Fresco of the Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci. Secrets. Secrets of Leonardo da Vinci's fresco "The Last Supper". Location and history of creation

Plot

The Last Supper is the last meal of Jesus Christ with his 12 disciples. That evening, Jesus established the sacrament of the Eucharist, which consisted of the consecration of bread and wine, and preached about humility and love. The key event of the evening is the prediction of the betrayal of one of the students.

"The Last Supper". (wikimedia.org)

The closest companions of Jesus - those same apostles - are depicted in groups around Christ, sitting in the center. Bartholomew, Jacob Alfeev and Andrey; then Judas Iscariot, Peter and John; then Thomas, James Zebedee and Philip; and the last three are Matthew, Judas Thaddeus and Simon.

According to one version, the closest person to the right hand of Christ is not John, but Mary Magdalene. If we follow this hypothesis, then her position points to marriage with Christ. This is supported by the fact that Mary Magdalene washed Christ’s feet and dried them with her hair. Only a legal wife could do this.

Nikolai Ge “The Last Supper”, 1863. (wikimedia.org)

It is not known exactly what moment of the evening Da Vinci wanted to depict. Probably the reaction of the apostles to the words of Jesus about the impending betrayal of one of the disciples. The argument is the gesture of Christ: according to the prediction, the traitor will stretch out his hand to the food at the same time as the son of God, and the only “candidate” is Judas.

The images of Jesus and Judas were more difficult for Leonardo than others. The artist could not find suitable models. As a result, he based Christ on a singer in a church choir, and Judas on a drunken tramp, who, by the way, was also a singer in the past. There is even a version that Jesus and Judas were based on the same person at different periods of his life.

Context

For the end of the 15th century, when the fresco was created, the reproduced depth of perspective was a revolution that changed the direction of the development of Western painting. To be precise, “The Last Supper” is, rather, not a fresco, but a painting. The fact is that technically it was made on a dry wall, and not on wet plaster, as is the case with frescoes. Leonardo did this so that the images could be corrected. The fresco technique does not give the author the right to make mistakes.

Da Vinci received an order from his regular client, Duke Lodovico Sforza. The latter’s wife, Beatrice d’Este, who patiently endured her husband’s unbridled love for libertines, eventually died suddenly. The Last Supper was a kind of last will of the deceased.

Lodovico Sforza. (wikimedia.org)

Less than 20 years after the creation of the fresco, Da Vinci's work began to crumble due to humidity. After another 40 years, it was almost impossible to recognize the figures. Apparently, contemporaries were not particularly worried about the fate of the work. On the contrary, they in every possible way, wittingly or unwittingly, only worsened his condition. So, in the middle of the 17th century, when the churchmen needed a passage in the wall, they made it in such a way that Jesus lost his legs. Later, the opening was blocked with bricks, but the legs could not be restored.

The French king Francis I was so impressed by the work that he seriously thought about transporting it to his home. And during World War II, the fresco miraculously survived - a shell that hit the church building destroyed everything except the wall with Da Vinci’s work.

Santa Maria delle Grazie. (wikimedia.org)

“The Last Supper” was repeatedly tried to be restored, although not particularly successfully. As a result, by the 1970s it became obvious that it was time to act decisively, otherwise the masterpiece would be lost. Colossal work has been carried out over 21 years. Today, visitors to the refectory have only 15 minutes to contemplate the masterpiece, and tickets, of course, must be purchased in advance.

One of the geniuses of the Renaissance, a universal man, was born near Florence - a place where, at the turn of the 15th and 16th centuries, cultural, political and economic life was extremely rich. Thanks to the families of patrons (such as the Sforza and the Medici), who generously paid for art, Leonardo was able to create freely.

Da Vinci statue in Florence. (wikimedia.org)

Da Vinci was not a highly educated man. But his notebooks allow us to speak of him as a genius, whose range of interests extended extremely widely. Painting, sculpture, architecture, engineering, anatomy, philosophy. And so on and so forth. And the most important thing here is not the number of hobbies, but the degree of involvement in them. Da Vinci was an innovator. His progressive thought overturned the ideas of his contemporaries and set a new vector for the development of culture.

Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie.

In one of the quiet corners of Milan, lost in the lace of narrow streets, stands the Church of Santa Maria della Grazie. Next to it, in an inconspicuous refectory building, a masterpiece of masterpieces - the fresco "The Last Supper" by Leonardo da Vinci - has been living and amazing people for more than 500 years.

The composition of “The Last Supper” by Leonardo da Vinci was commissioned by Duke Lodovico Moro, who ruled Milan. From his youth, moving in a circle of cheerful bacchantes, the Duke became so corrupted that even a young innocent creature in the form of a quiet and bright wife was unable to destroy his destructive inclinations. But, although the Duke sometimes spent, as before, whole days in the company of friends, he felt sincere affection for his wife and simply revered Beatrice, seeing in her his guardian angel.

When she died suddenly, Lodovico Moro felt lonely and abandoned. In despair, having broken his sword, he did not even want to look at the children and, moving away from his friends, languished alone for fifteen days. Then, calling on Leonardo da Vinci, who was no less saddened by this death, the Duke rushed into his arms. Under the impression of the sad event, Leonardo conceived his most famous work - “The Last Supper”. Subsequently, the Milanese ruler became a pious man and put an end to all holidays and entertainment, which constantly distracted the great Leonardo from his studies.
Monastery refectory with fresco by Leonardo da Vinci, after restoration
Last Supper

For his fresco on the wall of the refectory of the monastery of Santa Maria della Grazie, da Vinci chose the moment when Christ says to his disciples: “Truly I tell you, one of you will betray me.”
These words precede the culmination of feelings, the highest point of intensity of human relations, tragedy. But the tragedy is not only of the Savior, it is also the tragedy of the High Renaissance itself, when faith in cloudless harmony began to crumble and life did not seem so serene.

Leonardo's fresco is filled not only with biblical characters, they are also giants of the Renaissance - free and beautiful. But now they are confused...

“One of you will betray me...” - and the icy breath of inevitable fate touched each of the apostles. After these words, a variety of feelings were expressed on their faces: some were amazed, others were outraged, others were saddened. Young Philip, ready for self-sacrifice, bowed to Christ, Jacob threw up his hands in tragic bewilderment, was about to rush at the traitor, Peter grabbed a knife, Judas’s right hand clutched a purse with fatal pieces of silver...

For the first time in painting, the most complex range of feelings found such a deep and subtle reflection.
Everything in this fresco is done with amazing truth and care, even the folds on the tablecloth covering the table look real.

In Leonardo, just like in Giotto, all the figures in the composition are located on the same line - facing the viewer. Christ is depicted without a halo, the apostles without their attributes, which were characteristic of them in ancient paintings. They express their emotional anxiety through their facial expressions and movements.

“The Last Supper” is one of Leonardo’s great creations, whose fate turned out to be very tragic. Anyone who has seen this fresco in our days experiences a feeling of indescribable grief at the sight of the terrible losses that inexorable time and human barbarity have inflicted on the masterpiece. Meanwhile, how much time, how much inspired work and the most ardent love Leonardo da Vinci invested in the creation of his work!

They say that he could often be seen, suddenly abandoning everything he was doing, running in the middle of the day in the most intense heat to St. Mary's Church to draw a single line or correct the outline in the Last Supper. He was so passionate about his work that he wrote incessantly, sat at it from morning to evening, forgetting about food and drink.

It happened, however, that for several days he did not take up his brush at all, but even on such days he remained in the refectory for two or three hours, indulging in thought and examining the figures already painted. All this greatly irritated the prior of the Dominican monastery, to whom (as Vasari writes) “it seemed strange that Leonardo stood immersed in thought and contemplation for a good half of the day. He wanted the artist not to let go of his brushes, just as one does not stop working in the garden. The abbot complained to the duke himself, but he, after listening to Leonardo, said that the artist was right a thousand times over. As Leonardo explained to him, the artist first creates in his mind and imagination, and then captures his inner creativity with a brush.”

Leonardo carefully chose models for the images of the apostles. He went every day to those quarters of Milan where the lower strata of society and even criminal people lived. There he was looking for a model for the face of Judas, whom he considered the greatest scoundrel in the world.

Indeed, at that time Leonardo da Vinci could be found in various parts of the city. In taverns, he sat down at the table with the poor and told them different stories - sometimes funny, sometimes sad and sorrowful, and sometimes scary. And he carefully looked at the faces of the listeners when they laughed or cried. Noticing some interesting expression on their faces, he immediately quickly sketched it.

The artist did not pay attention to the annoying monk, who shouted, raged and complained to the duke. However, when the abbot of the monastery began to bother Leonardo again, he declared that if he did not find anything better for the head of Judas, and “they would rush him, then he would use the head of this so intrusive and immodest abbot as a model.”

The entire composition of “The Last Supper” is permeated with the movement that the words of Christ gave rise to. On the wall, as if overcoming it, the ancient gospel tragedy unfolds before the viewer.

The traitor Judas sits with the other apostles, while the old masters depicted him sitting separately. But Leonardo da Vinci brought out his gloomy isolation much more convincingly, shrouding his features in shadow.

Jesus Christ is the center of the entire composition, of all the whirlpool of passions that rage around him. Leonardo's Christ is the ideal of human beauty; nothing betrays deity in him. His inexpressibly tender face breathes deep sorrow, he is great and touching, but he remains human. In the same way, fear, surprise, horror, vividly depicted by the gestures, movements, and facial expressions of the apostles, do not exceed ordinary human feelings.

This gave the French researcher Charles Clément reason to ask the question: “Having perfectly expressed true feelings, did Leonardo give his creation all the power that such a subject requires?” Da Vinci was by no means a Christian or a religious artist; religious thought does not appear in any of his works. No confirmation of this was found in his notes, where he consistently wrote down all his thoughts, even the most secret ones.

What the amazed spectators saw when, in the winter of 1497, they, following the Duke and his magnificent retinue, filled the simple and austere refectory, was indeed completely unlike previous paintings of this kind. The “paintings” on the narrow wall opposite the entrance seemed as if they weren’t there at all. A small elevation was visible, and above it a ceiling with transverse beams and walls, forming (according to Leonardo’s plan) a picturesque continuation of the real space of the refectory. On this elevation, closed by three windows overlooking the mountain landscape, a table was depicted - exactly the same as the other tables in the monastic refectory. This table is covered with the same tablecloth with a simple woven pattern as the tables of other monks. There are the same dishes on it as on the other tables.

Christ and the twelve apostles sit on this elevation, closing the monks’ tables with a quadrangle, and, as it were, celebrate their supper with them.

Thus, when the monks sitting at the meat table could be more easily carried away by worldly temptations, they had to show for eternal teaching that a traitor could invisibly creep into everyone’s heart and that the Savior cares for every lost sheep. The monks had to see this lesson on the wall every day so that the great teaching would penetrate deeper into their souls than prayers.

From the center - Jesus Christ - the movement spreads across the figures of the apostles in breadth, until, in its utmost tension, it rests on the edges of the refectory. And then our gaze again rushes to the lonely figure of the Savior. His head is illuminated as if by the natural light of the refectory. Light and shadow, dissolving each other in an elusive movement, gave the face of Christ a special spirituality.

But when creating his “Last Supper,” Leonardo could not draw the face of Jesus Christ. He carefully painted the faces of all the apostles, the landscape outside the refectory window, and the dishes on the table. After much searching, I wrote Jude. But the face of the Savior remained the only one unfinished on this fresco.

It would seem that “The Last Supper” should have been carefully preserved, but in reality everything turned out differently. The great da Vinci himself is partly to blame for this. When creating the fresco, Leonardo used a new (he himself invented) method of priming the wall and a new composition of paints. This allowed him to work slowly, intermittently, making frequent changes to already written parts of the work. The result at first turned out to be excellent, but after a few years, traces of incipient destruction appeared on the painting: spots of dampness appeared, the paint layer began to peel off in small leaves.

In 1500, three years after the writing of the Last Supper, water flooded the refectory, touching the fresco. Ten years later, a terrible plague struck Milan, and the monastic brethren forgot about the treasure kept in their monastery. Fleeing from mortal danger, they (perhaps against their own will) could not properly take care of the fresco. By 1566 it was already in a very pitiful state. The monks cut a door in the middle of the picture, which was needed to connect the refectory with the kitchen. This door destroyed the legs of Christ and some of the apostles, and then the picture was disfigured with a huge state emblem, which was attached above the very head of Jesus Christ.

Subsequently, Austrian and French soldiers seemed to compete with each other in vandalism to destroy this treasure. At the end of the 18th century, the refectory of the monastery was turned into a stable, the fumes of horse manure covered the frescoes with thick mold, and the soldiers entering the stable amused themselves by throwing bricks at the heads of the apostles.

But even in its dilapidated state, “The Last Supper” makes an indelible impression. The French king Francis I, who captured Milan in the 16th century, was delighted with the Last Supper and wanted to transport it to Paris. He offered big money to anyone who could find a way to transport these frescoes to France. And he left this project only because the engineers gave up in the face of the difficulty of this enterprise.

Based on materials from “One Hundred Great Paintings” by N.A. Ionin, Veche Publishing House, 2002

Fresco The Last Supper by Leonardo da Vinci in Milan - where it is, how to get there, where to buy tickets. Description of the work, interesting and little-known facts.

The glory of this masterpiece, which is one of the most famous works of art, attracts tourists from all over the world to Milan. The Last Supper of Leonardo da Vinci, painted by him between 1495-1498, is located on the wall in the building of the former refectory of the monastery complex, next to the Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie, located in the city square of the same name. Even during the master’s lifetime, the wall painting was considered one of his best works, having a stunning influence on the work of several subsequent generations of artists. For more than 500 years, it has attracted the inexhaustible interest of historians, researchers and novelists, who still strive to unravel the supposed mysteries associated with the magnificent painting.

Leonardo's Last Supper: description of the work

Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper is a visual interpretation of an event recorded in all four canonical books of the Christian New Testament. The presented scene, recreating the last meal of Christ with his disciples, most closely matches the description set out in chapter 13 of the Gospel of John. In his version, the artist depicted the moment when Jesus announces the betrayal of one of those present, causing various reactions from his twelve followers - from varying degrees of horror to shock and anger, captured in the faces and in the dynamic poses of the figures sitting at the refectory table. Thus, by showing the extraordinary tension between the characters, Leonardo introduced great Christian drama into art for the first time, which was extremely unusual at that time. In addition, the master neglected the traditional iconographic canons, daring to paint the Savior without a golden mandorla (radiance), and the apostles surrounding him without traditional halos in favor of the realism of the created masterpiece.

To get rid of the use of halos of holiness, he placed three windows in the background, the widest of which is behind Jesus. The light emanating from it seemed to surround the Savior with an almost divine radiance, thereby concentrating all attention on the main character, and the real sun rays coming from the windows of the refectory complemented and enlivened the wall painting.

Despite numerous criticisms from the clergy of the Church, they subsequently admitted that no one had ever been able to better convey the meaning of the divine meal described in the Gospel, as Leonardo da Vinci did.

Interesting facts about Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper

The Last Supper - the test of time and the revival of a masterpiece

Leonardo da Vinci was not satisfied with the traditional technique of painting frescoes, which involved applying strokes of paint on wet plaster, since in this case he was not able to draw the smallest details and see the full naturalness of the resulting color, which lost its original brightness upon final drying. In addition, this method of creating wall paintings, used by most of his contemporaries, required quick work from scratch and did not allow repainting the surface, which was unacceptable for Leonardo, who often made changes and additions to the work of art he created. Therefore, in order not to sacrifice the skill of execution, the artist used a mixture of tempera and oil as an experiment, applying the resulting paint directly onto dry plaster. However, he did not know or did not take into account that such a dense dry base was not able to fully absorb the oil-based paint, which after a few years began to peel off and peel off from the wall, as a result of which the master had to correct and restore damaged fragments.

In 1652, the inhabitants of the monastery cut out a new door in the wall with the already fairly crumbling fresco, while removing a small part of it, on which the feet of Christ were depicted. Subsequently, numerous and ineptly carried out restorations, which began already in the 16th century, only worsened the deplorable condition of the masterpiece. Only in 1954, Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper was cleared of the previously applied layers, the identified remains of the original painting were fixed, and some lost fragments were restored from ancient copies. As you know, three of the artist’s students made full-scale copies of the original fresco by Leonardo da Vinci. In particular, the painting of the Last Supper, preserved today in the Royal Academy of Arts in London, reproduced on canvas in the smallest detail by Giampetrino (Giovan Pietro Rizzoli), was taken as the basis for the last restoration work, completed in 1999.

Last Supper. Copy of Giampetrino. 1520

Another similar example by the Italian painter Andrea Solari (Andrea di Bartoli Solari, 1460-1524) is located in the monastery of the Tongerlo Abbey in Belgium, and the third, by Cesare da Sesto (1477-1523) is in the church of San Ambrogio in Switzerland . Thanks to these exact copies, the original of Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper was not lost forever and today it can still be seen in a building located next to the Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie in the square of the same name in Milan.

How to visit and where to buy tickets

Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper is undoubtedly one of the most attractive attractions in Milan. However, the number of tickets on sale is very limited, since the building of the former refectory of the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie is absolutely not suitable for receiving a large number of tourists.

Only small groups, about 20-25 people, who can contemplate the masterpiece for 15 minutes, are allowed into the room. Since the flow of applicants almost never dries up, tickets must be purchased in advance, at least 1-2 months in advance, either through the official website or through the website of an authorized partner, given in the form below.

Advance booking of tickets for the Last Supper is mandatory.. It is worth considering that tickets purchased online can be obtained at the box office only upon presentation of an identification document of the visitor stated in the order, and no less than 30 minutes before the designated time.

Even children have heard about Leonardo da Vinci’s “Last Supper.” This unique work of art is still controversial to this day. The masterpiece of a brilliant artist, even centuries after it was written, never ceases to attract people's attention. This circumstance only once again proves the genius of the author.

The Last Supper is located in Milan, in the Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie. The temple is also a historical monument; it was built during the Renaissance. The painting adorns the walls of the refectory in the holy monastery.

Finding the place is easy. The Church of St. Mary is located on the square of the same name in the Italian capital.

Story

Leonardo created this work over several years: from 1495 to 1498. The carefully drawn details of the interior, the features of the images of saints and Christ required long, painstaking work. Reliable facts are known about how the picture was painted and who inspired the idea.

Customer of the famous creation

Important! You will not enter the refectory without a ticket. You should book your ticket well in advance of your planned trip.

A limited number of visitors are allowed. Therefore, there is a high probability that there will be no tickets available during your trip.

When planning excursions in Italy, make sure to visit the amazing fresco site while still at home.

“The Last Supper” never ceases to gather art fans. It also attracts pilgrims. No one else has managed to capture the image of Christ with his disciples so believably and realistically. It still fascinates, makes you stand near it for a long time and come back again and again.

A trip to Milan is not only an amazing opportunity for adult travelers to get acquainted with the work of a master, but also an excellent way to introduce children to the world of beauty.

Truly, there is no secret in the world that would not someday become obvious, for manuscripts do not burn. And we continue to debunk one of the most unscrupulous historical myths regarding the name defamed by the Christian Church Mary Magdalene. Recently, coverage of this topic has become of fundamental importance for us, because Rigden Djappo himself speaks with great respect about her and her “great feat”, which we will definitely come to later, as evidenced by those presented in the book “ Sensei 4. Primordial Shambhala"materials describing the completely unknown history of this mysterious and beautiful woman. Very soon in the "Primordial Knowledge" section we will post the detailed content of this, in our opinion, priceless literary work.

In the meantime, following the article “One of the secrets of Mary Magdalene, the beloved disciple of Jesus Christ,” we continue the search for an inconvenient truth for the official Church, trying to figure out what and why they hid from us - ordinary people - for thousands of years, what can you do, we have to to speak directly, the so-called “clergy”. Having received the keys of Knowledge, “doors and eyes open” for any person, he begins to see the surrounding reality from a radically different angle, and first of all, it becomes unclear to him why these people call themselves “clergy” and hide so many secrets? If people knew the truth, a lot in this world could change, and we are convinced, for the better for people.

Today we turn to the monumental painting of Leonardo da Vinci" Last Supper", depicting the scene of the last supper of Jesus Christ with his disciples. It was written in the years 1495-1498 in the Dominican monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. The reason for our conversion in it? Like many unbiased biblical scholars, we became very interested, why is it clear that there is a woman next to Jesus , while the Church for thousands of years has been urging people to believe in the version about a certain Apostle John, from whose pen the fourth, one of the canonical Gospels “of John the Theologian” came out, the “beloved disciple” of the Savior.

So, let's look at the original first:

Location

Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan, Italy.

"Last Supper" (official information, according to Wikipedia)

General information

The dimensions of the image are approximately 460x880 cm, it is located in the refectory of the monastery, on the back wall. The theme is traditional for this type of premises. The opposite wall of the refectory is covered with a fresco by another master; Leonardo also put his hand to it.

Technique

He painted “The Last Supper” on a dry wall, and not on wet plaster, so the painting is not a fresco in the true sense of the word. The fresco cannot be altered during the work, and Leonardo decided to cover the stone wall with a layer of resin, gabs and mastic, and then paint over this layer with tempera. Due to the chosen method, the painting began to deteriorate just a few years after the completion of the work.

Figures depicted

The apostles are depicted in groups of three, located around the figure of Christ sitting in the center. Groups of apostles, from left to right:

Bartholomew, Jacob Alfeev and Andrey;
Judas Iscariot (wearing green and blue clothes) , Peter and John (?);
Thomas, James Zebedee and Philip;
Matthew, Judas Thaddeus and Simon.

In the 19th century, notebooks by Leonardo da Vinci with the names of the apostles were found; previously only Judas, Peter, John and Christ had been identified with certainty.

Analysis of the picture

The work is believed to depict the moment when Jesus utters the words that one of the apostles will betray him (“and while they were eating, he said, “Truly I say to you, one of you will betray me”), and the reaction of each of them. As in other depictions of the Last Supper of the time, Leonardo places those sitting at the table on one side so that the viewer can see their faces. Most previous writings on the subject excluded Judas, placing him alone at the opposite end of the table from where the other eleven apostles and Jesus sat, or depicting all the apostles except Judas with a halo. Judas clutches a small pouch, perhaps representing the silver he received for betraying Jesus, or an allusion to his role among the twelve apostles as treasurer. He was the only one with his elbow on the table. The knife in Peter's hand, pointing away from Christ, perhaps refers the viewer to the scene in the Garden of Gethsemane during the arrest of Christ. Jesus' gesture can be interpreted in two ways. According to the Bible, Jesus predicts that his betrayer will reach out to eat at the same time he does. Judas reaches for the dish, not noticing that Jesus is also extending his right hand to him. At the same time, Jesus points to bread and wine, symbolizing the sinless body and shed blood respectively.
The figure of Jesus is positioned and illuminated in such a way that the viewer's attention is drawn primarily to him. The head of Jesus is at a vanishing point for all lines of perspective.
The painting contains repeated references to the number three:

The apostles sit in groups of three;
behind Jesus there are three windows;
the contours of the figure of Christ resemble a triangle.

The light illuminating the entire scene does not come from the windows painted behind, but comes from the left, like the real light from the window on the left wall. In many places in the picture there is a golden ratio; for example, where Jesus and John, who is on his right, put their hands, the canvas is divided in this ratio.

"The Last Supper. Mary Magdalene sits next to Christ!" (Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince. "Leonardo da Vinci and the Brotherhood of Zion")

(a book worth reading for its analytical perspective)

There is one of the most famous - immortal - works of art in the world. Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper fresco is the only surviving painting in the refectory of the monastery of Santa Maria del Grazia. It is made on a wall that remained standing after the entire building was reduced to rubble as a result of Allied bombing during World War II. Although other remarkable artists have presented their versions of this biblical scene to the world - Nicolas Poussin and even such an idiosyncratic author as Salvador Dali - it is Leonardo’s creation that, for some reason, amazes the imagination more than any other painting. Variations on this theme can be seen everywhere, and they cover the entire spectrum of attitudes towards the topic: from admiration to ridicule.

Sometimes an image looks so familiar that it is practically not examined in detail, although it is open to the gaze of any viewer and requires more careful consideration: its true, deep meaning remains a closed book, and the viewer glances only at its cover.

It was this work of Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) - the suffering genius of Renaissance Italy - that showed us the path that led to discoveries so exciting in their consequences that at first they seemed incredible. It is impossible to understand why entire generations of scientists did not notice what was available to our astonished gaze, why such explosive information patiently waited all this time for writers like us, remained outside the mainstream of historical or religious research and was not discovered.

To be consistent, we must return to the Last Supper and look at it with fresh, unbiased eyes. This is not the time to consider it in the light of familiar ideas about history and art. Now the moment has come when the view of a person who is completely unfamiliar with this so famous scene will be more appropriate - let the veil of bias fall from our eyes, let us allow ourselves to look at the picture in a new way.

The central figure, of course, is Jesus, whom Leonardo, in his notes relating to this work, calls the Savior. He thoughtfully looks down and slightly to his left, his hands are stretched out on the table in front of him, as if offering the viewer the gifts of the Last Supper. Since it was then, according to the New Testament, that Jesus introduced the sacrament of Communion, offering bread and wine to the disciples as his “flesh” and “blood,” the viewer has the right to expect that there should be a cup or goblet of wine on the table in front of him in order for the gesture to appear justified . Ultimately, for Christians, this supper immediately precedes the passion of Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane, where he fervently prays “let this cup pass from me...” - another association with the image of wine - blood - and also the holy blood shed before the Crucifixion for the atonement of sins of all humanity. Nevertheless, there is no wine before Jesus (and not even a symbolic amount of it on the entire table). Could these outstretched arms mean what in the vocabulary of artists is called an empty gesture?

Given the absence of wine, it is perhaps no coincidence that of all the bread on the table, very few are “broken.” Since Jesus himself associated with his flesh the bread to be broken in the supreme sacrament, is there not a subtle hint sent to us of the true nature of Jesus' suffering?

However, all this is just the tip of the iceberg of heresy reflected in this picture. According to the Gospel, the Apostle John the Theologian was physically so close to Jesus during this Supper that he leaned “to his chest.” However, in Leonardo this young man occupies a position completely different from that required by the “stage instructions” of the Gospel, but, on the contrary, exaggeratedly deviated from the Savior, bowing his head to the right. An unbiased viewer can be forgiven if he notices only these curious features in relation to a single image - the image of the Apostle John. But, although the artist, due to his own preferences, of course, was inclined towards the ideal of male beauty of a somewhat feminine type, there can be no other interpretations: at the moment we are looking at a woman. Everything about him is strikingly feminine. No matter how old and faded the image may be due to the age of the fresco, one cannot help but notice the tiny, graceful hands, delicate facial features, clearly female breasts and a gold necklace. This is a woman, precisely a woman, which is marked by clothing that especially distinguishes her. The clothes on her are a mirror image of the clothes of the Savior: if he is wearing a blue chiton and a red cloak, then she is wearing a red chiton and a blue cloak. No one at the table wears clothing that is a mirror image of Jesus' clothing. And there are no other women at the table.

Central to the composition is the huge, widened letter “M”, which is formed by the figures of Jesus and this woman taken together. They seem to be literally connected at the hips, but they suffer because they diverge or even grow from one point in different directions. As far as we know, none of the academicians ever referred to this image other than “St. John”; they also did not notice the compositional form in the form of the letter “M”. Leonardo, as we have established in our research, was a magnificent psychologist who laughed at presenting to his patrons, who commissioned him a traditional biblical image, highly unorthodox images, knowing that people would calmly and unperturbedly look at the most monstrous heresy, since they usually only see what they want to see. If you have been called upon to write a Christian scene, and you have presented to the public something which at first sight is similar and responsive to their wishes, people will never look for ambiguous symbolism.

At the same time, Leonardo had to hope that perhaps there were others who shared his unusual interpretation of the New Testament, who would recognize secret symbolism in the painting. Or someone someday, some objective observer will one day understand the image of the mysterious woman associated with the letter “M”, and ask questions that clearly follow from this. Who was this “M” and why is she so important? Why did Leonardo risk his reputation—even his life, in those days when heretics were burning at the stake everywhere—to include her in a fundamental Christian scene? Whoever she is, her fate cannot but cause alarm as the outstretched hand cuts her gracefully arched neck. The threat contained in this gesture cannot be doubted.

The index finger of the other hand, raised right in front of the Savior’s face, threatens him with obvious passion. But both Jesus and “M” look like people who do not notice the threat, each of them is completely immersed in the world of their thoughts, each in their own manner is serene and calm. But all together it looks as if the secret symbols were used not only to warn Jesus and the woman sitting next to him (?), but also to inform (or perhaps remind) the observer of some information that would be dangerous to make public in any other way. Did Leonardo use his creation to promulgate some special beliefs that would be simply madness to proclaim in the usual way? And could these beliefs be a message addressed to a much wider circle, and not just to his inner circle? Maybe they were intended for us, for the people of our time?

Young Apostle John or Mary Magdalene?

Let's get back to looking at this amazing creation. In the fresco on the right, from the observer's point of view, a tall bearded man is bent almost double, telling something to a student sitting at the edge of the table. At the same time, he almost completely turned his back to the Savior. The model for the image of this disciple - Saint Thaddeus or Saint Jude - was Leonardo himself. Note that images of Renaissance artists were usually either accidental or were made when the artist was a beautiful model. In this case, we are dealing with an example of the use of an image by an adherent of double entendre (double meaning). (He was preoccupied with finding the right model for each of the apostles, as can be seen from his rebellious offer to the most irate prior of St. Mary's to serve as a model for Judas.) So why did Leonardo portray himself as so clearly turning his back on Jesus?

Moreover. An unusual hand aims a dagger at the stomach of a student sitting just one person away from "M". This hand cannot belong to anyone sitting at the table, since such a bend is physically impossible for the people next to the image of the hand to hold the dagger in this position. However, what is truly striking is not the very fact of the existence of a hand that does not belong to the body, but the absence of any mention of it in the works about Leonardo that we have read: although this hand is mentioned in a couple of works, the authors do not find anything unusual in it. As in the case of the Apostle John, who looks like a woman, nothing could be more obvious - and nothing more strange - once you pay attention to this circumstance. But this irregularity most often escapes the attention of the observer simply because this fact is extraordinary and outrageous.

We often hear that Leonardo was a devout Christian whose religious paintings reflect the depth of his faith. As we can see, at least one of the paintings contains images that are very questionable from the point of view of an orthodox Christian. Our further research, as we will show, has established that nothing could be so far from the truth as the idea that Leonardo was a true believer - by implication, a believer according to the canons of the generally accepted or at least acceptable form of Christianity. Already from the curious anomalous features of one of his creations we see that he was trying to tell us about another layer of meaning in a familiar biblical scene, about another world of faith hidden in the generally accepted images of wall paintings in Milan.

Whatever the meaning of these heretical irregularities - and the significance of this fact cannot be exaggerated - they were absolutely incompatible with the orthodox tenets of Christianity. This in itself is unlikely to be news to many modern materialists/rationalists, since for them Leonardo was the first true scientist, a man who had no time for any superstitions, a man who was the antithesis of all mysticism and occultism. But they also could not understand what appeared before their eyes. Depicting the Last Supper without wine is tantamount to depicting a coronation scene without a crown: the result is either nonsense, or the picture is filled with other content, and to such an extent that it represents the author as an absolute heretic - a person who has faith, but a faith that contradicts the dogmas of Christianity. Perhaps not just different, but in a state of struggle with the dogmas of Christianity. And in other works of Leonardo we have discovered his own peculiar heretical predilections, expressed in carefully crafted relevant scenes, which he would hardly have written exactly as he was simply an atheist earning his living. There are too many of these deviations and symbols to be interpreted as the mockery of a skeptic forced to work according to an order, nor can they be called simply antics, such as, for example, the image of St. Peter with a red nose. What we see in the Last Supper and other works is the secret code of Leonardo da Vinci, which we believe has a striking connection with our modern world.

One can argue what Leonardo believed or did not believe, but his actions were not just the whim of a man, undoubtedly extraordinary, whose whole life was full of paradoxes. He was reserved, but at the same time the soul and life of society; he despised fortune tellers, but his papers indicate large sums paid to astrologers; he was considered a vegetarian and had a tender love for animals, but his tenderness rarely extended to humanity; he zealously dissected corpses and observed executions with the eyes of an anatomist, was a deep thinker and a master of riddles, tricks and hoaxes.

With such a contradictory inner world, it is likely that Leonardo’s religious and philosophical views were unusual, even strange. For this reason alone, it is tempting to dismiss his heretical beliefs as something of no relevance to our modern times. It is generally accepted that Leonardo was an extremely gifted man, but the modern tendency to evaluate everything in terms of "era" leads to a significant underestimation of his achievements. After all, at the time when he was in his creative prime, even printing was a novelty. What can one lone inventor, living in such primitive times, offer to a world that is swimming in an ocean of information through the global network, to a world that, in a matter of seconds, exchanges information through telephone and fax with continents that in his time were not yet discovered?

There are two answers to this question. First: Leonardo was not, let's use the paradox, an ordinary genius. Most educated people know that he designed a flying machine and a primitive tank, but at the same time some of his inventions were so unusual for the time in which he lived that people with an eccentric turn of mind may imagine that he was given the power to foresee the future. His bicycle design, for example, became known only in the late sixties of the twentieth century. Unlike the painful trial-and-error evolution that the Victorian bicycle underwent, Leonardo da Vinci's road eater already had two wheels and a chain drive in its first edition. But what is even more striking is not the design of the mechanism, but the question of the reasons that prompted the invention of the wheel. Man has always wanted to fly like a bird, but the dream of balancing on two wheels and pressing the pedals, taking into account the deplorable state of the roads, already smacks of mysticism. (Remember, by the way, that unlike the dream of flying, it does not appear in any classical story.) Among many other statements about the future, Leonardo also predicted the appearance of the telephone.

Even if Leonardo were an even greater genius than the history books say, the question still remains unanswered: what possible knowledge could he have possessed if what he proposed made sense or became widespread only five centuries after his time. One can, of course, make the argument that the teachings of a first-century preacher would seem to have even less relevance to our time, but the indisputable fact remains: some ideas are universal and eternal, the truth, found or formulated, does not cease to be the truth after the passage of centuries. ..

(to be continued)

"The Da Vinci Code" (scandalous novel by Dan Brown)

Particularly heated debates erupted in the world after the film adaptation of Dan Brown's scandalous novel " The Da Vinci Code", where, among other things, he states that Mary Magdalene was not only the beloved disciple of Jesus, but also the consort, that is, the wife . The book has been translated into 44 languages ​​and published in a total circulation of more than 81 million copies. The Da Vinci Code tops the New York Times bestseller list and is considered by many to be the best book of the decade. The novel, written in the genre of an intellectual detective thriller, was able to awaken widespread interest in the legend of the Holy Grail and the place of Mary Magdalene in the history of Christianity.

However, the Christian world reacted very sharply to the release of the book and film; Dan Brown's version was destroyed with a thousand critical responses and comments. One of the zealous ministers of religion put it most eloquently, even calling for a boycott of the film: “piercingly anti-Christian, full of slander, crimes and historical and theological errors regarding Jesus, the Gospel and a hostile church.” However, putting aside religious narrow-mindedness, one thing can be said for sure: none of the critics was alive then, and cannot know the real history. It may be known to the one whose name is inscribed in the title of our site, and we will return to his words.

SKETCH FOR "THE LAST SUPPER"

Well, now let's look at Leonardo Da Vinci's blank, the surviving sketch for The Last Supper. The second figure from the left, in the top row, feminine outlines, smoother and lighter forms are clearly visible. Who is this if not a woman?

SUMMARY

Everyone sees what they want to see, this is one of the mysterious laws of human consciousness. And if a person’s consciousness believes that white is black, it will confidently prove that it is right. We were not present at the painting of the famous monumental painting by the brilliant artist, just as we were not present at the epoch-making events in the life of Jesus Christ, and therefore it would be fairer to end this article with the statement that we cannot know for sure whether it is John or Mary, but subjectively, in the picture Leonardo Da Vinci is a woman, and therefore none other than the beloved disciple of Jesus - Mary Magdalene. The Church’s opinion that the Apostle John the Theologian is in the picture is of the same degree of subjectivity. 50/50 - no more!!!

Prepared by Dato Gomarteli (Ukraine-Georgia)

PS: another reproduction, photo of the “Last Supper” mosaic from St. Isaac’s Cathedral in St. Petersburg, and again we see a woman: