LisaShea Forum Logo
Search

Forum Areas
Parakeets
General Parakeet Chat
Keet Stories and Photos
Parakeet Photo Gallery
Budgie Training
Health and Medical Issues
Parakeet Breeding
In Memory Of ...
Non-Budgie Pets and Animals
Non-Budgie Animal Photos
Off-Topic for Keet Owners
Games
Animal Rights
Bird / Animal Books

General Discussion
Books, TV, Movies
Da Vinci Code
Dreams
Japanese Culture
Life, Universe, Everything
Online Courses
Politics
Religious Research
Show Your Own Work
Work From Home / Writing

Budgie Photos
My violet female budgie
my cage
two blues
Sponsored Link
Support Our Friends
The Child Health Site
Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... 10 11 >
Topic Options
#212537 - 09/04/07 08:35 PM Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ??
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Leonardo’s painting called “The Last Supper” has generated much interest. The book, The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown, relies upon a certain interpretation of Leonardo's painting. To be sure, the storyline was creative genius to be sure a the movie based upon the book was well done, but a fundamental flaw renders the entire concept as put forth by Mr. Brown invalid.

First the premise…drawn from the painting...that Leonardo deliberately omitted painting a "goblet/cup/chalice/etc" from which Jesus and the assembled disciples shared wine. This absent vessel, it is argued by Dan Brown and now legions of “believers” was intended by Leonardo to provide future validation of the premise that the so-called "Holy Grail" is not a vessel but the descendant(s) of Jesus and Mary M.

With an imaginative eye perhaps even Leonardo himself did not have, many now see in the space between Jesus and the figure on his right a "V", deliberately painted in such a way to represent the female womb. If Leonardo intended to obscure such a “meaning” from religions eyes of his day…a meaning he hoped would be clearly understood by those of an enlightened and liberated future, one can only imagine the hint of a smile as he painted knowing how angry those commissioning the work would be at the suggestion of a symbolic womb appearing in the middle of “their” painting.

Leonardo painted this work almost fifteen hundred years after the event so what was his source of "information" about the subject of his painting? After all, he was not there and knew no one that was?

He couldn't have consulted the NT. That collection of writings clearly state (at for example Luke 22:16-17) that (a) there was a "cup" and (b) out of that single container a drink of the wine therein was shared by all those assembled (except Judas I. who had departed).

Secondly, the picture portrays a "glass" with a liquid (presumably wine) near each of those seated at the table. While such vessels holding water or wine may have graced tables in Leonardo's time, they certainly did not in the time of Jesus.

Evidence of “hollow” glassware (vases) date from the sixteenth century B.C.E., but "glass" anything because of rarity, the absense of artisians that knew how to make it, and the resulting cost made it more likely to appear on the table of a Pharaoh not that of a carpenter, tax collector, or fisherman. Neither does the depiction of multiple “glasses” reflect the NT description of the event.

This begs the question, didn't Leonardo read his NT before commencing to paint? But then again, perhaps he couldn't properly research the matter since the Church wasn't too keen in his day on Bibles sitting around for just anyone to read.

Finally, amidst all the speculation and explanations, the appeal to scientific discovery, the X-Rays, electron Microscopes, spectrometers, etc., etc., where are the questions or observations asking why Jesus and his disciples were convened for an evening meal.

Why not? Why were they there? ?? What was so special that Jesus had planned for a long time to gather with his disciples on that night for that meal ??? Does any of that matter in relation to the issue of Leonardo's painting and the intense debate over "The Da Vinci Code" ??

It matters.

The meal was to commemorate Passover !!

Why is that significant?

The Passover of Moses had two things in common with the Passover of Jesus and the last meal with his disciples (1) the "bread-of-haste" (unleavened bread) and (2) wine. That night was to commemorate the flight of the Israelites from Egypt, not to set the stage for the going forth of Jesus' seed carried by a pregnant Mary M. as the premise of Mr. Brown and those embracing this story now contend.

Given the criterion of Passover as to “why” Jesus and his disciples were gathered together to share the event, Passover with its emblems of unleavened bread and wine, its historical and religious significance, all of which Jesus and his disciples were there to observe (a matter of no small significance which both Leonardo and Mr. Brown seem to have overlooked), the single cup described by the writers of the NT (who unlike Leonardo were actually there) all of those descriptive elements leave only one conclusion possible as to what Leonardo was and was not intending to paint.

No matter how hard anyone stretches, pulls and strains to make a case for believing that Leonardo's painting (with or without its "secrets") reveals and validates a fanciful legend that descendants of Jesus are the real "Holy Grail" have simply been carried away by an imaginative tale created by someone other than the painter himself.


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:27 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#212645 - 09/05/07 04:13 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Some food for thought for You. Davinci’s Mind - A Lens Da Vinci was undoubtedly one of the brightest and most diversified intellects to have ever lived… but we are only now beginning to understand the true depth and breadth of that genius…. and it is even more astounding than previously thought! His mind and the ability to project his vision and perception into layers and three dimensions from a variety of perspectives have previously only been seen as a result…. As in the Mona Lisa when her eyes follow you around the room wherever you go…. We are now able to prove that he had the unique ability to visualize in layers and three dimensions and to focus his and the viewer’s attention on one layer while he created and combined layers to produce, until now, unseen secondary images. It was his ability to see things from outside himself and place those images, both of himself and of other subjects within artworks surreptitiously that is coming to light. It is proving that da Vinci was able to use his mind much as a lens focusing on different depths of field, and then create multiple images, some visible others hidden, using his own very clever optical illusions that in modern terminology might be considered holographic in nature. New findings have revealed other capabilities that we will discuss in the near future. http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/About.html http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/Leonardo.html http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/Summary.html http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/index.html http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/Contact.html

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#212671 - 09/05/07 05:32 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Hi Grrr82CU ~ welcome to the forum smile

Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
... First the premise ... that Leonardo deliberately omitted painting a "goblet/cup/chalice/etc" .... This absent vessel, it is argued by Dan Brown ... was intended by Leonardo to provide future validation of the premise that the so-called "Holy Grail" is not a vessel but the descendant(s) of Jesus and Mary M.

Well, it is a theory ~ and I think that he is not the only person to put it forward. However, there is also here a supposition that the 'holy grail' actually attended The Last Supper.

Quote:
With an imaginative eye perhaps even Leonardo himself did not have, many now see in the space between Jesus and the figure on his right a "V", deliberately painted in such a way to represent the female womb. ...

Renaissance paintings were often full of symbolism and this 'V' shape is rather obvious and encourages viewers tp wonfder about its meaning.

Quote:
Leonardo painted this work almost fifteen hundred years after the event so what was his source of "information" about the subject of his painting? After all, he was not there and knew no one that was?

Of course Leonardo wasn't there, but his paintings do tend to make us think and question ~ and, in those days, documents from the East were turning up in the West and making people wonder about early Christianity.

Did he know or suspect something secret about Jesus?
I don't know.

Quote:
...the picture portrays a "glass" with a liquid .. near each of those seated at the table. While such vessels holding water or wine may have graced tables in Leonardo's time, they certainly did not in the time of Jesus.

I would like to hope that anyone seriously studying the painting would realise that it owes a lot to Leonardo's own life and times. It supposedly reflects the holy land of Jesus's time, but actually reflects Renaiassance 'Italy'.

Quote:
Evidence of “hollow” glassware (vases) date from the sixteenth century B.C.E., ...

I found some pictures of apparently Roman glasses:

http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/medieval/food/pictures/glasses.jpg
http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/food/wine.htm
....

Quote:
... Why were they there? ?? What was so special that Jesus had planned for a long time to gather with his disciples on that night for that meal ??? Does any of that matter in relation to the issue of Leonardo's painting and the intense debate over "The Da Vinci Code" ??
It matters.
The meal was to commemorate Passover !!
Why is that significant?

The Passover of Moses had two things in common with the Passover of Jesus and the last meal with his disciples (1) the "bread-of-haste" (unleavened bread) and (2) wine. That night was to commemorate the flight of the Israelites from Egypt, not to set the stage for the going forth of Jesus' seed carried by a pregnant Mary M. as the premise of Mr. Brown and those embracing this story now contend.

Given the criterion of Passover as to “why” Jesus and his disciples were gathered together to share the event, Passover with its emblems of unleavened bread and wine, its historical and religious significance, all of which Jesus and his disciples were there to observe (a matter of no small significance which both Leonardo and Mr. Brown seem to have overlooked), the single cup described by the writers of the NT (who unlike Leonardo were actually there) all of those descriptive elements leave only one conclusion possible as to what Leonardo was and was not intending to paint.

...

I don't understand.
Why do you say that 'Leonardo and Mr. Brown' overlooked the fact that this meal was part of Passover?


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:27 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#212893 - 09/06/07 04:57 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
To nango and PDM

Thank both of you for the thoughtful responses.

Please allow a few days (given my schedule) to peruse your comments, information & links. I will hope to be able to answer soon thereafter.

and...Grrr82CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#212952 - 09/07/07 12:34 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
The Grail I believe is a Bowl, Not a Goblet or Chalice

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#212974 - 09/07/07 02:44 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: nanago
The Grail I believe is a Bowl, Not a Goblet or Chalice


What caused you to draw that conclusion?
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#213302 - 09/09/07 05:43 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
A Goblet or Chalice was looked at also as a bowl.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#213306 - 09/09/07 07:10 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
But why do you think that the 'grail' is a goblet or chalice or bowl?
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#213617 - 09/10/07 04:45 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Homework

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#213680 - 09/10/07 07:25 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Just a quick check in...reading all the entries, working slowly (at best) on responses to your initial posts re: "A Fatal Flaw".

I'm looking forward to being able to re-enter the dialogue. Family matters are unexpectedly consuming massive amounts of time (sole caregiver for a disabled spouse).

Back with you as soon as possible. Have interesting research to share that applies to Leonardo's portrayal of glassware appearing on the "Last Supper" table.
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#213692 - 09/10/07 07:43 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
interesting,looking forward to research to share.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214012 - 09/12/07 11:55 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Re: Some food for thought for You I looked up the links you provided and considered the claims attending each subject matter. With all due respect, and in reference to your response and the material linked, nothing was applicable to the content of the post “Leonardo’s Painting – A Fatal Flaw?”. There was never any issue with Leonardo being one of the great luminaries of all ages with respect to the breadth of his imagination or skills as an artisan. We are all in awe of his probing mind, scribbling out notes and sketches of inventions which were later to take a form so resembling his own concepts that they cause us to view him as a man not only “before his time” – but as a man who awoke in the dark of night but went forth to begin his day before others began theirs. Neither was the post challenging his prowess as an artist, expressing his genius in many mediums. What the post, “Leonardo’s Painting, A Fatal Flaw” was about, is whether or not he was a sort of “Renaissance Nostradamus”. Was he a man who over a century after the fact was possessed with insight into the greatest mystery of all religions, who or what was the “Holy Grail” and painted in that hidden knowledge in his rendering of Christ’s last meal with his disciples? Was Leonardo a revealer of hidden truths, painting in multiple dimensions, utilizing planes of transparencies and filtered light flowing from his brushes dipped in experimental paint in techniques so advanced the secrets they masked would remain undiscovered until modern times? Did these “tricks of light and pigments” reside in fading works which (like “The Last Supper”) retain little of his own hand which was at work in their creation until discovery centuries later? For all his genius and prodigious talent, Leonardo Da Vinci was not telling us in “The Last Supper” that Mary Magdalene was to Jesus’ right or did he intentionally paint in the space between the two forms the symbol of the “sacred feminine”, a “V”, the opposite of the “Blade”. More to come…


Edited by Grrr82CU (09/12/07 11:56 AM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214078 - 09/12/07 05:47 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Thank you for the welcome PDM, So as not to burden the board with repetitive quotes, unless a different arrangement is preferred please simply review your own quotations from “Leonardo’s Painting – A Fatal Flaw” for context in relation to the following replies. Re: The missing “cup”, “chalice”, “goblet”(or "bowl" as Nanango prefers) Hopefully the original post at least established an arguable premise that Leonardo made no attempt to be accurate against the benchmark of the descriptions of Jesus’ last meal with his disciples contained in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John because (a) attention to accuracy wasn’t important to him [in relation to the NT account] (b) he thought it only necessary to rely upon his own memory or (c) he didn’t have access to new testament material (a possibility because of the Church’s resistance to bibles being made available in the common language of the people). If that can be more-or-less agreed upon by all of us for the sake of discussion, then follows one of the major objections regarding the frenzied embrace of Dan Brown’s great weave of fiction with history. That objection is the tale’s relationship and dependence upon Leonardo’s “The Last Supper” to validate the belief that Mary Magdalene was not only at the table but the space between her and Jesus is deliberately painted to form the symbol for a womb, the “opposite” of the male (the “Blade”), thus the “Holy Grail”. It is argued, therefore, that Leonardo represented the "V" to say to those "in on the secret" that it representes not just any woman but Mary Magdalene herself. But before a rush to belief in this scenario… (1) Leonardo’s painting is fraught with historical inaccuracies when measured against the New Testament accounts of Jesus’ last meal with his disciples (more on this later on) (2)The painting itself has been tampered with (the insertion of a doorway over Leonardo’s portrayal of Jesus’ and other’s feet). How many more “tamperings” have occurred that we do not know about with any certainty? (3) Even in Leonardo’s time, the experimental paint and application in a non-fresco technique began to degrade so quickly that the great master himself had to repair it often. Was it always simply repaired with no changes reflecting a new theory/idea by the Master? Do we not in every day life demand greater tests of veracity for anything we are considering believing than is being asked by many of Mr. Brown's hypothesis? Why are so many lowering the criterion regarding this novelistic hypothesis based upon a painting that is less than historically accurate in relation to the N.T? Teabing in Dan Brown’s novel argues the figure to the right of Jesus has feminine features and futher announces that he sees “the hint of a bosom”. This he postulates is proof enough that the figure is none other than Mary Magdalene, Jesus' pregnant wife. This sets up a no-compromise conflict. Either the figure is that of Mary Magdalene or it is that of The Apostle John. If the figure to Jesus’ right is Mary Magdalene, then the Apostle John is missing from the table. Who with a shred of attention paid to the context of the reason for the last evening meal can argue that John is not (or would not be) among the twelve disciples? Can we imagine that Leonardo would paint in Jesus’ betrayer, Judas Iscariot, at the table but the leave out the disciple described as “the one Jesus loved”, the one who leaned back against his master to ask the betrayer's identy? (Jn 13:23,24). As to the “femininity” of the person to Jesus’ right, Leonardo was a product of the Florentine School which is known for promoting the imaging of young boys and young men with effeminate features. Witness examples by Piero della Francesca’s “St. Julian” (1455-1460); Raphael’s “St Sebastian” (1502-1503) just to name two. Now pull up Leonardo’s “Angel In The Flesh”. (Cautionary note: it’s a bit sexually explicit). It is a perfect example of Leonardo’s frequent use of “gender-blending” just as seen in the work of others painting under the influence of The Florentine School. Before you leave viewing “The Angel In The Flesh”, note, please the presence of a “bosom”. If Teabing was the Grail Scholar he is set forth to be by Dan Brown, or if in fact Mr. Brown was properly informed regarding this, he would have known this about Leonardo’s predilection to portray young men and boys in an effeminate way and should not have presented the “hint of a bosom” by Teabing as an endorsement of the person to Jesus’ right being Mary Magdalene. More to come as time allows…
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214183 - 09/13/07 01:47 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Only from my perspective I feel Lionardo encrypted many of his works with meaning, when put all together spell out what he was trying to say, like a book,
Lionardo was to much of a Genius to lay anything down in one area but in multiple areas to protect what he was doing and to protect the Secret of what was past on to him.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214217 - 09/13/07 05:01 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU0
Leonardo painted this work almost fifteen hundred years after the event so what was his source of "information" about the subject of his painting? After all, he was not there and knew no one that was?

(Source of information?)
True, He Lionardo was not there but perhaps, just perhaps, Lionardo was intrusted with some information that was passed down to him through some very powerful people at the time!
Perhaps one should get involved within the time line and people surrounding him.

Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU0
Evidence of “hollow” glassware (vases) date from the sixteenth century B.C.E.

Do we make a mistake of thinking it was even glassware??

Finally food for Thought!
Originally Posted By: Leonardo
There are many who would, with reason, blame me by pointing out that my proofs are contrary to established authority, which is, after all, held in great reverence by their inexperienced minds. They do not realize that my works arise from unadulterated and simple experience, which is the one true mistress, the one true muse. The rules of experience are all that is needed to discern the true from the false; experience is what helps all men to look temperately for the possible, rather than cloaking oneself in ignorance, which can result in no good thing, so that, in the end, one abandons oneself to despair and melancholy.

~Leonardo da Vinci
Translated from the Italian by Richard Hooker
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/REN/PAINTER.HTM

A second and final thought of illusion and purpose.
Originally Posted By: Leonardo
On the three branches of perspective.

There are three branches of perspective: first, the diminution of objects as they recede from the eye, known as Diminishing Perspective. Second, the way in which colors vary as they recede from the eye. Third, the explanation of how the objects in a picture ought to be less perfect and complete in proportion to their remoteness. The names are as follows: Linear Perspective, The Perspective of Color, The Perspective of Disappearance

On the mistake of those who practice without knowledge.
Those who are fond of practice without knowledge are like a sailor in a ship without a rudder or a compass who, as a result, has no certain idea where he's going. Practice must always be built from sound theoretical knowledge. The gateway to this theoretical knowledge is Perspective; without Perspective nothing can be done well or properly in the matter of painting and drawing. The painter who only relies on practice and the eye, without any intellect, is no more than a mirror which copies slavishly everything placed in front of it and which has no consciousness of the existence of these things.
Here, right here, in the eye, here forms, here colors, right here the character of every part and every thing of the universe, are concentrated to a single point. How marvelous that point is! . . . In this small space, the universe can be completely reproduced and rearranged in its entire vastness!

~Leonardo da Vinci
Translated from the Italian by Richard Hooker
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/REN/PAINTER.HTM






Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:27 PM)

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214218 - 09/13/07 05:06 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
I agree that males and females could be mistaken for one another in Renaissance art, including that of Leonardo.

What I find interesting is the way that John and Mary Magdalene are painted to look so similar in various works.

A good example is Pietro Perugino's 'The Crucifixion with the Virgin, St John, St Jerome and St Mary Magdalene':
http://www.abcgallery.com/P/perugino/perugino20.html

See:
'Did Perugino (1445-1523) leave us a clue about the identity of
Mary Magdalene as the Beloved Disciple?'

http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/perugino.htm

There is doubt about who, exactly, is being referred to as 'the beloved disciple' ~ it may not be John.
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214223 - 09/13/07 05:54 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Nanago: (Grrr82CU: "(Leonardo painted this work almost fifteen hundred years after the event so what was his source of "information" about the subject of his painting? After all, he was not there and knew no one that was?)"

Nanango: "Lionardo was not there but perhaps, just perhaps, Lionardo was intrusted with some information that was passed down to him through some very powerful people at the time!"

...and perhaps not. To presume Leonardo was passed great information by the powerful of his day (most of whom he did not get along with that well) presumes much.

Nanago: "Perhaps one should get involved within the time line and people surrounding him"

That is the information being brought forth, especially relating to the school of painting to which he owes his basic training.

"(Grrr82CU: "Evidence of “hollow” glassware (vases) date from the sixteenth century B.C.E.,)"

Nanango: "Do we make a mistake of thinking it was even glassware??"

That was not the point being addressed.

Leonardo shows clear glassware on the table. As stated, "hollow" glassware had been around for centuries at the time of Jesus - but - it was not clear. That did not become possible until 100 C.E. so even if the apostles did drink from glasses (which is very doubtful) Leonardo's portrayal of them as "clear" is another example that his painting is less than accurate historically in relation to Jesus' time.

The matter of tableware, glassware, etc., is the subject referred to as "more to come". Haven't had time to bring everything together.

Sorry there isn't time for more tonight (or until next week probably)

Oh...and the method of quoting...sorry...haven't got the hang of using the icons to transfer quotions in those nice little frames as does PDM smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:27 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214233 - 09/13/07 07:04 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
When I was young my father taught me two make 'two' snow balls not one when throwing them at anyone in a game , I asked him 'Why', he told me that while everyone was watching the first snow ball thrown in the air straight up you could throw the other one
at them that they never would expect it. It is my thought that Lionardo did the same thing in his painting, by this I mean he always gave you something up in the air to think about, while he did what he wanted to do right in front of you.

Words to think about.

The snow ball effect. The first of two snow balls, the first being thrown up above the eyes and head!

The gateway to this theoretical knowledge is Perspective; without Perspective nothing can be done well or properly in the matter of painting and drawing. The painter who only relies on practice and the eye, without any intellect, is no more than a mirror which copies slavishly everything placed in front of it and which has no consciousness of the existence of these things.

Here, right here, in the eye, here forms, here colors, right here the character of every part and every thing of the universe, are concentrated to a single point. How marvelous that point is! In this small space, the universe can be completely reproduced and rearranged in its entire vastness!


The second of two snow balls thrown.

If the eye is forced to look at an object far too close to it, that eye cannot really form a judgment of that object, for instance, when a man tries to look at his nose. As a general rule, then, Nature teaches us that no object can be seen perfectly unless it is placed at least at a distance from the eye equal to the length of the face.

My point is, Lionardo did it right in front of all of us, but we did not pick it up! (I will explain more Later!)





Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214280 - 09/14/07 02:25 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
...Oh...and the method of quoting...sorry...haven't got the hang of using the icons to transfer quotions in those nice little frames as does PDM smile

Hi!
This is for everyone concerned, as well as Grrr82CU:

When you reply to a post, you click on reply ~ that way the correct response goes with the correct original comment.

Often, to show the relevance of a comment, a quote is required, then, instead of clicking on 'reply', you click on quote ~ and you can just delete the bits you don't require ~ replacing them with dots ... if and where necessary.

If you want to just do it yourself, do this:
To open a quote:
[q uote]
To open a quote with the name of the person quoted included:
[q uote=XXX]
To close a quote:
[/q uote]

I have incorrectly left gaps between the 'q' and the 'u' only so that this explanation doesn't come up as a quote.

All quotes posted must obvious as quotes and the person being quoted should be easily identifiable.

Quotes from books, etc, should also be clearly marked and the author must be identifiable

Long quotes should be avoided because copyright infringement might be an issue.

_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214281 - 09/14/07 03:39 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Grrr82CU

I have been re-reading your posts and am trying to see the 'fundamental flaw' that 'renders the entire concept as put forth by Mr. Brown invalid'.

I believe that there are actually many flaws in Dan Brown's book ~ and we have discussed many, many errors on this forum.

As far as Leonardo's 'Last Supper' is concerned, I think that he used the Bible story, but painted it in a 'Renaissance Italian' manner. The models were from his place and time. I understand that Jesus would probably have had short hair, for example, yet he has the style of Leonardo's place and time. The picture tells of a specific moment, so he must have had access to that story ~ if only via his patrons.

The drinking vessels, too, must have been an interpretation from Leonardo's own experience. Nothing more; nothing less, I would guess.

How does that fit with Mary M being the Holy Grail?
I can't see a problem really.
If she carried the Holy blood, and the Holy grail was believed to be the vessel that carried this holy bloodline, then she was that grail. There is no reason for us to believe that a drinking vessel from the table had to be involved.

I think that most people accept that 'The Last Supper' was considered to have been a meal connected to Passover.
Why is that a problem?
Wouldn't women have attended such a meal?

Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
'Either the figure is that of Mary Magdalene or it is that of The Apostle John. If the figure to Jesus’ right is Mary Magdalene, then the Apostle John is missing from the table.

Who with a shred of attention paid to the context of the reason for the last evening meal can argue that John is not (or would not be) among the twelve disciples? Can we imagine that Leonardo would paint in Jesus’ betrayer, Judas Iscariot, at the table but the leave out the disciple described as “the one Jesus loved”, the one who leaned back against his master to ask the betrayer's identy?'

The identity of 'the beloved disciple' is something of a mystery. Certainly you would expect the 'beloved' one to be with Jesus at his final Passover meal, but why not his mother and sisters and Mary Magdalen?
If we can't miss out one, why miss out the others?

I have already mentioned the 'strange' practice, by Renaissance artists, of painting John and the Magdalene as if they were twins.
Why would they do this?
Doesn't it imply that the one may have been mistaken for the other?
Why, in Renaissance 'Italy', was this idea around?

'Did Perugino (1445-1523) leave us a clue about the identity of
Mary Magdalene as the Beloved Disciple?'

http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/perugino.htm

Did Leonardo hear the story of Mary Magdalene and Jesus kissing, perhaps?
I understand that 'heretical' stories from the East were reaching Florence and thereabouts around this time.

Did he decide to make an implication, or ask a question with his painting?
Or is there no symbolism?
Is the 'V' shape just an artistic technique?
Why on that side but not the other?
Is there any hidden message?
Can we know?

Quote:
'the idea that Da Vinci used any kind of code pertaining to any issue Dan Brown raises is unsupported by art historians.

Brown says that in this painting Da Vinci is telling us that the figure always identified as John the Evangelist is really Mary Magdalene, and that these two figures together form an "M," and that, because there is no grail in the picture, Da Vinci is telling us the "grail" is the sacred feminine of Mary Magdalene.

Unfortunately for Brown, art historians tell us that the effeminate-looking John is quite a typical representation for the time, as is a Last Supper portrayal emphasizing betrayal rather than the institution of the Eucharist. In addition, the Last Supper is a dramatization of a scene from the Gospel of John, in which the institution narrative is not even described. No chalice? No problem. In context, it makes sense.'

From: The Da Vinci Code the facts behind the fiction
http://www.thetruthdecoded.org.au/The-Da-Vinci-Code-the-facts-behind-the-fiction.php


To me, the painting contains many questions ~ why the gesture (sometimes known as 'the John the Baptist gesture') in the face of Jesus? ~ Almost filling the space that would have been the balancing 'V' shape?

I appreciate that Leonardo's boys looked effeminate ~ sometimes overly so, but why does 'the beloved disciple' look so much like 'Mary' in the 'Virgin of the Rocks' paintings?
And like Leda, too?!

Didn't this bother the people of the time ~ especially the Church???

And speaking of these paintings, why does he make John the Baptist and Jesus look so alike?

http://web.educastur.princast.es/proyect...ENTO/lvinci.htm

And look like Leda's twins?
http://www.oel-bild.de/Leda~2934.htm
http://www.oel-bild.de/Leda~2935.htm
http://www.oel-bild.de/Leda~2936.htm

Was it purely to do with the model(s) available?

So, I don't trust Brown's conclusions, but I do find Leonardo's paintings intriguing, and they do make me ask questions and wonder if he had heard heretical stories, or if he had some heretical ideas of his own?


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:28 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214283 - 09/14/07 04:06 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Some background & other info: Did Leonardo da Vinci Believe that Mary Magdalene was the Beloved Disciple? http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/leonardo.html Did Perugino (1445-1523) leave us a clue about the identity of Mary Magdalene as the Beloved Disciple? http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/perugino.htm Mary Magdalene: Author of the Fourth Gospel? by Ramon K. Jusino, M.A. © 1998 http://ramon_k_jusino.tripod.com/magdalene.html Lisa's pages: ~ The Last Suppera No Chalice and the Missing Cup (Plus links to other relevant info) http://www.lisashea.com/hobbies/art/nochalice.html Some early copies of the Last supper give us an idea of what it might once have looked like: Version at the museum, Tongerlo http://www.tongerlo.org/da_vinci/avondmaal.htm Giovan Pietro Rizzoli, called Giampietrino c1515 http://www.racollection.org.uk/ixbin/hixclient.exe?submit-button=SUMMARY&$03/1230%20index%20mus_obj_parts=.&_IXMAXHITS_=1&_IXSPFX_=full/t


Edited by PDM (09/14/07 04:06 AM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214299 - 09/14/07 06:46 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Thanks for the formatting information PDM. HTML is familiar but not UBBCode at this point.

A quick in & out like this is only to copy the responses and tranfer them to MS Word for study later. As indicated, time is very limited, and concern is building that not enough of it to do justice to the responses is going to be available. Will try however...

As to the "flaw" you have been re-reading to determine what was being referred to, the underlying thought behind the word choice was a "cumulative" flaw in Leonardo's portrayal of Jesus' "Last Supper" rather than a specific "one" flaw.

"Cumulative" is intended to mean (in the sense of) relating to the sum of (a) the painting's lack of historical accuracy in relation to N.T. accounts and (b) misrepresentation of the event in relation to Passover.

What has been attempted thus far, is to present material for consideration relating to collateral items in the painting per (a) above. Thus, in example, the contribution of Leonardo's school of painting to the portrayal of the person to Jesus' immediate right, the "tableware" (more to come on that), and other related issues of interest. What has not been entered at this point, is material for consideration related to (b) above, the issue of Passover and how Leonardo's painting does not reflect an accurate portrayal of that celebration.

For the record, this writer is an admirer of Leonardo and always has been, also not a Catholic so there is no agenda from that perspective to defend regarding Jesus and Mary Magdalene.

Enjoying the spirited exchanges and high level of discussion.

Have a good weekend all...

More when possible and ....Grrr92CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#214985 - 09/16/07 08:41 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
For anyone interested in the timline of such matter, one should look in www.jstor.com, I think you will find that this is one of the best places in the world for research.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#215015 - 09/17/07 09:01 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
First, there is appreciation for the patience of those exchanging dialogue and viewpoints regarding this writer’s time constraints which are severely limiting timely responses.

Also, please be assured that it is only a reflection of available time to compose that responses may at times seem clipped. They are not meant to be. At other times a reply may seem to not address (or only skip lightly over) each and every point brought forth by another writer. In such instances, it is all about limited time to compose, noting more. Neither is focus on one writer’s comments more than another ‘personal’ in any way but only to address something that is salient to a current or on-going point of discussion.

So quickly to a few thoughts:

Originally Posted By: PDM, 12/16/04
Renaissance paintings were often full of symbolism and this 'V' shape is rather obvious and encourages viewers to wonder about its meaning


Perhaps "interest", but as conclusory evidence assumed by many that it symbolically represents a woman's womb, the "Holy Grail"? Such "insight" into what is not there is more a case of Scotoma (in reverse compared to its usage by Professor Langford in Dan Brown’s novel). Rather than see what Leonardo intended as simply a space incidental to the painting (much less his intent to provide support for a hypothesis developed much later), someone “sees” what he/she wants to see as fitting the now popular notion that it symbolizes "who" or "what" the grail is.

Originally Posted By: PDM, 12/16/04
Is the 'V' shape just an artistic technique? Why on that side but not the other?


Applying that criterion, a “V” is quite obvious between the left shoulder of Philip and right shoulder of Matthew (in the blue garment). The one appearing between Philip and Matthew is not as dramatic as the one appearing between Jesus and John (a comparison which will no doubt be pounced upon by those wishing to be persuaded the one between Jesus and John has a hidden meaning) but never-the-less a clearly visible “V” between Philip and Matthew.

You asked “Why not [a “V” on] the other [side]?”

This writer asks, Quid Pro Quo, “Why not recognize the "V" between Philip and Matthew? Why not argue by the same standard and logic being applied to the “V” between Jesus and the person to his right also to the "V" between Philip and Matthew as representing (or also representing) the “Sacred Feminine”, the “Holy Grail”?

Again, Quid Pro Quo, “One Standard” applied to all the “Vs” in the picture. That would assure no double-standard creeps in that is convenient to only one interpretation would it not?

Originally Posted By: PDM, 12/16/04
…you would expect the 'beloved' one to be with Jesus at his final Passover meal, but why not his mother and sisters and Mary Magdalene? If we can't miss out one, why miss out the others?


There is a difference between Jesus’ disciples, of which there were many but not all were Apostles. On the other hand, Jesus’ Apostles, of which there were only twelve, were each also a disciple. It was Jesus’ apostles/disciples that were present at “The Last Supper”, not disciples who were not also Apostles. That is why Jesus’ mother and Mary Magdalene were not at the table. Neither were Apostles (Mt 10:2-4)

Originally Posted By: PDM, 12/16/04
The identity of 'the beloved disciple' is something of a mystery


Nothing personal, but it seems a bit ironic that the identity of the one “Jesus loved” can be described as “somewhat of a mystery” in the face of such assurances from so many that the figure to Jesus’ right in Leonardo’s painting is clear to them as being Mary Magdalene.

Remembering the difference between a disciple and an Apostle/disciple, only John, the youngest of the Apostles and the last to die would have been at the table, not Mary Magdalene. It has already been established Leonardo portrayed young men with effeminate features so the figure to Jesus’ immediate right, John, would be so painted pursuant to the tradition of the Florentine School.

Finally, to the claim that the writer of the Fourth Gospel does not identify the disciple in question so (a) it could be Mary Magdalene and/or (b) Mary Magdalene is the author of the Fourth Gospel...

None of the four Gospel accounts self-identify as do the writers of Ezekiel, Hosea, and many other Hebrew Testament authors. To the list of those biblical writers that do identify themselves as the authors can be added the name of the youngest and last to die Apostle when composing The Revelation as noted in Chapter 1, verse 1 (and yes, this writer is aware of those who as on every matter are called upon to argue that it was someone else that wrote The Revelation).

Last but not least, is the N.T. record which rules out one of two possible identities of the disciple "whom Jesus loved" that is in question:

Originally Posted By: John 20:1, 2, New RSV
Mary Magdalene came to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved and said to them...


The description speaks for itself. Mary Magdalene is clearly identified as being a separate person from the “disciple whom Jesus loved”.

In the face of this construction, it is impossible to maintain the argument that she is the writer of the Fourth Gospel who does not identify herself as the disciple "whom Jesus loved" but later names herself as approaching Peter and herself!

Remember the dispute at that last meal as who was the greatest? It is much more defensible that the writer of the Fourth Gospel refers to himself in the third party in modesty opposed to saying “I, John, am the disciple that leaned back upon my Master’s breast, I the one whom he loved, I the one who along with Peter Mary Magdalene ran to tell our Master’s tomb had been opened”.

Surely Jesus loved all his disciples and disciple/apostles, but there was apparently something special about John which is why he was singled out as the one “whom Jesus loved”. Perhaps it was his youth, perhaps because he would be the last to carry on the message. We cannot know.

Only time for one more topic, the glassware Leonardo painted.

Originally Posted By: PDM
I would like to hope that anyone seriously studying the painting would realize that it owes a lot to Leonardo's own life and times. It supposedly reflects the holy land of Jesus’ time, but actually reflects Renaissance 'Italy'


This is exactly why the painting has been exploited in developing this and that fanciful speculation. Had Leonardo painted accurately according to Jesus’ time, clear glasses would not have been represented, neither would he have omitted a single vessel from which all the disciple/apostles shared a drink of wine as described in the N.T. Regardless of whether or not there were individual drinking cups for all present (again they wouldn’t likely have been glass, much less clear), the fact remains that one and one vessel alone is represented as being passed among those present (except Judas who had departed). That item is no where to be found in Leonardo’s portrayal so once again, opportunity is provided by Leonardo's omissions to give rise to the claim that a visual “V” between Jesus and the figure to his right represents that vessel (The Holy Grail).

Painting in the style of the Renaissance – should not be used to excuse lack of accuracy on the part of Leonardo in portraying a subject that had the benefit of multiple descriptions of the event provided by the N.T.

As to Leonardo’s portrayal of the “clear” table glasses, it was not until 100 C.E. (A.D) with the discovery in Alexandria that adding manganese oxide to the glass making process would produce “clear” glass. Even in the Renaissance, it was not until about 1688 C.E. (A.D.) that a method of pouring glass was developed thus making it more prevalent.

Originally Posted By: PDM
The Romans invented glassware


You might want to check your information. While the Romans did contribute to the slow spread of glass in its various forms (typical of the time) through conquest and trade, they absolutely did not invent glass or glassware.

As previously noted, glass and experimentation with it dates to early Egyptian and Mesopotamia. Almost a thousand years after those early evidences, a “How To” produce glass was discovered in 650 B.C.E (B.C.) on tablets from the reign of the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal. So with all due respect, the Roman's didn't "invent" glass. During the time of Jesus, Rome was still importing most of its glass items from Syria, Phoenicia, and other conquered nations that had already developed the art of glass production. Jesus and his disciple/Apostles were most likely to have used drinking vessels made from wood or clay, not glass.

Pursuant to the topic title, “Leonardo’s Painting – A Fatal Flaw”, the error of clear and multiple glassware joins the growing catalogue of errors (a few more of which were hopefully addressed in this post), contributing to the cumulative total of why it does not merit the authority being accorded to it. Appealing to Leonardo’s Last Supper claiming it shows the “Holy Grail” in a ”V”-shaped space, or that Mary Magdalene is the identity of the figure to Jesus’ right because it appears effeminate, etc., is based upon a flawed source.

More to come, next about the painting in relation to the observation of Passover.

…and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:28 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#215230 - 09/18/07 05:24 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Hi smile

Quote:
PDM: “Renaissance paintings were often full of symbolism and this 'V' shape is rather obvious and encourages viewers to wonder about its meaning “

Grrr82CU: “Perhaps "interest", but as conclusory evidence assumed by many that it symbolically represents a woman's womb, the "Holy Grail"?”

Absolutely ~ we can only guess and discuss and debate.
Dan Brown's book was a novel ~ he seemed to believe it all, but it was published as a work of fiction.
If it got people thinking and questioning~ all to the good, in my opinion.

Renaissance paintings ~ and others ~ can be a bit mysterious. As I said, it's strange that Perugino, who I think was a friend of Leonardo, should paint Mary & John as if they were identical twins!
Doesn't that make you wonder if these men might have had an inkling that the Magdalene might have been the 'beloved disciple'?


Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
... Rather than see what Leonardo intended as simply a space incidental to the painting (much less his intent to provide support for a hypothesis developed much later), someone “sees” what he/she wants to see as fitting the now popular notion that it symbolizes "who" or "what" the grail is.

OK, but what if Leonardo did mean something by that space?
By ignoring its possible symbolic value, aren't you also interpreting it according to what you see or want to see?

Quote:
PDM, 12/16/04: “Is the 'V' shape just an artistic technique? Why on that side but not the other?”

Grrr82CU: “Applying that criterion, a “V” is quite obvious between the left shoulder of Philip and right shoulder of Matthew (in the blue garment). The one appearing between Philip and Matthew is not as dramatic as the one appearing between Jesus and John (a comparison which will no doubt be pounced upon by those wishing to be persuaded the one between Jesus and John has a hidden meaning) but never-the-less a clearly visible “V” between Philip and Matthew. ....”

Fair enough, but one could then ask ~ why not so dramatic on that side?
There will always be questions and we cannot always be sure that we have found the correct answers, surely?

Quote:
PDM, 12/16/04: “…you would expect the 'beloved' one to be with Jesus at his final Passover meal, but why not his mother and sisters and Mary Magdalene? If we can't miss out one, why miss out the others?”

Grrr82CU: “There is a difference between Jesus’ disciples, of which there were many but not all were Apostles. On the other hand, Jesus’ Apostles, of which there were only twelve, were each also a disciple. It was Jesus’ apostles/disciples that were present at “The Last Supper”, not disciples who were not also Apostles. That is why Jesus’ mother and Mary Magdalene were not at the table. Neither were Apostles (Mt 10:2-4)”

We actually don't know who else might or might not have been present. We only have the basic bible story.
We cannot know how Leonardo interpreted it ~ or what 'artistic license' he used.

Quote:
PDM, 12/16/04: “The identity of 'the beloved disciple' is something of a mystery”

Grrr82CU: “Nothing personal, but it seems a bit ironic that the identity of the one “Jesus loved” can be described as “somewhat of a mystery” in the face of such assurances from so many that the figure to Jesus’ right in Leonardo’s painting is clear to them as being Mary Magdalene.”


Well, I don't think we know who 'the beloved disciple' was meant to be, but we do know that the person in the painting, who is usually called 'John', is meant to be that special disciple. Since we don't actually know that John was the 'disciple whom Jesus loved', then we don't know who the person seated next to Jesus was / is.
I don't think the person is referred to as the 'Apostle' whom Jesus loved???

Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
It has already been established Leonardo portrayed young men with effeminate features so the figure to Jesus’ immediate right, John, would be so painted pursuant to the tradition of the Florentine School.

Quite possible, I agree.

Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
Finally, to the claim that the writer of the Fourth Gospel does not identify the disciple in question so (a) it could be Mary Magdalene and/or (b) Mary Magdalene is the author of the Fourth Gospel...

None of the four Gospel accounts self-identify as do the writers of Ezekiel, Hosea, and many other Hebrew Testament authors. To the list of those biblical writers that do identify themselves as the authors can be added the name of the youngest and last to die Apostle when composing The Revelation as noted in Chapter 1, verse 1 (and yes, this writer is aware of those who as on every matter are called upon to argue that it was someone else that wrote The Revelation).


Basically, we don't know who wrote any of it and this leads to guesswork, supposition, debate and enquiry.
Scholars of Theology discuss & debate who the beloved disciple might have been and who wrote the books of the Bible. They don't know and neither do I. No-one does, not for sure.
Stories can be changed, and have been changed, to fit agendas.
I don't see anything that proves that Mary either was, or was not, the disciple Jesus loved.

Did Leonardo know? ~ Unlikely.
Did he have some unorthodox, even heretical ideas? ~ Possibly.
Who knows? ~ None of us.

We weren't there; neither in the Holy Land at the time of the 'Last Supper', nor in Leonardo's Renaissance Florence.

We don't know; so we wonder and suggest. We fill in the gaps with our imaginations.

But there is some mysterious artwork out there (eg Poussin) ~ and much is connected to the same range of ideas.

Leonardo's works of art are fascinating ~ and they get me to ask questions.
Questions are always worth asking, in my opinion.

.
.
.
.


Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
PDM: “The Romans invented glassware”

Grrr82CU: “You might want to check your information.”


When did I say that the Romans invented glassware?!
Sorry, I don't remember saying that. confused


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:28 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#215239 - 09/18/07 07:01 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: PDM, 09/18/07
When did I say that the Romans invented glassware?! Sorry, I don't remember saying that


Following the hyperlinks beginning with "The Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci", then to "The Chalice and Cups", title article:

Quote:
The Last Supper No Chalice and the Missing Cup


Quote:
It's a simple short cup. The shape is what the 'average person' back in those days of Roman Rule would have had. Remember, EVERYBODY drank wine at the time, even slaves. Water was considered dangerous to drink. The Romans invented glassware, so where the Greeks drank from metal, pottery or carved wooden cups, the Romans loved glass


Presumed you authored this section. Apologies if someone else.

Originally Posted By: PDM
I don't see anything that proves that Mary either was, or was not, the disciple Jesus loved


Again, Mary Magdalene did not run to herself as the "disciple Jesus loved" (Jn 20:2)

Sorry there isn't time to address more comments in this very limited reply. A bit envious of the freedom to compose such quick (and more encompassing) responses as you apparently do PDM. Will give best effort to address additional comments as time permits.

Grrr82CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#215725 - 09/19/07 06:00 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
PDM, 09/18/07: When did I say that the Romans invented glassware?! Sorry, I don't remember saying that.

Grrr82CU: Following the hyperlinks beginning with "The Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci", then to "The Chalice and Cups", title article:
...
Presumed you authored this section. Apologies if someone else.



No; as I said, it was a list of 'Some background & other info'.
I believe that Lisa may have writtenm that and I know that she is very knowledgeable about wine and its accoutrements, so she must have got it from somewhere, but I know not where.
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#215730 - 09/19/07 06:21 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU

PDM:I don't see anything that proves that Mary either was, or was not, the disciple Jesus loved.

Grrr82CU: Again, Mary Magdalene did not run to herself as the "disciple Jesus loved" (Jn 20:2)

Grrr82CU smile


You are assumimg that we can trust the Bible to be correct, yet we know that it has been tampered with.

There are two threads on this subject where this is discussed ~ and which show that this 'proof' is not reliable.

Here's one:
The Beloved Disciple
http://www.wineintro.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=80006&fpart=1


Edited by PDM (09/20/07 04:10 AM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#215767 - 09/19/07 08:01 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: PDM
I don't see anything that proves that Mary either was, or was not, the disciple Jesus loved.
[Response - Grrr82CU] Again, Mary Magdalene did not run to herself as the "disciple Jesus loved" (Jn 20:2)


Originally Posted By: PDM
You are assumimg that we can trust the Bible to be correct, yet we know that it has been tampered with


Funny you should say that...since we have established that just about everything regarding Leonardo's celebrated "The Last Supper" has been "tampered with" in repainting, adding doorways, etc., yet it is touted as so trustworthy in displaying the symbol of the "Sacred Fememinie" in the "V" between Jesus and the person to his right" wink

We are agreed that "textual criticism" has been put to the test for a century and more working to determine the most accurate copies of biblical texts. More than one that bore evidencies to having been "tampered with" over the centuries (1 Jn 5:7 being the most notorious) were culled and discarded. The process is on-going, but because of this work there are more trustworthy than untrustworthy texts that have survived and been handed down to us. Ultimately, if God had it all written, then surely He has the power to assure that it reaches us in a more trustworthy form than not.

That having been said, in following the thread you provided, perhaps there is a misunderstanding on this writer's part as to what was supposed to be revealed.

Different renderings of how Jn 13:18-26 is translated from Greek into English in several bibles specific to the discription of a particular disciple being referred to as "the beloved disciple" (or any recognizable variation thereof) is not an example of "tampered" text - just an example of translator's preference.

Variety in wording of Jn 13:18-26 was in evidence in the link you provided to be sure, but unmistakeably the same meaning is discernable in all examples provided. The examples from several translations still offer similiar descriptive phrasing that the disciple in question was singularly described as being 'loved' by Jesus.

Also - the text quoted in this writer's original response was Jn 20:2, not Jn 13:18-26. Nothing in Jn 13:18-26 distinguishes between Mary Magdalene and the "beloved disciple"...but Jn 20:2 does!

Regardless of which translation is used, the distinction between Mary Magdalene and "the beloved disciple" in Jn 20:2 is incontrovertible, and also supported textually in every MSS.

Finally - after reading around in several areas of this expansive site, this writer is not going to mention time demands again after witnessing your own prodigious postings everywhere knowing the time involved in doing so. Good job!

"Seriously", offline for several days...but Grrr82CU smile

_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#215797 - 09/20/07 04:21 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
I do not consider that Leonardo's art is proof of anything; nor do I consider the Bible to be proof of anything. (I certainly wouldn't rely on it simply because some believe it to be God's word.)

I consider the story of 'the beloved disciple' to be an intriguiong one, leaving many unanswered questions & I also consider Leonardo's works to be intriguing, including The Last Supper ~ and, of course, 'the disciple Jesus loved' is the link.

I ask questions because I am intrigued ~ I don't necessarily expect to find answers, but I don't think that others have the answers, either, because the origins of both works are lost in the mists of time.

Now that I am working, I have less time to devote to the forum than I once had. However, I do like to stay involved in these interesting discussions. smile
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#216251 - 09/23/07 05:53 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
Mary Magdalene did not run to herself as the "disciple Jesus loved" (Jn 20:2)


Originally Posted By: PDM
I do not consider that Leonardo's art is proof of anything; nor do I consider the Bible to be proof of anything. (I certainly wouldn't rely on it simply because some believe it to be God's word.)


Granting (with respect) your personal position of belief on that matter, this writer would only point out that the distinction between Mary Magdalene and "the beloved disciple" (around which so much controversy swirls pursuant to Dan Brown's novel and earlier such hypothesis) as provided by Jn 20:2, has no peer in terms of documentation.

The statement at Jn 20:2 is simply the oldest and most authoritative source of all applicable information on that topic that exists.

That fact alone, regardless of what position of trust is accorded to it as a source, places it in the category of being more authoritive on the matter than any other source (or collections of materials) to the contrary that may be called upon to support a different interpretation of the identity of the figure to Jesus' right.

On other matters relative to the thread, this writer's delay in posting on Leonardo's painting in realtion to Passover (as promised days ago) is due to additional research being done.

...and Grrr82CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#216349 - 09/23/07 05:18 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
I have read a lot about this subject by people who have studied this issue and this line did not cause the writers any problems. I'll have to refresh my memory, though, and get back to you.
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#216979 - 09/27/07 10:10 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
A hint of a new Doc. and Book to be published shortly on da Vinc1 at: I found that there perspective a valid one. A note from the project to the people: NOTE: We have not misrepresented Leonardo's work in anyway, nor have we used any computer manipulation or transposition techniques to alter the Master’s original works. Leonardo used mirrors throughout his whole professional life to hide his ideas in notes that were written backwards. Simple perpendicular mirror reflection could reverse that process rendering the text legible to any reader who could understand the language. It is not at all surprising therefore that he would apply similar mirror imaging techniques in his art to those he used when writing his various Codices. http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/index.html http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/Library.html

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#217521 - 09/30/07 11:26 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
One of the two reasons for choosing the title of the originating post, “Leonardo’s Painting – A Fatal Flaw ?? " was to focus attention on the accumulation of information and subsequent interpretations all claiming to be based upon Leonardo’s painting (the other reason is about the Passover in relation to his painting - that post still intended but not prepared).

Anxious to provide examples showing all manner of “secrets revealed”, proponents tout how Leonardo deliberately painted in “clues” as to who/what the “Holy Grail” was/is using techniques known only to him but which are now knowable to us compliments of modern technology.

As everyone knows, “The Da Vinci Code” started a phenomenon that has generated extraordinary levels of interest. Building upon Dan Brown’s fictional platform, more books, new websites, lectures, tours, have arrived in the marketplace many positioning themselves (imputing by no statement to the contrary) that they are not fiction. It almost seems there are more proponents explaining what has been discovered from their study of Leonardo’s painting than there are detractors explaining why they are wrong.

So, what about those claiming that “secrets” were hidden by Leonardo utilizing painting techniques so advanced (layers hidden below layers, visual allusions created with plays on perspective and light, even incorporating “mirror-painting” to conceal hidden figures of such things as Templar Knights) that such images are discernable in our day thanks to great sleuthing and advanced technologies? Can such claims actually be supported by Leonardo’s painting as it was originally painted or for that matter, as it exists today?

What about those claiming that Leonardo painted Mary Magdalene as Jesus’ wife to his right instead of the youngest disciple/apostle, John? Does the figure exhibit a “bosom”, pregnant, accompanied by a “V” shaped space symbolizing yet another “clue”, the “Sacred Feminine”, a woman’s womb as identified by Teabing in Dan Brown’s novel? Again this writer asks, “Can such claims actually be supported by Leonardo’s painting as it was originally painted” or as it exists today?

Can the painting of “The Last Supper” by Leonardo Da Vinci on its own merits according to what we have today be used to prove that he used techniques known only to him to leave behind “secrets” and “clues” about “who” and/or “what” so-called The Holy Grail was and is?

Can we know from the painting as it exists today if Leonardo intentionally inserted Mary Magdalene into the painting as Jesus’ wife to his right instead of the youngest apostle, John?

To each of the preceding interogatories, the answer is “No”. Subsequent paragraphs will explain.

Even though as previously noted Dan Brown’s novel is positioned as “fiction”, assurances are now advanced by many as truth. Leonardo, they contend, meant for those of another day to recognize that the “Holy Grail” is a woman’s womb. This, they say, is represented by the ancient symbol for the “Sacred Feminine”, a “V” shaped space that Leonardo took pains to create between Jesus and the figure to his right.

For us in this forum exchanging viewpoints, what basis can be provided by this writer to influence others to consider that such conclusions derived from “studies” of Leonardo’s “The Last Supper” are in fact “flawed” both as to reasoning and evidentiary outcomes? Is such a basis for disbelief even possible to present?

This writer hopes that the following information will demonstrate once and for all that the many presentations listed above (and many more unspecified) assuring validation from Leonardo’s “Last Supper” as we see it today are not only “flawed” but rendered “impossible” to have achieved based upon the painting itself.

So, back to all the books, websites and other sources of commentary detailing the mysteries now being revealed about Leonardo’s “Last Supper”. Once again the question must be asked, “Can any of them be valid given the historical travails of the painting through the centuries?”

It might be helpful to those who still “aren’t sure” that some foundation doesn’t exist for believing in such claims, to consider the history of the painting’s “endurance” through the intervening centuries up to our time. Is what we see today “Leonardo’s”… or only the attempts by others pursuant to what they think he painted, imposing with less skill their paint applied over the vague shadows remaining of his work?

Giorgio Vasari (1511 – 1574), was a painter, an architect, and known for his biographical work on famous persons. As Leonardo Da Vinci’s biographer, Vasari described the painting of The Last Supper as already ruined” and in such state of decomposition that the figures in the painting were "unrecognizable" by 1556. That is sixty years (+/-) after Leonardo finished it.

If the painting had become [color:#CC0000][b]”unrecognizable” by 1556, how many layers, converging perspectives, and planes of light, male/female facial characteristics, skin tones, secretive messages painted into the composition, etc., done by Leonardo’s own hand were left to explore electronically and otherwise by the dawn of the new millennium?[/b][/color]

Nothing that would support all the claims now being made in the painting’s behalf!

A first restoration was attempted in 1726 which endured poorly. Another attempt was begun in 1770 wherein the work of 1726 was stripped off but restoration was halted and remained in an unfinished state for a very long time.

In 1796 the French used the building as an armory. Soldiers are recorded as throwing stones at the painting and scratching out the eyes of the figures. The building was also used as a prison wherein no catalogue of damage by prisoners was kept.

Next, disaster!

In 1821, an attempt was made to remove the section of the wall upon which Leonardo had painted. The center section was severely damaged, apparently at or near the location of the celebrated “V” space appearing between Jesus and the figure to his right. If true (and historically it is) was it restored to represent (Teabing's description of it in Brown's novel as the “Holy Grail”) what Leonardo had originally painted it to be or did he never paint the space intending such significance at all? The project to remove the wall and the painting was abandoned. How was it repaired? The wall pieces were reinserted and mortared but the wall surface, the painting pieces that had been removed, were re-affixed with glue!.

Next, another cycle of study and poorly executed restoration came and went between 1901 and 1924 only to be followed by more years of decline so that by the late 1970’s, the painting was so badly deteriorated that it was again considered to be “unrecognizable”.

What happened next? You guessed it! Another cycle of restoration was commenced and after more re-painting, stabilization techniques for the wall-surface, and the installation of climate control devices were completed the restored (or would re-created by other lesser skilled hands than Leonardo's who also didn't know his "secrets" be more accurate) painting of Leonardo Da Vinci’s Last Supper is now available for limited viewing.

In summary

Given the history of the painting’s “endurance”, given that whatever Leonardo Da Vinci’s own hand painted long ago faded to the state of being “unrecognizable” multiple times, given the record of damages and botched repairs on detail that could no longer be recognized, who can allow themselves to be carried away by all the fanciful tales spun by Dan Brown and others?

How many contributing to this and other such forums, proclaim Leonardo’s painting has all sorts of secrets to tell us, secrets only now being revealed through sophisticated scanning techniques reaching down through the layers revealing hidden images?

Claims of Leonardo’s fabled secretive techniques utilizing planes of refracting light, converging perspectives, mirror-painting, image-messaging, and many more known-only-to-him processes revealing secrets today, is simply not possible given that his experimental paint long ago faded or was striped away by early restorers hundreds of years past according to the historical record.

Claims regarding his secret painting techniques no longer remain to be explored, x-rayed, 3-D scanned, or otherwise technologically “explored”. Even if images had emerged during such modern day high-tech wizardry (which they couldn't have as detailed previously), it would be impossible to distinguish between the work of Leonardo versus painting over or in replacement of his work by Gellotti, Mazza, Barezzi, Cavenaghi, Silvestri, Pelliccioli, or Barcilon spread as it was over centuries interspersed with repeated acts of vandalism from one source or another, environmental deterioration, and botched attempts at restoration.

So the next time you are regaled with a tale about some new discovery announcing what new-age technology has revealed about Leonardo Da Vinci’s painting of “The Last Supper”, when you find yourself wondering if Da Vinci really painted the figure to Jesus’ right to be Mary Magdalene, that he painted a "her" instead of an effeminate Apostle John as he did elsewhere (pursuant to The Florentine School's techniques), that the figure was pregnant and later moved to France to bear Jesus’ child, or the next time you see that Templar Knight at the far end of the table supposedly hidden there by Leonardo for future revelation but discernable today thanks to great sleuthing and modern electronics (but more likely thanks to Adobe Photoshop)…think again!

…and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:29 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#217560 - 09/30/07 02:47 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Indeed, we cannot possibly 'know' that Leonardo included secrets in his fresco-type-painting, known as 'The Last Supper'. The style ~ not quite fresco ~ didn't work, apparently, and so it deteriorated very quickly.

Dan Brown, amongst others ~ eg Lynn Picknett & Clive Prince ~ have read much into the works of Leonardo da Vinci. It's interesting to read and to speculate upon their ideas, but there is no proof of anything particularly mysterious.

I don't think that we can really learn anything of the ancient past from the works of Leonardo, but he may have incorporated 'heretical' ideas into his art ~ or not.

Certainly, I think that it is well-known that the painting we have today is a restoration of a restoration of a restoration. However, in those days before photographs, painted copies of images tended to exist (though Picknett & Priince think that the 'Turin Shroud' is an early photograph, made by Leonardo.) And there are early copies:

http://www.tongerlo.org/da_vinci/avondmaal.htm

http://www.racollection.org.uk/ixbin/hixclient.exe?_IXSS_=%2403%2f1230+index+mus_obj_parts=%2e%26_IXMAXHITS_=1%26_IXDB_=default%26_IXSESSION_=mLSsS72Ngql&_IXSR_=xt1&_IXSPFX_=full/p&_IXMAXHITS_=1&_IXFIRST_=1&submit-button=summary&_IXELEMENT_=0

The Tongerlo one has been in their abbey since 1545 and the Giovan Pietro Rizzoli one was completed by 1549, so we can get an idea of what Leonardo's work was like in its earliest days ~ and it's not unlike what we have now.

We must always 'think again' ~ but that does not mean that our minds should be closed.

We don't know that Leonardo's works contain puzzles or mysteries ~ but we don't know that they don't ~ and there is much symbolism in Renaissance art. Paintings are to be deciphered, I feel, and I see no reason why we should not try to decipher those of Leonardo and put forward our own theories ~ they may be wrong or they may be right, but they are up for discussion.

We discuss the meaning behind Picasso's 'Guernica'; we wonder about Poussin's works. I see no reason not to discuss Leonardo's works. I find them intriguing ~ as do others, otherwise these theories wouldn't exist.

He seems to have been an usually able man with ideas before his time ~ maybe some of them are indeed shown in his art. Who can say?
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#217670 - 10/01/07 06:52 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: PDM
The Tongerlo one has been in their abbey since 1545 and the Giovan Pietro Rizzoli one was completed by 1549, so we can get an idea of what Leonardo's work was like in its earliest days ~ and it's not unlike what we have now


Being very aware of the early copies of Leonardo’s “The Last Supper”, that we have a general idea of “what it looked like” today was never at issue. It should be kept in mind when viewing those copies that they were based upon a work already in an advanced state of deterioration.

With only seven and eleven years respectively to go before becoming “unrecognizable”, fine detail painted by Leonardo would have been by then been fine no longer. By the time these artists copied Leonardo's work, the need to rely upon their own interpretation, skills, (and unavoidably) some degree of “guesswork" would most likely have been imposed upon them by the painting's condition.

One should approach with caution (and a healthy dose of skepticism), all that is being touted as research and high-tech discovery regarding Leonardo's intents, purposes, and "secrets" when he painted "The Last Supper" before embracing it.

Originally Posted By: PDM
Dan Brown, amongst others ~ eg Lynn Picknett & Clive Prince ~ have read much into the works of Leonardo da Vinci. It's interesting to read and to speculate upon their ideas, but there is no proof of anything particularly mysterious


As you know, this writer quite agrees.

...and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:29 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#217724 - 10/01/07 11:23 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU
..
With only seven and eleven years respectively to go before becoming “unrecognizable”, fine detail painted by Leonardo would have been by then been fine no longer. By the time these artists copied Leonardo's work, the need to rely upon their own interpretation, skills, (and unavoidably) some degree of “guesswork" would most likely have been imposed upon them by the painting's condition. ..... and Grrr82CU smile


Yet their works are extremely similar.
Is this because they copied each other, or did they copy Leonardo's still recognisable project?


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:29 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#217862 - 10/02/07 06:36 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Personally from my own perspective I find what Giorgio Vasari wrote about many things when it came to da Vinci not to be true, by study of my own research have found many things Vasari says made up to sell books.
Look at Vasari's time line and compare it with much of what was going on at the time in history.
There are no facts that back up Vasari's story of the painting by Leonardo called the Mona Lisa, in fact there is proof that the king was not even in the town where his palace was when da Vinci died, so how could he have been with Leonardo when he died?
Be careful of what you make of Giorgio Vasari's words.


Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#217863 - 10/02/07 06:43 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
O in case you didn't know Giorgio Vasari gave the Painting by Leonardo da Vinci the name we call now call her to be the Mona Lisa, and the story he made upm about her, everything was made up, there is and has never been any proof to sow anything different about the name of the subject until 2005 when a researcher by the name of Michael W. Domoretsky found the true name within the painting call the Mona Lisa woven within the sleeve of the painting itself in Opyical illusion for an invention by da Vinci himself.
This person is on his way to putting out a book on da Vinci's finds shortly.

http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/Summary.html
http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/Summary.html

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#217957 - 10/02/07 11:30 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Other researchers have drawn other conclusions ~ I think you must know that I have mentioned Isabella of Aragon before, and this could well be a portrait of her.
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218113 - 10/03/07 04:33 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Originally Posted By: PDM
Other researchers have drawn other conclusions ~ I think you must know that I have mentioned Isabella of Aragon before, and this could well be a portrait of her.


Yes there are many theories about who she is but I do feel from the research that has been shown thus far that the da Vinci Project, Research Group is onto something great.
I think also not only do they produce the name 'Mary' in there finding's and back them up, but they have also said they have found a series of Symbols that also prove the name 'MARY'to be true and the connection between the Templars and the Masons, all written in symbol form.


Edited by PDM (10/03/07 05:20 AM)
Edit Reason: quote clarified

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218127 - 10/03/07 05:25 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
We are going off topic, I think. This thread is to address what might be considered a 'fatal flaw' in the beliefs of Dan Brown re Leonardo's 'Last supper'
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218246 - 10/03/07 07:18 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: PDM
We are going off topic, I think. This thread is to address what might be considered a 'fatal flaw' in the beliefs of Dan Brown re Leonardo's 'Last supper'


Agreed, but this for another writer's sake and that one's desire to research...

Referring to Leonardo Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa,

Originally Posted By: nanago
…a researcher by the name of Michael W. Domoretsky found the true name within the painting call the Mona Lisa woven within the sleeve of the painting itself


Originally Posted By: nanago
… the research that has been shown thus far that the da Vinci Project, Research Group is onto something great. I think also not only do they produce the name [color:#CC0000][b]'Mary' in there finding's[/b][/color] and back them up…


Following the link provided by nanago to the da Vinci Project, Research Group, sure enough one finds the word 'Mary' in highlight atop the folds of the Mona Lisa’s right forearm.

Before all exchange hi-5s, however, what’s wrong with that picture ??!!??

"Leonardo didn’t speak or write in English !!!

Further proof (if any is still needed) that Leonardo did not write the “true name” of the Mona Lisa’s on her forearm:

From what languages would Leonardo have chosen ??

Hebrew ?? Italian ?? English ??

Any of the above present an insurmountable problem for Mr. Domoretsky and the “da Vinci Project, Research Group” to still justify the use of their highlighter pen to trace out 'Her Name'on the right forearm of the Mona Lisa as Leonardo painted it.

How so ??

If Leonardo used his native language (Italian), he would have painted the folds of cloth to spell out 'Maria', which of course he didn't, which further means "Maria" will not flow nicely from the highlighter pen on to the top of the folds of cloth adorning the Mona Lisa’s right forearm as Leonardo painted it !!

If Leonardo had chosen instead to represent her name in her native language (Judeo-Aramiaic) he would have created folds of cloth whereupon the name 'Maryam' (derived from the Hebrew “Miriam”) could be traced out...but he did no such thing. Unfortunately for Mr. Domoretsky and the “da Vinci Project, Research Group” is concerned, no matter how hard they try, 'Maryam' won’t fit the folds of Leonardo’s Mona Lisa right forearm as Leonardo painted it !!

Is anyone getting the picture that this is “research” and accompanying claims is utter nonsense ??

What about choosing English ??

Well, that won’t work out for Mr. Domoretsky and the “da Vinci Project, Research Group” either. If Leonardo had written in English, that language in his day bore absolutely no resemblance to today’s English. Try reading Canterbury Tales in Chaucerian English (Chaucer lived 1343 – 1400), just for starters.

Want more proof of how Leonardo would have had to paint the folds of cloth on the Mona Lisa’s forearm to accommodate the English of his day ??

In the following sample, see if you can find the name of 'Mary Magdalene':

Originally Posted By: Luke 8:1-3
Syððan wæs geworden þæt he ferde þurh þa ceastre and þæt castel: godes rice prediciende and bodiende. and hi twelfe mid. And sume wif þe wæron gehælede of awyrgdum gastum: and untrumnessum: seo magdalenisce maria ofþære seofan deoflu uteodon: and iohanna chuzan wif herodes gerefan: and susanna and manega oðre þe him of hyra spedum þenedon.


Given the above evidence, about all this writer can say about the “research” of Mr. Domoretsky and the so-called “da Vinci Project, Research Group” is that Scotoma is alive and well regarding their claims that the “true” name of the Mona Lisa, 'Mary', was painted by Leonardo in English on her right sleeve.

Just for fun, let’s take a look at how Leonardo frequently painted “sleeves”. Pull up his painting of Benois Madonna, c.1478 – and observe the elaborate folds of fabric on her forearm. Probably if you look enough, the letter “M” or “W” could be made out on it.

Next, pull up Leonardo’s Grotesque Heads, c.1490 – and focus first on the figure in the foreground. Zoom in (if you have found a site that provides that capability) and note the right shoulder blade from just above the waist ascending upwards towards the neck.

Beginning with an unmistakable ”M”, that little section of wrinkles and folds ends with an equally unmistakable ”Y”. Using the same alchemy employed by Mr. Domoretsky and the “da Vinci Project, Research Group”, highlighting other fabric wrinkles, folds, to produce an ”a” and then an ”r” would not be difficult at all.

There…another one of Leonardo’s figures identified as 'Mary' employing the same methodology of Mr. Domoretsky and the “da Vinci Project, Research Group !!

Also – zoom in on the figure to the right of the one just examined. It could be argued that visually it is a woman with a tiny baby (top of its head showing, complete with eyebrows and a nose) swaddled into the folds of her garment against her left breast (if one could be made out).

You see, it is a small matter to find whatever one wants to find in art to support an agenda (such as preparations for…selling a book ?)

Originally Posted By: nanago
Personally from my own perspective I find what Giorgio Vasari wrote about many things when it came to da Vinci not to be true, by study of my own research have found many things Vasari says made up to sell books


Neither Varsari’s reputation nor his work is held in the disrepute expressed by nanago by the world art community:

Originally Posted By: Wikipedia
With a few exceptions, however, Vasari's aesthetic judgment was acute and unbiased. He did not research archives for exact dates, as modern art historians do, and naturally his biographies are most dependable for the painters of his own generation and the immediately preceding one (Vasari 1511-1574 – Leonardo 1442 – 1519, inserted, this writer)



Originally Posted By: nanago
Look at Vasari's time line and compare it with much of what was going on at the time in history


Originally Posted By: Wikipedia, continuing commentary on Vasari
Modern criticism — with all the new materials opened up by research — has corrected many of his traditional dates and attributions. The work remains a classic even today, though it must be supplemented by modern critical research


So, enough on this. Leonardo didn’t paint the folds of cloth on the forearm of The Mona Lisa to form the name “Mary” in English. Leonardo painted many fabrics with elaborate folds, peaks and valleys, and Vasari wasn’t the lying scoundrel just trying to sell his books as accused.

This post hasn't been about trying to discourage the love and pursuit of “research” by another writer, it’s about trying to encourage pursuit of research along credible lines.

…and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:29 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218282 - 10/04/07 05:50 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Mary in Italian is short for Maria, this is a fact!, It does not matter if Leonardo was Italian or not it has no play on the name chosen by Leonardo.
Note the name Mary, as in Mary Magdalean!
There is proof of Leonardo using optical illusion in most of his work from a young age to his twilight ages and Leonardo writes of the use of this in his notes very clearly, the Experts have totally missed this.


Originally Posted By: Grrr82cu
"Leonardo didn’t speak or write in English !!!",
This has no play on what he wrote at all , the fact is with or without the name traced it is there in optical illusion form! The trace by pen was put there so people like yourself could understand how to look at what Leonardo did, and still you missed the point! Grrr82cu, I suggest you look into some research in the following area it may also help you with you fatal flaw. This would be a great place for you to start with you search.http://www.jstor.org/

Originally Posted By: Grrr82cu
"So, enough on this. Leonardo didn’t paint the folds of cloth on the forearm of The Mona Lisa to form the name “Mary” in English. Leonardo painted many fabrics with elaborate folds, peaks and valleys, and Vasari wasn’t the lying scoundrel just trying to sell his books as accused."

It is well documented that Giorgio Vasari was not telling the truth about the name of the Mona Lisa.
The two doctors in the da Vinci Project, Research Group come with great backgrounds, what do you Grrr82CU bring to the table, I am sorry but from what I have read and seen from the project they are on something great.
Sorry it is my opinnion, we all have one.


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:29 PM)

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218289 - 10/04/07 06:46 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU, You are as Accurate as Dan Brown is, and that is not much!
Grr82CU, Scotoma is alive and well with what you are saying??? I think before you start pointing who is right and wrong you should research more and cross reference your material, and I personal wouldn't use (Originally Posted By: Wikipedia,) for any reference.

I would use the Oxford Library where most Scholars go to for information or http://www.jstor.org/, to start with, not Wikipedia.
I would also recommend the head of the research department for the Da Vinci Project, Research Group, Doctor Glynne Milburn or Doctor Lauren Noll, they can help you greatly in your Quest to answer some of your own questions you might have about what the time line is and what the Experts have missed within Leonardo's works. http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/About.html, I am sure these two people can help you see what has been discovered and understood.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218297 - 10/04/07 07:07 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU,You see, it is a small matter to find whatever one wants to find in art to support an agenda (such as preparations for…selling a book ? Grrr82CU, Is this what you are trying to do in (Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ??)sell a book? I also didn't say Vasari was lying, I did say he was no correct in what he said about Leonardo in many ways. Yes he has his facts wrong! He is the only person that made up the story about Leonardo's paintibg we call the

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218331 - 10/04/07 11:33 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Look you people think what you want, all I was pointing out was something for you to debate, some new evidence, enjoy, need a break! Smiles

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218378 - 10/04/07 07:09 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: nanago
...need a break! Smiles


Agreeing to disagree and move forward is a good thing to do. Enjoy the sabbatical smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218417 - 10/04/07 09:33 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU, Thank you for your interest in one of the findings. It appears you have given it a fair amount of consideration and have formed an opinion based on your perspective. We welcome all serious civil responses to the findings, in the negative as well as positive. We do not claim to interpret or reason why the appearance of any anomalies occur. We point out those things that appear to have been included in DaVinci’s work. We are not in a position to know the why or wherefore of reasons for any of the findings to have been created. We simply point out occurrences of anomalies that appear to exist. Some of them will have a higher probability of being intentional inclusions than others. There is much about DaVinci that is not known and may never be known. Did he have some knowledge of the English language? Or did the Italians use Mary as a nickname? Did he use a code? This is not for us to determine. Having found dozens of other hidden, imbedded images and constructs of various types that appear to have a very high probability of deliberate creation, Mary on the sleeve is but one of the optical illusions that some feel may be real, while others feel that it is not real. There are arguments of varied validity using a wide variety of information in support of positions on both sides of the investigation on this particular finding. We leave the deliberation of all findings on the aspect of validity and interpretation to any who deem it worth their while to investigate and discuss it. We have received many emails on both sides of the argument and take no position. In the end the final determination will come from people such as you and other scholars. In the future it is our intention to create a comparative analysis on each finding giving the public’s view of acceptance or rejection for each of our findings. Again, thank you for your interest and the time you have taken in considering the finding as such discourse is valuable to all who are interested in the subject.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218500 - 10/05/07 11:51 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Quote:
Grrr82CU, Thank you for your interest in one of the findings...We welcome all serious civil responses to the findings...We do not claim to interpret or reason why the appearance of any anomalies occur. We point out those things that appear to have been included in DaVinci’s work. We are not in a position to know the why or wherefore of reasons for any of the findings to have been created. We simply point out occurrences of anomalies that appear to exist. (Underline emphasis added by this writer)


Thank you for the kind explanation and insight provided. It is helpful in understanding the disposition towards the question of Leonardo painting folds of cloth to spell out a name in modern day English.

Quote:
There is much about DaVinci that is not known and may never be known. Did he have some knowledge of the English language? Or did the Italians use Mary as a nickname? Did he use a code? This is not for us to determine


The thought occurs, a determination of 'yes' or 'no' to each interogatory should be forthcoming pursuant to any evidence of (a) any other examples of Leonardo writing a modern day English word such as "Mary" in his journals or utilizing painting to form such a word (b) evidence from any writing emanating from Italian archives specific to Leonardo's time wherein there is an example of a modern English word such as "Mary" used (b) the same standard as above for usage of a "nickname" or "code" employing a modern day English word such as "Mary" to stand for an Italian name of Leonardo's time.

Perhaps identifying such evidence(s) would be a worthwhile quest by those involved with the "da Vinci Project, Research Group".

This writer would think finding a modern day English word equal to "Mary" from any source of Italian art or literature from Leonardo's time would certainly be very helpful to the project for validation purposes.

One other clarification please...

The frequent use of "we" in the post...seems to indicate a collective from inside the circle rather than from outside of it. Are you, nanago, a participating/active researcher of the "da Vinci Project, Research Group" or does the composition reflect someone else ??

Just curious...and thanks again for the insight provided.

After reviewing whatever reply follows, this writer will take a brief break (up to a couple of weeks if necessary) in responding to buy out time to compose the last intended segment on the topic of "Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ??". What Leonardo painted in relation to Passover.

...and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:30 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218659 - 10/06/07 10:28 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU In answer to your response: Thank you for your continued interest and willingness to entertain alternate ideas and to keep an open mind. Our research indicates that Mary may actually have been used by the Italians as a shortened or colloquial version of the name Maria or Miriam and may not actually be modern English. We cannot state this unequivocally and so we have not yet felt justified in stating it at all. However there is some evidence toward this end. We are of course constantly searching for any references or inferences that justify or indicate the likely validity, or point in the opposite direction, relevant to any of the findings. The DaVinci Project Research Group is a comprised of a number of people from varied disciplines including professional researchers, who have been invited to join the Project and are attempting to pool knowledge and capabilities to bring the discoveries public in the best possible light. Realizing that the findings are in some cases controversial, we have sought out professionals in fields that complement each other and that lend specific skills required to ensure that we are publishing findings with a high degree of credibility. The “we” is due to the fact that a minimum of two individuals, authorized by the directors to speak on behalf of the project group, collaborate in answering any correspondence or questions relevant to the project. We are gratified that you have been reviewing our work and have seen fit to spend time in consideration of our findings. We welcome your input. If you find evidence in support or in contradiction to a specific finding by all means let us know so that we can include it in our deliberations. Again, thank you for your continued interest, Michael Domoretsky, Executive Director Graham Noll Operations Director

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218757 - 10/06/07 08:54 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: Michael Domoretsky, Graham Noll, as nanago
The “we” is due to the fact that a minimum of two individuals, authorized by the directors to speak on behalf of the project group, collaborate in answering any correspondence or questions relevant to the project


Given the sudden and noticable change in writing style, thank you for confirming that more than one person was entering content as “nanago”.

Originally Posted By: nanago
Our research indicates that Mary may actually have been used by the Italians as a shortened or colloquial version of the name Maria or Miriam and may not actually be modern English


We seem to be agreed then that only the form “Mary” on the sleeve of The Mona Lisa, not the Italian or Olde English “Maria” and not the Judeo-Aramiaic “Maryam” will fit what you are suggesting Leonardo painted into the folds of her garment.

It must follow, therefore, that if for whatever reason "Mary” is not proven as a “shortened or colloquial version” of that name in usage common to Leonardo and his contemporaries, then the premise that he painted the folds of the Mona Lisa’s forearm sleeve as an “optical illusion” to read “Mary”....will be disqualified.

Originally Posted By: nanago
We cannot state this (that “Mary” was a non-modern English word used by the Italians – inserted by this writer for continuity) unequivocally and so we have not yet felt justified in stating it at all


But is this not the imputed message your website delivers when presenting the highlighted “Mary” on the Mona Lisa’s sleeve?

Originally Posted By: The da Vinci Project
The name 'MARY' in optical illusion form on the left sleeve facing you
emerges from the painting called the Mona Lisa


As appearing in:
http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/mona.html

This writer is not attempting to keep dialogue going on material other than this thread’s title (“Leonardo’s Painting – A Fatal Flaw ??”) such as these last several exchanges have done, but having said that and before disengaging for a week or so to compose a final post, what “evidence to this end” is there suggesting "Mary” was in colloquial usage in Leonardo’s time?

...and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:30 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218833 - 10/07/07 10:03 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU:
Euclid used the letter "Y" in his Arabic Language,250-325 BC.
Ptolemy, Also used the "Y", 250-325 BC.
Pythagoras, Also used the letter "Y" in Greek, Language.

da Vinci studied all three men faithfully when he was studying Astronomy and mathematics etc.
In Da Vinci's own handwriting, Manuscripts / Codex and Symbols, he also reveals he used this letter and others.

Why would I let out all my research at this time and point, but I did point you in a direction, now if You want Grrr82CU you can research this for yourself, I have spent 4 years on this.











Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#218957 - 10/07/07 09:15 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Did Euclid, Ptolemy, and Pythagoras use the letter "Y" ??

What did all three have in common that would have attracted Leonardo to study them ??

Could Leonardo have used the "Y" said to be seen in the works of Euclid, Ptolemy, and Phythagoras as the last letter of the name "Mary" deliberately painted into the folds of cloth on the forearm of The Mona Lisa as suggested by the "da Vinci Project, Research Group" ??

The answers...in a day or two when time permits.

...and Grrr82CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219027 - 10/08/07 11:38 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
I have been reading about the letter 'Y'. I hadn't realised that it was so interesting:

'.. the Pythagorean Letter Y (Littera Pythagorae Y), which is perhaps less well known nowadays than the other Pythagorean symbols, but has been quite influential in European art, literature and thought ..'

http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mclennan/BA/PT/Intro.html#Y
http://kachina2012.wordpress.com/category/fibs-that-tell-no-lies/
http://vunex.blogspot.com/2006/11/garden-of-forking-paths.html
http://vunex.blogspot.com/2006/11/de-bry-ypsilon.html
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219054 - 10/08/07 01:11 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Did Euclid, Ptolemy, and Pythagoras use the letter "Y" ?? =(YES, proof of this in there written language, by them!)

What did all three have in common that would have attracted Leonardo to study them ?? , (Hello!!!Grrr82CU are You Serious!!)( Mathematicians, Astronomy,Science,etc.( do the research Grrr82CU)

da Vinci studied all three men faithfully when he was studying Astronomy,mathematics, Science,Alchemical,etc. (YES!, do the Research!)

Grrr82CU:
Euclid used the letter "Y" in his Arabic Language,250-325 BC.
Ptolemy, Also used the "Y", 250-325 BC.
Pythagoras, Also used the letter "Y" in Greek, Language.


Grrr82CU, You seem to want to discourage this conversation, but yet you respond to the everything with great interest!, Interesting!

http://www.lionardofromvinci.com


Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219076 - 10/08/07 03:26 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: "Which" nanago is unknown
What did all three have in common that would have attracted Leonardo to study them ?? , (Hello!!!Grrr82CU are You Serious!!)( Mathematicians, Astronomy,Science,etc.( do the research Grrr82CU)


Given the sarcasm....it must have been missed that the questions were ~ RHETORICAL !!!

Comparing this entry to that of 10/06/07 (also entered as "nanago"), this post was obviously not written by Mr. Michael Domoretsky, Executive Director or Mr. Graham Noll, Operations Director.

Originally Posted By: by which nanago?
Grrr82CU, You seem to want to discourage this conversation...


Simply stated, continuing discussion about the Mona Lisa or other "da Vinci Project" agenda has nothing to do with the topic of this board as pointed out to you on 10/03/07 by PDM.

Originally Posted By: continuation
...but yet you respond to the everything with great interest!, Interesting!


Whatever this writer has responded to was to note an alternate viewpoint to those being expressed by "nanago" (apparently the 'original one') and the "da Vinci Project" site...but with no intention to indefinitely stay off the subject of this board.

The "want to discourage this conversation", therefore, is in the interest of returning to the subject of the board. There are two posts to follow before this writer disengages. One regarding Euclid, Ptolemy, Phythagoras, and Leonardo as just promised and one regarding what Leonardo painted in relation to Passover promised some weeks back. As previously stated, as the sole caregiver for a severely disabled spouse, "time" to read, research, and compose is at a premium.

_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219094 - 10/08/07 04:22 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU, You are right the topic is " A Fatal Flaw ?? ", how foolish of me, Sorry! I will move on, but I still would encourage you to look at the people I have pointed out in the last few days.

Euclid, Ptolemy, and Pythagoras, The History of these people are very important.
I can also tell you that the letter "Y" was also used as a symbol by the Templar/Masons in the 12th Century, and yes before you ask I do have proof of this.
Grrr82CU The letter "Y",has been used in more different ways than you and I can even Imagine!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219221 - 10/09/07 02:18 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
I think that I should have started a new thread for the discussion of 'Y' and 'MarY'.

We must try to keep threads on topic.

Anyway, I have started a new thread now:

'Y' - Euclid, Pythagoras, Leonardo, etc. MarY
http://www.wineintro.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=219220#Post219220

Nanago, it is better if one person posts on one user name. Otherwise it becomes too complicated. If someone is discussing a subject with someone else, then that 'someone else' should always be the same person.

This is a discussion board. It has to have rules which need to be followed, if it is to work properly.

Thank you.


Edited by PDM (10/09/07 02:18 PM)
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219279 - 10/09/07 09:17 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
This writer's entry on that topic will be entered in the new forum rather than this one when completed.

...and Grrr82CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219909 - 10/14/07 08:10 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
This writer just completed a three part entry in the 'Y' - Euclid, Pythagoras, Leonardo, etc. MarY forum and will now return to this topic to compose the last intended segment on Leonardo's painting in relation to Passover.

Thanks for the patience...and...Grrr82CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219924 - 10/14/07 10:39 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU, Well done on the "Y", I will say you are getting closer to the subject at hand, "Symbols", again well done!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219926 - 10/14/07 10:43 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
So Grrr82CU, what type of writer are you?

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219942 - 10/14/07 12:10 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: nanago
Grrr82CU, Well done on the "Y"...


Thank you.

Originally Posted By: nanago
So Grrr82CU, what type of writer are you?


"This writer" is intended as gender-neutral and without the ubiquiteous first person opinion ( " I " ) found everywhere.

Hopefully a reader, therefore, will be able to focus more on the material and content rather than uncounsciously "reading" any pre-conceived ideas into "this writer's" work.

Thanks for asking...and...Grrr82CU smile

_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#219984 - 10/14/07 05:55 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Smiles

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#220127 - 10/15/07 06:50 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Grrr82CU,I thought you would like to know that in the Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, compiled and edited from the original manuscripts,By Jean Paul Richter, (Section I.page 4 explains that Leonardo did use the letter "y".

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#220175 - 10/16/07 07:48 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: nanago
Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, compiled and edited from the original manuscripts,By Jean Paul Richter...


As responded to in the new forum on this topic, an old copy buried somewhere in the dungeons will have to be retrieved and reviewed.

Without having yet done so, the criteron to be satisfied remains whether any use of a ""Y" was as a "letter (which was not a naturally occurying member of Leonardo's Italian alphabet) that he employed in the spelling of a word...or...was it used as a "symbol" in a non-word-building context (such as the "Pythagorean Y") to represent something else.

Whatever response will be forthcoming on this material, it will be confined to the other forum for reasons previously discussed. Unfortuantely that reply will not be immediate as the desire to finish a last entry in this forum first has barely been begun due to extreme time limits.

...and Grrr82CU smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#221906 - 10/27/07 07:48 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Not that this writer expects anyone out there to be waiting with bated breath for another installment...but just in case...don't give up on the intent to post regarding Leonardo's painting in relation to the many aspects of Passover not represented in The Last Supper.

There are already many positions appearing in this overall forum, some accurate, some not. Hopefully the intended entry will provide something of interest relative to these issues. This writer is just having to deal (for weeks and more weeks now) with several time-intensive issues that are draining away every spare moment needed to research, organize, and compose all of the relevant material. Will continue to press for completion.

...but...Grrr82CU anyway smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#243198 - 01/12/08 12:42 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
Published: January 09, 2008 11:31 pm Local Mason says he’s found secrets embedded in DaVinci's paintings Gail McCarthy/Staff Writer Michael Domoretsky has spent the last four years studying the works of Leonardo da Vinci to uncover the secrets of the original Renaissance man. Now he’s sharing those secrets with the world. What Domoretsky has found, he says, is a “legacy of hidden messages” carefully concealed in some of the world’s most famous paintings and decipherable only to those who know how to read them. Domoretsky, an Ipswich resident, gave his first public presentation on his research before a roomful of North Shore Masons at their lodge on Eastern Avenue in Gloucester on Tuesday night. The venue was appropriate because Domoretsky believes the 15th century artist was a Mason who incorporated Masonic symbols, like the compass and square, into his works. “The best place to hide something is in plain sight,” said Domoretsky, who is a Mason himself and works with stone as a self-employed installer of marble and granite countertops. Domoretsky has had a lifelong interest in da Vinci. But his obsession with the master’s secrets was kindled when he came across an image of the “Mona Lisa” on a Web site about the movie “The Da Vinci Code.” He’s quick to add, however, that he didn’t see the movie until long after he began his research, has never read the book and his work has no connection to the ideas presented by “Code” author Dan Brown. Domoretsky said da Vinci was a master of optical illusion who created pictures within pictures within pictures — many of them designed to be visible only with the use of mirrors. In the darkened hall, Domoretsky projected images of two paintings, “Mona Lisa” and “The Virgin and Child with St. Anne and the Infant Saint John the Baptist,” as they appear when mirrors are positioned to the right and left of the original artwork. The resulting twinned images reveal hidden faces and objects and forms that include several chalices and what Domoretsky sees as a high priest of the Knights Templar, a Templar shield and cross and a sarcophagus. The Knights Templar came into existence after the First Crusade of 1096 to protect European pilgrims en route to sacred sites in Jerusalem. The order was suppressed about 200 years later but, some believe, went underground and survived as a secret society. Domoretsky believes da Vinci was “heavily involved in Freemasonry and the Knights Templar.” Graham Noll of Groveland, who is part of Domoretsky’s da Vinci Project Research Group and assisted at Tuesday’s presentation, said the messages that the artist embedded in his work were intended for other initiates of the secret societies in which da Vinci was involved. “The membership of craft and professional associations were given knowledge and ritual to protect, and da Vinci was obliged to pass on the information,” Noll said. Domoretsky said to his knowledge, he is the first to use the mirror imaging to study Da Vinci’s work. Scholars are skeptical of his findings — one critic, for example, questions why da Vinci would conceal the word “Mary” in the folds of the Mona Lisa’s clothing when the Italian for Mary is “Maria.” “Anyone who claims to find something new is dismissed by the experts,” Domoretsky said. “We are misrepresented because some people don’t like what we say.” Domoretsky remains undaunted and continues his research to decode da Vinci’s secrets and the meaning of messages he encrypted in his paintings. He plans to hit the road with the show he presented Tuesday in Gloucester. Domoretsky, who also plans a book, has previously detailed some of his findings on his Web site, www.lionardofromvinci.com. (He believes the artist’s real first name was Lionardo, not Leonardo.) Dana Andrus, master of the Tyrian-Ashler-Acacia Masonic Lodge in Gloucester, said Masons he talked with after the presentation were intrigued by Domoretsky’s work. “I think he is somewhat of a visionary,” Andrus said. “He used da Vinci’s own insight to look at the paintings. That’s someone who has taken a great deal of time and thought, and not listened to the conventional wisdom, and come up with a new idea on how to approach something.” http://www.gloucestertimes.com/punews/local_story_009233135.html

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#243199 - 01/12/08 12:43 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
nanago Offline
Regular

Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 67
Loc: U.S.A.
From a probability professor: Jan. 1/08 TO: The da Vinci Project Research Group http://www.lionardofromvinci.com/ We searched a minimum of over 5000 paintings of the period and were unable to locate any use of the Perpendicular Mirror Process outside Leonardo da Vinci’s works. We have identified a minimum of 20 images within the “Virgin and child with St. Anne and the infant St. John” that are readily accepted by almost 100% of the people who view those specific discoveries. We asked a probability expert form a proper hypothesis and to do a calculation relative to the probability of the discoveries being random or coincidental based on these facts. His answer is: We’ll assume that the chances of a random event occurring in a painting of that era are less than 1 in 5000 since you couldn’t find any in that many trials(i.e. looks at paintings). Now suppose you find, say 20, such events (i.e. images) in one painting. The odds of this occurring independently by chance are less than (1/5000) ^20=10^ (-74) =1 divided by 10 raised to the power of 74 which is essentially 0. Thus it’s virtually impossible to find 20 images by coincidence.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#315632 - 07/30/08 07:18 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: nanago]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Greeting all...

This writer is hoping for, trying for, a 'come back' after a long absense to complete presentation of the subject, "Leornardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw?"

Now busy researching the complex timetables, accounts and related descriptions involving Jesus' celebration with his twelve disciples/apostles of Passover. It is a more involved task than originally thought.

The final post or posts will, this writer believes, finally answer the question originally posed in the title of this of this topic. Is Leornardo's depiction of "The Last Supper" 'fatally flawed' in representing the event ??

Composition will follow research...and that will be on-going for just a bit longer before work on the post(s) will begin.

Looking forward to it...and Grrr82CU !!
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#320015 - 08/15/08 08:52 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU, Post #212537 , 09/04/07
…Jesus and his disciples were there to observe [Passover] (a matter of no small significance which both Leonardo and Mr. Brown seem to have overlooked)…


Originally Posted By: PDM, Post #212671, 09/05/07
I don't understand. Why do you say that 'Leonardo and Mr. Brown' overlooked the fact that this meal was part of Passover?


First, about Dan Brown “[overlooking] the fact that this meal was part of Passover”, no reference linking Leonardo’s painting of the “Last Supper” to Passover as the reason Jesus and his disciples/apostles were assembled together is to be found in The da Vinci Code. Perhaps a better word choice by this writer therefore would have been “ignored” instead of “overlooked” in describing the total absence of any reference by Dan Brown to Passover in the context of Leonardo’s painting of The Last Supper.

Next as to the premise contained in the title of this board that Leonardo himself ‘overlooked’ that Passover was the occasion Jesus and his disciple/apostles were gathered together to observe, what he painted answers any challenge to that statement. On the table, Leonardo paints fish instead of roasted lamb, leavened bread instead of the “Bread of Haste” [unleavened bread] which would have been eaten by Jesus and his disciples/apostles reflecting and commorating the Hebrews departure from Egypt. Finally, without even going into the controversy surrounding the number of drinking containers Leonardo painted, or the matter that it [a single cup] or they [the twelve cups Leonardo painted] were more likely to have been of wood or clay instead of glass (as Leonardo painted them), sufficient to demonstrate Leonardo painted erroneously was his choice to paint them as clear. How to make glass clear had not yet been discovered in Jesus’ time.

“Artistic license” some might argue. “Didn’t have a Bible handy” might be the excuse others would offer in Leonardo’s behalf. None of these attempts to explain away why Leonardo painted what he did, however, measures up to the greatness we have come to expect of Leonardo. Such argumentation presumes to excuse that Leonardo was ‘cavalier’ in painting something as sacred to the Hebrews (and therefore to Jesus and his disciples/apostles) as Passover. Who would argue that as an artist who extended himself in every direction to study the anatomy of man, color, light, muscle, dress, expressions, age, youth, movement and all that surrounded him Leonardo was not aware of what the community of Jews did once a year…that he was oblivious to or had no knowledge of such an annual event by a segment of his community??? Unthinkable...and most uncharacteristic of Leonardo!!

The fact remains, Leonardo does not reflect the food of Passover in his painting.

So, what of the argument posed by some that Jesus and his disciples/apostles were not gathered together for the Passover meal but had instead convened the day/evening before Passover ?? If it were to be that the depiction of the “Last Supper” was in fact not the Passover meal, then the fish and leavened bread Leonardo painted might well have been served (and thus not violated the food requirements of Passover). Given that scenario, Leonardo could be absolved of the charge of painting a ‘flawed’ picture of Passover because it was not Passover that he painted of Jesus and his followers sharing in a “Last Supper” but a different occasion.

What we have to determine then is “on what night” and “for what reason” and “for what meal”, did Jesus and his disciples/apostles gather together to share?? Regarding our inquiry, what information can the historical evidence we have, such as it is, reveal as to whether it was Passover or the night before that Jesus and his followers met together - and will the answer determine whether what Leonardo painted as the “Last Supper” render a verdict of 'accurate'…or ‘flawed’??

More when time permits...and that, unfortunately, is very limited.

…and…Grrr82CU !!


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:30 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#322229 - 08/24/08 04:45 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Part 1

What do we really know about the event Leonardo chose as his subject for “The Last Supper” ??

In the founding post of this series, “Leonardo’s Painting – A Fatal Flaw??” three interrelated questions were posed regarding the gathering of Jesus and his apostles:

Originally Posted By: Grrr82CU, #212537 - 09/04/07
Why were they there?? What was so special that Jesus had planned for a long time to gather with his disciples on that night for that meal?? Does any of that matter in relation to the issue of Leonardo's painting and the intense debate over The Da Vinci Code??

As has been noted in the preceding post (#320015 - 08/15/08), Dan Brown makes no mention of why Jesus and his apostles were gathered together in his novel "The Da Vinci Code". Instead, we are introduced to Leonardo’s painting only as “The Last Supper” when Leigh Teabing opens a book and inquires of Sophie Nuveu if she recognizes the painting portrayed across two pages that he holds before her.

If for the sake of discussion we grant Leonardo’s painting of the The Last Supper depicts the very moment when Jesus announces one from among their midst is going to betray him the singular question to be resolved becomes
  • Was that night and that meal in observation of Passover”??
If “yes”, the food on the table would have to be represented as conforming to such Passover restriction as unleavened bread and roasted lamb. The lamb had to have been chosen and inspected for blemish on the tenth day of the first month (Nisan) of the Hebrew Calendar and thereafter finding nothing to disqualify its selection, it would be maintained as prescribed by Hebrew Law until being ceremonially slain at the Temple on the fourteenth day of Nisan (also known as the “Day of Preparation”).

If “no” then the food on the table could be anything that still conformed to Hebrew dietary law governing what could and could not be eaten. Animals that both ruminate their food and also have cloven hooves are allowed for consumption (cattle, deer, sheep, goat) but animals that only do/have one or the other are not such as camel, hare, and swine. Of the things that are in the waters, anything that has fins and scales may be eaten but creatures that do not are excluded (such as shellfish, lobster, oysters, shrimp, clams and crabs). Of fowl, only birds-of-prey and scavengers are specifically forbidden.

As may be noted in Leonardo’s painting, the food on the table is represented as leavened bread and fish and thus with colors and brushes in hand, Leonardo does not portray Jesus and his apostles as having gathered together to observe and share a Passover meal.

So we return to our question, “was that night and that meal in observation of Passover”?? If it can be determined that it was, then Leonardo’s portrayal of The Last Supper is flawed for not having correctly portrayed the table as it would have been set for the Passover Meal Jesus and his apostles had gathered together to share.

Persuant to all of this, our first task is to determine the year Jesus would have gathered his apostles together for this meal.

Why?

Because once the year has been identified, the lunar dates Passover occurred in relation to the last days of Jesus’ ministry can be ascertained from astronomical records.

Thereafter once the year coinciding with the last Passover Jesus would be alive on earth to observe has been established, our second task will be to determine on the ”time-frame” during which the meal Leonardo intended to paint was held (as will be determined by consideration of several factors to be outlined later on in this post) .

At this point it will be well to keep in mind that as we move forward with one choice and discard another in choosing the best “fit” of the date and hour Jesus and his apostles met for The Last Supper the more difficult the task becomes….and the more subject to challenge. Such is the nature of conclusions drawn from historical records that describe, allude to, and otherwise give indications as to "when" something happened...but do not provide the specific time and date in absolute terms. In such instances, there will always be "variables" that can argued in behalf of reaching another conclusion different from the one settled upon such as by this writer for this occasion. But then, that is why discussion boards exist, n'est-ce pas??

Since the intent is to focus on when did Jesus and his apostles meet for The Last Supper, detailing other aspects relating to Jesus’ life and ministry are not attempted herein. Given the restriction of information to be examined, therefore, we begin with the leaders that are prominently mentioned in the New Testament as being involved in some capacity during the trial of Jesus. This will begin the process of eliminating years in which The Last Supper did not occur. Those leaders are:

  • The Jewish High Priest, Caiaphas
  • The Prefect of Judea, Pontius Pilate
  • Tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, Herod Antipatros
Holding Office: Caiaphas from 18 CE to 37 CE; Pontius Pilate from 26 CE to 36 CE; and Herod Antipatros (Herod Antipas) from 4 CE to 39 CE.

The next outline (without detail for the moment) provides a glimpse of all the other factors which will have to considered, each in turn, all occurring within the time Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, and Herod Antipas held their respective offices before any determination of the day, date, and time-frame that Jesus and his apostles met for the subject of Leonardo’s painting, The Last Supper, can be proposed:

  • The Hebrew Month of Nisan in relation to the observation of Passover
  • How/why the “length” of a Hebrew day can vary
  • Understanding “Between The Evenings” in relation to Passover
  • The “Synoptic Gospels” (Mt, Mk, Lk) description of when the The Last Supper occurred
  • When The Last Supper occurred according to the Fourth Gospel (Jn)
  • How the use of two different “day-start” views of the Hebrew Calendar may explain the difference between the Synoptic Gospels’ and the Fourth Gospel’s reckoning of day of The Last Supper?
  • Passover dates occurring within the administrations of Caiaphas, Pontius Pilate, and Herod Antipas that coincide with the time-frame of Jesus’ ministry which in turn limits the choices for when the The Last Supper could have occurred...and how that begins to close in on determining whether or not Leonardo painted accurately in relation to the The Last Supper as it really happened.

    "Part 2" will take a while to prepare. There is much to sift through, to weigh and ponder, so more when time permits – and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:30 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#344164 - 12/28/08 06:40 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
For anyone still interested, the remaining material to be posted in follow-up to Part 1 (above) is in the final stage of research, composition and UBB formatting.

At the very least, Part 2 should be ready by the first week in January of the New Year.

Not sure yet, but there may be a need for another entry beyond Part 2 just to break up the length. If it appears that to bring forth all of the information intended will require yet another month or so to complete, Part 2 will just be entered and a "Part 3" or "Part J'ai fini !!" will follow in the effort to reach a conclusion of whether or not Leonardo's painting of "The Last Supper" is 'fatally flawed' in relation to the accuracy of its content as this writer has proposed since the initial post.

...and Grrr82CU

Best Wishes to all for the coming year.

Have a Grrr8 New Year's Eve party as you dance the old year out and the new one in!

http://adwoff.com/pictures/icons/band.gif
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#344166 - 12/28/08 07:31 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Hi

Yes, people seem to have lost some of their interest in Leonardo, don't they.

but it is still interesting, so I'll be happy to read your findings ~ thank you.

And a happy new year to you, too! smile
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#344943 - 01/01/09 06:40 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Part 2

To begin where Part 1 ended, a brief list of several topics was provided that this writer suggested would be investigated for possible contribution towards resolving the question “…on what night and for what purpose" did Jesus and his twelve disciples/apostles meet for the last time? Was the event to observe Passover or on another evening such as perhaps the night before?

From that simple list and the range of historical information contained therein, to most it would probably seem a relatively simple matter to extract the time of Jesus’ “Last Supper”, betrayal, trial, and execution within a very narrowly defined time span. As the assembled data applied to all of the possible outcomes from which to choose is considered however, it will quickly become apparent that the task of settling upon one date and one time to the degree of certainty one would like to be the result of the researched information, is anything but simple. That having been noted, this writer hopes the conclusion reached will satisfy critical analysis and thereafter viewed as having accomplished the task as nearly as possible given the data available.

As we all know, Leonardo da Vinci's famous painting of “The Last Supper” on a wall of the Dominican Convent Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan portrays the shock and reaction of those assembled just after had Jesus announced that one from among their midst was going to betray him. Controversy abounds, however, as to when this "Last Supper" took place (not to mention Dan Brown's contention that the painting also portrayed something else which has already been addressed elsewhere within this forum). Some argue "The Last Supper" occurred as early as Passover 29 CE, others contend that the meeting was not a Passover meal at all but a day or two before the actual Passover festival. Which is correct?

This writer has no illusions that what is presented herein will settle the matter. Part 1 and these entries which follow result from months of researching and reading as many argumentations both pro and con plus sifting through and adding in technical time-measuring algorithms, historical lunar phases, dates, etc., relative to gaining a better understanding of how the Hebrews and the occupiers of their land viewed and measured “time” before and during the time of Jesus. Ultimately this writer hopes that after each reader has deliberated and verified what is presented to their individual satisfaction as being a correct representation of fact (or a reasonable presumption of “fact” based upon collateral but not direct historical evidence) the majority will feel conclusions reached are sufficiently supported and of defensible merit to answer the question of “…on what night and for what purpose" did Jesus and his twelve disciples/apostles meet - and did Leonardo paint that event accurately.

So – to the points of interest proposed at the conclusion of Part 1 and provide a preliminary comment regarding each one:

  1. The Hebrew Month of Nisan in relation to the observation of Passover
    .
    The month of Nisan was originally called “Abib” at Ex 13:4 (interchangeable with the spelling “Aviv” in many commentaries), identifies the month the Hebrew exodus from Egypt occurred. It is one of only four months referred to by name in the Hebrew Text prior to the Babylonian exile which began in 586 BCE. During their exile in Babylon, the Hebrews apparently began to adopt the names of the months from the Babylonian calendar (no doubt to simply facilitate communicate with the Babylonians during their captivity). “Abib”, now “Nisan”, corresponds to the Babylonian Calendar first month “Nissanu”. “Nisan” is now the first month of the Jewish ecclesiastical year and the seventh month of the civil year.
    .
  2. How/why the “length” of a Hebrew day can vary

    A Hebrew “day” is adjusted in length according to its occurrence in its season. In example, at Latitude 30N, daylight lasts 10.10 hours on Jan 1. By April 16, the “day” has lengthened to 12.73 hours. The Hebrew “day” has 24 hours but there is where the similarity to non-lunar based timekeeping ends.

    Compared with the modern day division of hours into precise divisions (seconds, minutes, each of equal length) culminating with the definition of a “day” as from midnight to midnight, the LuniSolar days and hours are not of equal length. The hours are divided into two groups, the day-hours and the night-hours. The days always have 12 hours as do the nights but the hours are not of equal duration. On a long summer day for example, a Jewish hour may be 72 minutes long whereas on a winter day it may only be 48 minutes. Later on in this post, the exact time of sunrise, solar-noon, and sunset will be provided to further identify the “time” most likely being described in NT accounts of “The Last Supper” and following events
    .
  3. Understanding “Between The Evenings” in relation to Passover
    .
    1. “Between the evenings” – reflects the Hebrew phrase “beyn ha'arbayim” or “bin e-orbim”
    2. Demonstrating the difficulty in assigning an exact “time-period” to this phrase is evidenced by how various translators attempt to render it. Examples are found concerning Numbers 19:14 whereupon the Jewish Publication TANAKH as “dusk”, KJV has “even”, the NAS, “twilight”, both Darby’s Translation and Young’s Literal Translation, “between the evening” and the 1995 God’s Word Bible, “dusk”. Application and expansion of this important point will follow later in the process of narrowing the choices of when Jesus and his disciples/apostles gathered for “The Last Supper”
      .
  4. The “Synoptic Gospels” (Mt, Mk, Lk) description of when “The Last Supper” occurred
    .
    The Synoptic Gospels (traditionally referred to as the books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke even though anonymous) all have Jesus’ death occurring at some interval after the ninth hour (counting from sunrise) on Nisan 14 (Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34; Lk 23:44)
    .
  5. When “The Last Supper” occurred according to the Fourth Gospel (Jn)

    The Fourth Gospel (traditionally referred to as the Book of John) does not describe the death of Jesus in the same time-related terms as the three other gospels except to note that his time before Pilate occurred at the “sixth hour” (Jn 19:14). The other gospel writers also note “the sixth hour” but mark it as the start of a period of unusual darkness which lasted until the 9th hour after which Jesus died (at an unspecified interval) afterwards.
    .
  6. How the use of two different “day-start” views of the Hebrew Calendar may explain the difference between the Synoptic Gospels’ and the Fourth Gospel’s reckoning of day of “The Last Supper”?
    .
    1. The two main Jewish religious bodies in Jesus’ day, The Sadducees and The Pharisees, marked “day-start” and “day-end” differently
    2. The Pharisees adhered to the Talmud whereas the Sadducees adhered to the Torah. The Talmud reflects the teachings over the centuries by Jewish religious teachers each in their time, the Torah the first five written “books” of the Hebrew Text attributed to Moses (Ex chapters 17, 24, 34; Lev Chapters1,6:8; Josh 8, Mk 12; Ro 10)
    3. Add to this the Roman system of calculating hours which the Jews were using in daily life (because they had to for commerce, taxes, etc.) – and you have several possible explanations as to what seems (but may in fact actually not be] difference in the accounts between the first three gospel accounts of of Jesus’ last the day and hours compared with the fourth gospel
      .
  7. .Finally - Passover dates occurring within the administrations of Caiaphas (18 CE to 37 CE), Pontius Pilate (26 CE to 36 CE), and Herod Antipas (4 BCE to 37 CE ) that coincide with the time-frame of Jesus’ ministry
The possible dates are:

  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3789/29 CE; April 14, Julian calendar, day 173174
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3790/30 CE; April 5, Julian calendar, day 173120
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3791/31 CE; March 26 Julian calendar day 1732465
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3792/32 CE; April 14, Julian calendar day 17322850
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3793/33 CE; April 3, Julian calendar day 1733204
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3794/34 CE; March 22, Julian calendar day 173357
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3795/35 CE; April 11, Julian calendar day 1733942
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3796/36 CE; March 30, Julian calendar day 1734296
  • Nisan 14, Hebrew Year 3797, 37 CE; March 20, Julian calendar day 1734651

Part 3 follows...and Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:31 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#344944 - 01/01/09 06:45 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Part 3
.
As you grind through all of the preceding and following information, it is imperative that you keep in mind five points that are critical to the outcome of any decision(s) reached as to the exact date and time of Jesus and his disciples/apostles “Last Supper”:
.
Keep in mind” point 1 – The Hebrew concept of “time” with regards to the start of each day, the middle of each day and the end of each day along with the “hour-number” assigned to represent that “time”

For example, in the rendering of the Fourth Gospel (traditionally referred to as the Gospel of John although anonymous) in the 1995 "God's Word" Bible (and similarly but worded a little different - Weymouth’s New Testament) render the Greek phrase, "hora eimi hos hectos" at Jn 19:14 as:

Originally Posted By: Jn 19:14
"…six o'clock in the morning…"
.
This is an incorrect translation which creates entirely the wrong impression in the mind of a reader as to when the event being described actually occurred. What "hora eimi hos hectos" says is that "...it was the sixth hour", meaning of the Jewish day and close to Solar Noon, not "six o'clock in the morning" as rendered in the "God's Word" Bible.
.
Keep in mind” point 2 – While reading down through all of the material dealing with dates, times, and references to a “day of the week” (exempli gratia: Friday), such references do not reflect the usage of Jesus’ culture nor that of Rome in his time. Since the Roman calendar was originally lunar-based before being changed to solar-based, the phases of the moon were the foundation of a system of marking the progression of days through any given month. The first of the month (first quarter/crescent of the moon) was called “Kalens”, the half-disc “Nonae” and the full moon “Ides”. Remember the warning to Julius Caesar to “beware the Ides of March”? Caesar was assassinated March 15, 44 CE. The first lunar quarter occurred on March 14, the full moon on the 21st. Caesar's death occurred within the lunar phase to which the sage's warning had referred.

Additional comment as it may be applicable later: The recession of light from the moon’s surface was not marked. Although the months were "named" in the Roman calendar, the days of the month were not named as in today's calendar. The Romans referred to the day of the month as counted before the month to follow. For example – what we would call Monday the 15th of December the Romans would simply have called the eighteenth day before January. As mentioned earlier, this has led some translators to use a “day-name” (Friday or some other day-name) for a time not so named in scripture to try and help readers understand when a biblical writer was referring to a time or day being described in their language in their time.

Returning again to John 19:14 in the 1995 “God’s Word” Bible, we have an example of translators substituting the word “Friday” instead rendering from Greek into English what is actually written the Greek Text. Gr: ”de paraskeue ho pascha” has been rendered as "Friday" instead of “preparation of the Sabbath”. One presumes the decision to substitute “Friday” for “the preparation day” was meant to help a non-Jewish reader who might not be familiar with what the phrase “day of preparation” was describing. By substituting the day of the week "Friday", the translators place in the mind of the reader that it was the day before Saturday which is the Jewish Sabbath.

The point being made is not that on occasion such liberty in translation is unacceptable for clarity between ancient and modern usage. The problem is that when researching times, dates, etc., such as we are attempting to do here, any translator liberties taken can lead to errors in understanding such as previously demonstrated in the rendering of the sixth hour" at Jn 19:14 by at least two bible translating committees into "six o'clock in the morning".

Such mistranslation will result in a researcher reaching the wrong conclusion if he or she does not have at least some knowledge of the language in which the foundation material was written . For our purposes in this endeavor, every effort has been made to secure translation accuracy rather than simply accepting translations wherein interpretational substitution may have altered historic markers or timetables to which an ancient writer meant to refer but that were “lost in translation”.
.
”Keep in mind” point 3 – Determining the “end of day” has a critical role to play in determining “when” “The Last Supper” occurred.

The Pharisees judged “day's-end” as occurring between mid-afternoon (any time after solar noon) whereas for the Sadducees “day’s-end) occurred at “beyn ha'arbayim” (between-the-evenings) most frequently translated as twilight, dusk, or sunset. The Jewish Publication Society’s ”Tanakh” renders the phrase “twilight” at Ex 12:6 as does the New RSV, NAB, New Jerusalem Bible, New KJV, and the New International Version.
.
”Keep in mind” point 4 – and this cannot be overemphasized - is to remember that the start of all Jewish holidays (including modern day Passover) actually begins the evening before it appears on the Hebrew calendar

In other words (using Passover as an example), the "first" day of Passover is not shown on a Jewish calendar as beginning on Nisan 14 but on Nisan 15. Yet Nisan 14 is when the Hebrews, the Jews of Jesus' time and the Jews of today, gather to commemorate that first Passover “meal” the Hebrews prepared and consumed in haste on the eve of their exodus from Egypt.

So when the Hebrews huddled in their huts the night the Angel of YHWH passed through the land of Egypt striking all firstborn whose doorway was not marked with the blood of a lamb, the Passover was in progress not the Passover completed. This is an important point to remember as we draw down to a decision between Nisan 14 and Nisan 15 as the date of Passover. Expansion of this point follows in “Keep in mind” point 5 yet to come.

Take a “mind-break” for a moment…

Continue to keep in focus that the purpose of all this information and detail regarding the various systems of time measurement existent in Jesus’ day is because all of them were in daily use. The Jews (and therefore Jesus and his disciples) had to contend not only with their own calendar system (Lunar) of which there were two opposing positions regarding day-start, day-end (Sadducees and Pharisees), the Jews also had to deal with the Roman civil calendar (used for business, payment of taxes, etc.) as well as the Roman State calendar (in place for everything else, imperial matters, religious observances, listing of months, weeks, days, etc). The latter two calendars were required for the daily interaction of the Jewish citizens with the occupiers of their land. More discussion on this later and how it ultimately may explain the difference between the first three gospel accounts of the time of Jesus last hours and fourth gospel. More discussion of that possibility continues later.

There is yet another matter just to be aware of when reading references to the first month of the Hebrew calendar.

Before the destruction of the second temple in 70 CE, the beginning of each month in the Hebrew calendar was “observational” even with the exilic-period incorporation of the Babylonian LuniSolar calendar format by Sanhedrin president Hillel II.

The beginning of each month based upon the observation of the first visible illumination of the moon’s surface. Gradually, as they had during the Babylonian captivity, the Jews increasingly incorporated the Roman civil calendar and State calendars (Julian) into their daily lives again no doubt to help in keeping track of doing business with the Romans, taxes, etc.
.
”Keep in mind" point 5 – and this one will be a stunning thought to many. The annual observance of “Passover” is to occur only on Nisan 14 according to the Hebrew Text. Nisan 15 begins the Festival of Unleavened Bread lasting seven days thereafter but that festival, although it immediately follows the Passover is not a continuation of “Passover”. The observation of Passover is for one “day”, beginning at dusk and ending the following dusk, one day and one day only, Nisan 14!

The question some readers are probably asking at this moment is “Wait a minute, don’t the Jews celebrate Passover from the 15th to the 21st of the month of Nisan?”.

Yes, they do – but calling the entire festival “Passover” is something that has apparently occurred over the centuries with the gradual blending of the “Passover” with the Feast of Unleavened Bread because the one follows the other. Referring to the fifth day after Nisan 14 as “Passover”, for example, would have been unknown to the Hebrews of Moses’ day because that “fifth day” would be in the middle of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, not Passover. The practice of showing "Passover" on the Jewish calendar beginning on Nisan 15 through Nisan 21 may have become "tradition", but with that it seems the Jews have forgotten the very clear demarcation between the two observances as noted in Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Exodus as follow.

In support of this point, consider exactly what Numbers 9:3,5 states (with emphasis added by this writer):

Originally Posted By: Tanakh, Numbers 9:3,5
”In the fourteenth day of this month, at dusk, ye shall keep it in its appointed season; according to all the statutes of it, and according to all the ordinances thereof, shall ye keep it.' – and verse 5 – “And they kept the passover in the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at dusk, in the wilderness of Sinai; according to all that HaShem commanded Moses, so did the children of Israel.”

.
Note the combination of the words “all” in conjunction with how long Passover was to be observed – not one day before Nisan 14, not one day afterwards because “afterward” begins a different albeit contiguous festival was begun.

Now add to your review of Numbers 9:3,5 exactly what Leviticus 23: 5,6 says in support of the position taken in “critical point” #5:
Originally Posted By: Tanakh, Lev 23:5,6
“In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at dusk, is HaShem'S Passoverand verse 5 – “And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto HaShem; seven days ye shall eat unleavened bread”
.

To review then – Passover begins “at dusk” on Nisan 14 and continues until the following dusk. Going back to the “critical point” #4, however, you will find that on today’s Jewish calendars “Passover” is shown as beginning on Nisan 15 instead of on Nisan 14 only. If there is confusion on the part of readers at this point in the post, this is why.

The “exodus” of the Hebrews from Egypt did not begin until daylight of Nisan 15 which by then Passover was over! What has apparently happened (about which the Jews themselves seem not to be thinking about), is what might be described as the culturally-based phenomenon of “combining” one or more events into one usage (a sort of “cultural-shorthand” if you will).

“Blending together” the preparations by the Hebrews for the Angel of YHWH’s “Passover” on Nisan 14 with the Festival of Unleavened Bread beginning the day after on Nisan 15 and calling it “Passover”, is what is causing any confusion being felt by readers of this point. While this practice may have become “Tradition” (now of long standing), it never-the-less does not adhere to instructions found in the Torah clearly setting up the two events as distinct, one from the other. In saying that, this writer implies no criticism of the Jews on this matter because it surely was neither with conscious nor deliberate intent to call the Festival of Unleavened Bread “Passover”. This writer presumes the practice occurred over a long period of time.

The Jews still very much recognize the night of Nisan 14 regarding its historic content but as demonstrated by their own calendars, they no longer correctly differentiate between “Passover” the night the Angel of YHWH passed through the land and the next day’s journey out Egypt. Now think about the Festival of Unleavened Bread which begins on Nisan 15. Doesn't it fall into place to have the flight from Egypt be remembered framed around unleavened bread? During those days in the deserts and mountains on the move every day, camping at night with only the simplest cooking arrangements (no brick ovens), when would the Hebrews had time to add leaven to their bread and allow it to rise and bake off?? The “Bread of Haste” eaten on Nisan 14 became in a sense “Bread of The Trek” (no sarcasm intended) beginning Nisan 15 and beyond as they walked into the desert. This “Feast of Unleavened Bread” then, provides the basis for remembering the hardships endured by the Hebrews after the Passover freed them from Egyptian bondage on Nisan 14 but they had not yet arrived in the “land of milk and honey”.

Tying it all together to come when time permits...and...Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:31 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#344976 - 01/01/09 08:10 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Oh my goodness! smile
That's a lot to get through ~ but I'll try! smile

I wonder if it would be better, now, in the ''Religious Research section?? What do you think, Grrr82CU?
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#346384 - 01/11/09 03:58 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
What are your responses to Grrr82CU's thoughts on these questions about 'The Last Supper'?

Quote:
Why were they there??
What was so special that Jesus had planned for a long time to gather with his disciples on that night for that meal??
Does any of that matter in relation to the issue of Leonardo's painting and the intense debate over The Da Vinci Code??
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#360609 - 04/09/09 07:45 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Greetings all...

On this annual observance of the departure of the Hebrews from captivity in Egypt following a night of terror for the Egyptians and a night of hurried preparation for their flight by the Hebrews, we remember that Jesus and his disciple/apostles were also mindful of their preparation to observe this yearly event known simply as “Passover” (Mt 26:17; Mk 14:12). What is not so simple as any who have grappled with or researched “when” the NT account of their last meal together actually occurred can attest, although we know the day of the week since the gospel accounts are in agreement that it was a Friday (Mk 15:42; Lk 23:54; Jn 19:14), we simply have no written nor oral record passed down to us that provides the year of “The Last Supper”.

Everywhere on the internet and in books are presentations advancing this year and that year for Jesus’ last meal, albeit all within a very narrow range of dates selected. Some advocate 29 C.E., some 30 C.E., others the year 33 and a few as late as to 36 C.E. All are based upon decisions reached after collecting together the complex evidences that do exist and like the individual pieces of a quilt, must be sewn together to reach a final form.

Once assembled, these factors are sifted, juxtaposed, extrapolated, compared with other alternative possible evidences and otherwise evaluated from every perspective. The hope is to discover if the combined material indicates a definable “X Marks The Spot” conclusion or decision point. The ideal result would be the identification of a single year that could be viewed as the best fit given every scenario, one that would accommodate a progression of “rule-in, rule-out” choices made during the examination/evaluation process. At worst, it is hoped that such research results in a minimum of choices between two or three probable years rather a less defined range of mulitple possibilities which would leave the researcher more or less back where he or she began.

In this pursuit of the year of Jesus’ “Last Supper”, a number of “time-markers” must be considered in attempting to arrive at the year it occurred. As presented in this writer’s Post #322229, 08/24/08, Part 1, one such group of “markers” are the administrations of the Jewish High Priest, Caiaphas, The Prefect of Judea, Pontius Pilate, Tetrarch of Galilee and Perea, Herod Antipatros, all of which are named in the NT in relation to Jesus’ last days.

The start and end of each man’s tenure was listed in the previously noted entry (Post #322229, 08/24/08, Part 1) and upon examination found to coincide with the NT account that they were all involved in some way in the arrest, trial, and execution of Jesus. This fact in turn narrows the range-of-years within which “The Last Supper” could have occurred.

With all of this emphasis upon determining the “year” of Jesus’ death, it should be said that what is even more challenging is to determine whether the “The Last Supper” was actually held on Passover (Nisan 14). Attempting to select the “right answer” from the possible choices of Nisan 13, Nisan 14, or Nisan 15, cannot begin without first knowing the year – which is why focusing on identifying the year of Jesus’ death is very important to the outcome of identifying the day of the week he died which we concluded (from paragraph one) was on a Friday.

What follows then is to determine the range of dates Nisan 14 falls on a Friday. As with almost every calendar system the "date" of each period remains constant but the day of the week it falls upon each year varies. This is one of the reasons why you will find arguments for different years ranging between 29 C.E. and 36 C. E. all over the internet and in print because Nisan 14 falls on a Friday in more than one year.

To break away for just a moment from discussion about the collection, collation, review, and selection process of materials seeking to identify the year of “The Last Supper”, remember the originating post of this series posited the question as to whether or not Leonard da Vinci painted his version of that event correctly. It has already been documented in this forum that the food Leonardo painted was not that required for a Passover meal (also discussed in Post #322229, 08/24/08, Part 1).

What we are now pursuing is trying to determine first the year of Jesus’ last meal with his disciples/apostles and if that is successfully accomplished, the next step (and a much more difficult one) is to try and determine whether or not it was held on Nisan 14 (the annual date of the first and all subsequent Passover observances) versus a different day of say Nisan 13 or 15. Associated with that search are the questions:

  1. Did Jesus knowing of his imminent capture, trial, and death hold a Passover-Like observance on a day other than Nisan 14 or was it on the Passover” (Nisan 14)?
  2. If “The Last Supper” was held on a day different than Nisan 14, could (not would) the food Jesus and his disciple/apostles used still have conformed to the dietary regimen of Passover if it was the roasted lamb and unleavened bread required even though the meal was not held on the “real” Passover (Nisan 14)?
  3. Or – did those gathered eat something else such as painted by Leonardo in the form of fish and leavened bread and just let it be a substitute for Passover given the probability that Jesus would be dead before the “real” Passover occurred?
What is ultimately determined as the answer to these questions (and more) will provide either a “yes” or “no” response to the topic’s title, “Leonardo’s Painting – Fatally Flawed?”

First to address the question, "If the food required to be served in a Passover Meal was observed but on another night, would it satisfy the requirements of being a "Passover" even though not held on Nisan 14?"

Simply stated – No

It would have no standing as being an acceptable application as a Passover Meal because (1) the ceremonial slaughter of the lamb at the Temple would not have been carried out by the Temple priests on any day other than the “Day of Preparation” (2) the arrangement under the Law for holding a Passover on a day other than Nisan 14 due to someone being ceremonially unclean and/or because of traveling would not apply since neither of those criteria would be in effect regarding Jesus or his disciple/apostles (see Numbers 9:10-11).

As to the next hypothesis that Jesus and his followers met on a day that was not Nisan 14 and viewed it as a substitute, “Passover-Like” replacement would be to ignore both the question Jesus was asked by his disciples regarding Passover preparation (Mt 26:17) and again his own statement regarding his desire to share what he knew was going to be his final Passover with his disciple/apostles (Lk 22:15). Finally, Jesus stated that he had no intention of not following the Law (Mt 5:17) which leads us to the most certain reason he and his followers did not elect to observe Passover on a day other than Nisan 14.

Anyone arbitrarily deciding to observe Passover on a day other than Nisan 14 (the "appointed day") would be ostracized and cast out based upon Numbers 9:13. There is simply no way that Jesus, given all that he said regarding his anticipation of sharing Passover with his disiples/apostles as well as not coming to tear down the Law, would have elected not to observe Passover on Nisan 14, regardless of his advance knowledge of what was about to happen to him. Neither would he have endangered his followers by having them participate in something that would have them condemned according to the conditions set forth in Number 9:13.

So we must look elsewhere for the correct answer to the question of when did Jesus and his followers meet for “The Last Supper” rather than to be enticed into believing the arguments advanced by some that they met on a day other than the actual "appointed day" of Nisan 14. As evidenced by the preceding considerations, there is simply no reason to believe that Jesus would even have considered observing Passover on any day other than Nisan 14 as required by The Law.

Before we can begin to examine the evidences of what calendar “date” (not day-of-the-week) the Last Supper occurred, we must first identify the year. Without knowing what year this event occurred, the chances of identifying the calendar date are greatly diminished.

Why?

Because the “calendar date” of Nisan 14 is dictated by the lunar calendar of the Jews so although it will fall on a different “day-of-the-week” each year, the "date" (Nisan 14) remains "date-certain' because it is based upon the phases of moon. Nisan 14, therefore, is always accompanied by a "full moon". Again as previously noted in paragraph one, the gospel accounts all agree that the day-of-the-week this Nisan 14 fell on was a Friday. More on the years Nisan 14 fell on a Friday to come.

To begin the process of identifying the year of Jesus death – a review of events that narrows the timeframe of his last days down to a range of “probable” years in which his death occurred.

First, the NT account of his early years state that Jesus was taken away from the harm planned by Herod the Great pursuant to a warning given to his family by an angel (Matthew 2:15). After fleeing Judea, Jesus and his family remained in Egypt until Herod’s death in 4 B.C.E. after ruling for 34 years beginning in 37 B.C.E. Examination of one specific accomplishment by Herod the Great will help us in our quest to eventually develop a range of dates for the year Jesus died as the consideration of all pertinent material progresses.

The Jewish historian, Josephus, relates that Herod’s great project of rebuilding the Temple began in the 18th year of his reign (Josephus, Annals, 15.380). The 18th year of Herod’s administration equates to the year 20/19 B.C.E.**

**Remember there is no “0” year when calculating between a date beginning before the Christian Era (in B.C.E.) that continues into the Christian Era (C.E.) so utilizing either 20 B.C.E. or 19 B.C.E. does not drastically affect the accuracy of the calculation of any resulting later date. Historically speaking, although there is no “0” year between 1 B.C.E. and 1 C.E. the practical fact remains that the passage of twelve months are still in play. To begin a calculation of the “date” of an event that occurred in December of 1 B.C.E. as to the interval between that and April 2 C.E. is not one year but four months. The passage of time, however, “looks” like one year because such calculations do not account for “when” in the midst of a year-of-months an event occurred. Some attempt to counter such difficulty by inserting a “0” year into the calculation but this yields an inaccurate measure of time elapsed. There is no “0” year, for example, between 1 B.C.E. and 1 C.E.

To return to examining the work started on restoring the Temple by Herod the Great, taking the end view first, all work was not completed in the forty-six years the Scribes used in the argument with Jesus as recounted in the Fourth Gospel, Chapter 2, verses 18-20 (attributed to John). However the Temple was completed to the stage of being fully functional and in daily use so the “time marker” of the end of a forty-six year period that began in Herod the Great’s 18th year serves our purpose in seeking to identify the year the discussion between the Scribes and Jesus took place.

Calculating forty-six years of temple construction from the 18th year (19 B.C.E.) of Herod the Great’s administration we arrive at between late 28 C.E. to early/middle of 29 C.E. Correspondingly, this would be the year Jesus began his public ministry at “about thirty years of age” according to the account in the Third Gospel Chapter 3 verse 23 (attributed to the Luke).

Is there another but separate basis for calculating the time Jesus began his ministry?

Yes - but presentation of that information and "the rest of the story" will have to wait because this writer is out of time.

And...Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:31 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#360636 - 04/10/09 05:56 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
This brief entry to correct something.

The statement...

Quote:
"To begin a calculation of the “date” of an event that occurred in December of 1 B.C.E. as to the interval between that and April 2 C.E. is not one year but four months."

...is incorrect and resulted from this writer experimenting with different year-dates seeking to create an example that would clearly illustrate the matter of no "0" year between 1 B.C.E. and 1 C.E.

It was thought that perhaps a longer time span might better illustrate the matter so the year 2 C.E. was used during composition. Before posting the entry, however, 2 C.E. should have been changed back to 1 C.E. so the year would have matched the time elapsed illustration. With the additional changes now added into the following correction, the illustration will hopefully be better as follows:

Quote:
"Looking at a typical calculation of the interval of time between two dates such as typified by one beginning in late December of 1 B.C.E. and lasting until early April 1 C.E., the elapsed time is not one year as would commonly be described with a statement something like "...lasting from 1 B.C.E. to 1 C.E." The actual time elapsed would be four months (give or take unspecified elapsed days in both December and April). So the duration of the event was not a "year" lasting from 1 B.C.E. to 1 C.E. but only four months long."

.Please insert this corrected entry in substitution of what appears in the post.

The focus on this issue is because when adding historic dates together as was done regarding Herod the Great's beginning of the work to rebuild the Temple with the elapsed time of forty-six years mentioned in the NT exchange between Jesus and the Jews (among them perhaps scribes and the merchants he drove out of the temple) to arrive at the year of that discussion, the result of one or the other returns (such as 28 C.E. or 29 C.E.) can appear to be "out-of-sync" with other known historical markers.

If one year (e.g.28 C.E) is used in a calculation in preference to another (29 C.E. or vice versa) to derive the year of Jesus' "Last Supper" and following death, the return will obviously be two different years - at least one of which will not match other required factors such as requiring the lunar record of Nisan 14 (accompanied by a full moon) to fall on a Friday in 32 C.E. to coincide with the NT description of the day-of-the-week upon which it actually fell.

This illustration highlights the difficulty that can be experienced when calculating spans of time between dates that cross over from B.C.E. to C.E. resulting from no "0" year in the calculation. More detail regarding why 29 C.E. rather than 28 C.E. is the better fit for basing the upcoming calculation of the year of Jesus' "Last Supper" and death in the next entry...when time permits.

Hopefully this explanation is more helpful than confusing as future entries continue to pursue the process of identifying the year of Jesus' death though the application and comparison of these historical markers.

And...Grrr82CU smile


Edited by Lisa Shea (12/29/12 11:31 PM)
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#360639 - 04/10/09 06:39 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Thank you, Grrr82CU. smile
That's very interesting.

When I have time, I should like to look at it again, in conjunction with some books I have.

It's very complex ~ you must have spent a long time working on this.Have you sent your work to a publisher for consideration?

I think that it might be good to put it to a larger audience than the one you have here smile
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#397933 - 03/28/10 05:48 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Giornale Offline
Member

Registered: 03/26/10
Posts: 42
Loc: Planes, Trains & Automobiles -...
Grrr82CU

This is very challenging reading as "PDM" observed which is to say - detailed and complex.

You seem to be building towards presenting the actual day and year that Christ died according to your calculations and interpretation of information you have assembled. I have read other's presentations of this topic. Yours is very interesting, and you actually seem to have all the "building blocks" necessary (or very nearly) to form your final conclusions.

It has been a long time since you have posted any new "chapters" and perhaps I speak for others in saying that I would like to see more.

When are going to resume or finish your presentation of this very intriguing subject?

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#397937 - 03/28/10 07:22 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Giornale]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Welcome Giornale smile
I hope that you will enjoy the forum smile
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#398552 - 04/06/10 12:12 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Lisa Shea Online   content


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 8819
Loc: US
I want to advise some caution in making too many inferences based on what was painted in this one particular painting. For example, Leonardo painted everyone on one side of the table. In reality they would have sat on both sides of the table. He only put them on one side to "make the painting work". So there could easily be other facts that he deliberately altered for aesthetic reasons rather than hard core realism reasons.
_________________________
Lisa Shea, Owner

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#402000 - 06/04/10 07:26 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
gluckrevolutioni Offline
New Member

Registered: 06/04/10
Posts: 3
This night was the literal end of meals for Our Lord. And in it he showed us another way that we might 'eat'. Perhaps Easter is an event where we should eat sparingly and not gorge ourselves.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#405426 - 10/20/10 02:10 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: gluckrevolutioni]
Lisa Shea Online   content


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 8819
Loc: US
Well technically the whole period UP to Easter is about fasting - so you've already spent a dedicated period of time to fasting, as you head into Easter. Easter then is about gratitude for being able to provide your body with food again. I agree that you shouldn't be a glutton though.
_________________________
Lisa Shea, Owner

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#408310 - 01/15/11 03:44 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Lisa Shea Online   content


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 8819
Loc: US
It's impressive to me how many people are still visiting this thread to learn from it! I'm curious, if you're a new visitor, please join us and let us know what enticed you to read about this topic!
_________________________
Lisa Shea, Owner

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#411042 - 03/03/11 11:42 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
jilly Offline


Best Friend

Registered: 07/07/08
Posts: 1766
Loc: Asheville, NC
It makes sense. It's not like interest in the painting will get stale. smile
_________________________
Jilly
LisaShea.com Forum Moderator
Frugal Living Editor at BellaOnline.com
App owner - RunPee.com - to help you find the best movie breaks smile

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#417854 - 09/13/11 07:06 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
It's been a very long time since I have posted in this forum. A long-running battle with recurring "C" has been the primary drain on energy and the time necessary to tie all the threads of thought/investigation into this complex subject to a conclusion.

The desire to do so is still present - and hope to be able to do that at some point in the future for the enjoyment of those who have visited this topic in such numbers (never anticipated) to which I would like to say a simple "thank you" for the interest.

PDM - I miss our exchanges. Don't know when I will be back but hope to at some future time. Convey to your friend Lisa and our host - that the website she has updated since I last visited looks Grrr8 smile
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#417857 - 09/13/11 04:44 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Hello Grrr82CU smile

It's Grrr82CU again!

I am very sorry to hear of your problems and look foreard to seeing you back on the forum whenever you are ready ~ feeling fit well and full of energy, I hope.

All the very best!!! smile
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#419870 - 11/03/11 05:36 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
Hello friend PDM smile

I have moved to another state and am digging through everything wanting to reassemble all the materials I had collected for this project and then try to "get my head into where I was" when I was writing all of this way back when.

I'm a little surprised at the interest this still generates. I wish the distracting and unrelated-to-the topic exchanges with the multiple-personalitied "Nanango" weren't mixed in with my installments relative to the title of the thread. For the first time visitor, having to plow through all my exchanges with "Nanango" which were totally unrelated to the topic of "Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw?" must make it difficult to follow the sequencing and progression through the complex material I have tried to pull together to expand on this subject.

You no doubt remember "Nanango" wherein you and I became aware that more than one person was posting under that user name because of the back and forth "stylistic differences" between posts. I believe you ultimately determined he/they were all part of that group "researching" Leonardo's use of "hidden images underneath his painting of The Last Supper which they believed using X-Ray and other imaging equipment was supposedly going to reveal. I never saw any coverage of their "discoveries" so....

Anyway, I'm sure you remember that it gradually became apparent to both of us that he/they were never interested in the underlying topic of this thread - only in promoting their own agenda. I also remember that at the same time he/they were posting their exchanges with me in this thread they were also inserting the same material throughout the DaVinci forum into other's titles as well.

In any case, I know you admonished them to post responses pursuant to the topic of the thread (and they kind of faded quitely away) but I still wish all those unrelated exchanges were not mixed in. As noted above, it must make trying to follow the progression of various stages of the information (specific to "Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw") as it was developed and posted more difficult. Heck, it was difficult for me to stay on track having to break context in trying to be polite and respond to what they were insering!

So I wanted to reply to this last entry of yours (and thank you for the well wishes. Some progress to that end has been made). I'm hopefull that once all the dust from this move and medical stuff settles I can start working on this again to tie up all the loose ends and bring it to a conclusion.

Lot's to reassemble and perhaps even more challenging - get my head back into all the complexitis and "spread-all-across-the-landscape" underlying documentation that has been lying fallow all this intervening time.

Hope you are well and all things are good for you and our host Lisa.
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#419874 - 11/03/11 08:05 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Hi Grrr82CU and thank you smile
Hope things are going well.

Have you considered publishing your thoughts on this subject ~ either online or in print?
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#419876 - 11/03/11 08:56 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: PDM]
Grrr82CU Offline
Companion

Registered: 09/04/07
Posts: 100
Loc: Chicago, IL
smile the draft and supporting foundation material is on the way to the Copyright Office.

Much still to do however to re-connect what few little grey cells I have remaining with all the stacks of backgroud material I used thus far and more that needs to be added and "woven into the plot" before I will feel prepared to re-start the work needed to "finish this thing" (which of course I initially want to do where it started - right here).

Tks for the encouragement!
_________________________
Thanks For Visiting !!

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#419879 - 11/04/11 09:32 AM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
PDM Offline


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 12/16/04
Posts: 22788
Loc: UK
Good luck, Grrr82CU ! smile
_________________________
"The secret of success is constancy to purpose" - Benjamin Disraeli.

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Del.icio.us Digg Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Yahoo My Web Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Google Bookmarks Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Stumbleupon Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Reddit
#420090 - 11/13/11 12:51 PM Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? [Re: Grrr82CU]
Lisa Shea Online   content


True Blue Soulmate

Registered: 10/20/04
Posts: 8819
Loc: US
Grrr82CU -

I'm curious, did you submit it electronically or did you actually send in a physical copy? I aim to do everything electronically nowadays, it seems to be much quicker!
_________________________
Lisa Shea, Owner

Top

Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Twitter Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to Facebook Add Re: Leonardo's Painting - A Fatal Flaw ?? to MySpace