going to be exhibited at London's National Gallery in November and auctioned off. It has been estimated to sell for 100-200 MILLION dollars. There is still some controversy if it really is a Leonardo da Vinci painting.
Interestingly I have a picture of Salvado Mundi in my book. I had compared it to the Shroud of Turin & the vitruvian man: both of which I think were created by Leonardo himself. I think he purposely painted the Salvado Mundi as further proof that he also created the Shroud of Turin.
They say that great artists "use lies to tell the truth." I think the Salvator Mundi was painted …
Leonardo da Vinci was born in a town called Vinci in 1452. He left behind thousands of pages of journals and hundreds if not thousands of works of art. He was obsessed with mirrors and painted more portraits than anything else (that we know of) so it's been sort of a mystery as to what he really looked like. Why aren't there more, if any, obvious portraits of himself?
Almost every artist, especially painters, and even more so - painters who paint portraits paint themselves a lot. If you have the urge to start painting, and there is no one around - you are always there. I know personally that I have more pictures of myself than anything else. Why? Cause i'm there, all the time.
I would imagine that Leonardo painted himself, a lot. I would go so far as to say he was his own greatest subject. He was obsessed with mirrors, he painted a lot, he wasn't always around a lot of people, and getting people to stay still for long amounts of time is very difficult. When you are loo…
With this one below. The one above is obviously very similar and was by Bernardino Luini who was said to have worked directly with Leonardo. I had thought it was the painting to have been authenticated to be by da Vinci. I tried the mirroring technique and it worked almost identically on both paintings - both Luini's and da Vinci's. They definitely shared techniques and these paintings were inspired by each other. It would be interesting to know who painted which -first. I would go with Luini trying to emulate Leo.
I believe that Leo and his fellow artists would try to compete with each other to see who could paint a more complicated and "better" painting. Not only that but Leonardo was trying to teach his friends and apprentices and what better way than "Try to do this!"
The curls in the hair are reminiscent of St. John the baptist, and the hands and skin look like the Mona L…