Da Vinci was gay. Leonardo da Vinci: personal life. Sophie Chauveau - Leonardo da Vinci - The lives of remarkable people - Why is there so much unfinished

22.06.2019

Other scientists believe that the issue lies in the peculiarities of the author’s artistic style. Allegedly, Leonardo applied paints in such a special way that the face of Mona Lisa is constantly changing.

Many insist that the artist depicted himself in a female form on the canvas, which is why such a strange effect was obtained. One scientist even discovered symptoms of idiocy in Mona Lisa, citing disproportionate fingers and lack of flexibility in her hand. But, according to the British doctor Kenneth Keel, the portrait conveys the peaceful state of a pregnant woman.

There is also a version that the artist, who was allegedly bisexual, painted his student and assistant Gian Giacomo Caprotti, who was next to him for 26 years. This version is supported by the fact that Leonardo da Vinci left this painting as an inheritance when he died in 1519.

They say... ...that it is the Mona Lisa model great artist owes his death. That many hours of grueling sessions with her exhausted the great master, since the model herself turned out to be a bio-vampire. They still talk about this today. As soon as the picture was painted, the great artist was gone.

6) Creating a fresco " Last Supper"Leonardo da Vinci searched for a very long time ideal models. Jesus must embody Good, and Judas, who decided to betray him at this meal, is Evil.

Leonardo da Vinci interrupted his work many times, going in search of sitters. One day while listening church choir, he saw in one of the young singers a perfect image of Christ and, inviting him to his workshop, made several sketches and studies from him.

Three years have passed. The Last Supper was almost completed, but Leonardo never found a suitable model for Judas. The cardinal, who was in charge of painting the cathedral, hurried the artist, demanding that the fresco be completed as soon as possible.

And then, after a long search, the artist saw a man lying in a gutter - young, but prematurely decrepit, dirty, drunk and ragged. There was no longer time for sketches, and Leonardo ordered his assistants to take him straight to the cathedral. With great difficulty they dragged him there and put him on his feet. The man did not really understand what was happening and where he was, but Leonardo da Vinci captured on canvas the face of a man mired in sins. When he finished his work, the beggar, who by this time had already come to his senses a little, approached the canvas and shouted:

– I’ve already seen this picture before!

- When? - Leonardo was surprised. – Three years ago, before I lost everything. At that time, when I sang in the choir, and my life was full of dreams, some artist painted Christ from me...

7) Leonardo had the gift of foresight. In 1494, he made a series of notes that paint pictures of the world to come, many of them have already come true, and others are coming true now.

“People will talk to each other from the most distant countries and answer each other” - we are undoubtedly talking about the telephone here.

“People will walk and not move, they will talk to someone who is not there, they will hear someone who does not speak” - television, tape recording, sound reproduction.

“You will see yourself falling from great heights without any harm to you” - obviously skydiving.

8) But Leonardo da Vinci also has mysteries that baffle researchers. Maybe you can solve them?

“People will throw away from their own homes the supplies that were meant to keep them alive.”

"For the most part male will not be allowed to reproduce, since their testes will be taken away."

Do you want to learn even more about Da Vinci and bring his ideas to life?

Leonardo da Vinci's famous fresco "The Last Supper" (1495–1497) was painted on the wall of the refectory of the Dominican monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. Long recognized best work master, it became an object of mass pilgrimage after the publication of Dan Brown's book "The Da Vinci Code" in 2003.

Dan Brown explodes with his interpretation of the painting Christian tradition. In the fresco, the writer of the bestseller saw some secret meaning, intentionally put into it by the artist. Brown claims that to the right of Jesus, da Vinci depicted not the Apostle John, as was previously believed, but Mary Magdalene, and not just as a companion of Christ, but as his wife. In the space between Jesus and Magdalene he sees an encrypted Latin V (in red) - a symbol feminine. And together their figures seem to form an M (in green) - the sign of Mary Magdalene. The intrigue of the novel lies in the fact that Mary allegedly had a child from Jesus, who was taken to Marseille and became the founder of the French Merovingian dynasty, which lost the throne in the 8th century. Since that time, there has been a closed alliance that keeps this secret, whose members strive to return power to the dynasty of Jesus. A little to the left is a hand with a knife (in a red circle), which, according to the writer, does not belong to any of the apostles and symbolizes forces hostile to the Merovingians. On the right, he was interested in the raised finger of Thomas - a gesture that canonical iconography allegedly endowed only John the Baptist (if this is so, then it turns out that another apostle disappeared from the picture, and John the Baptist turned out to be resurrected, taking part in the whole story). However, behind Brown's fabrications there is only ignorance of the canons and rich imagination.

Thus, the iconographic type of the Apostle John has always been distinguished by a certain femininity, and there are many paintings where he is depicted as in Leonardo. The letters V and M (in black) can be placed throughout the picture, as well as other “ciphers”, for example, the letter W (in black) - in Christian iconography a symbol of a hermaphrodite. There is also no doubt that the hand with the knife belongs to Peter: this knife is present in the gospel stories. And a raised finger is a universal gesture of calling as a witness to the heavenly powers.

While Leonardo was writing, his work was supervised daily by the prior of the monastery, and he would, of course, pay attention to any liberties in the interpretation of the New Testament. In any case, we have no grounds to assert that he was also in secret alliance supporters of the Merovingians. Da Vinci's fresco is not at all interesting because of its false mystical secret writing. In fact, this is the first depiction of the Passover meal where the apostles are not represented as frozen extras. The author created a drama painting, a painting that conveys the students’ lively reaction to the Teacher’s words: “One of you will betray me” (this is the moment captured on the fresco). But how could this reaction be conveyed in a fresco? There is no way around this without a gesture. Sign language was well developed in the canonical tradition, but da Vinci greatly expanded its “vocabulary.” “The Last Supper” is full of canonical symbolism, however, many of the characters’ gestures are Leonardo’s discoveries, which were subsequently copied by other artists as ready-made iconic forms.

Jesus. Here is pure canon: the thumb of his right hand touches the tablecloth, the rest are raised. This is a traditional gesture of regret: Christ is saddened that his words led the apostles into such confusion. Left hand lies palm up - a sign of inner peace and agreement with the will of the Father.

John. The fingers of the stunned apostle are convulsively clasped. After Leonardo, this gesture began to mean passivity, contemplation, self-absorption, and inability to take active action.

Judas. As treasurer of the community right hand he clutches his wallet. With his left hand, with which the apostle seems to be defending himself, he knocks over the salt shaker: in Christianity and many other cultures it is a sign of trouble.

Peter, standing up, asks John: who, in his opinion, does the Teacher mean (this is Leonardo’s own interpretation). He is filled with anger and sorrow, and as a man of action, Peter clutches a knife in his right hand to punish the apostate. With this knife he will then cut off the ear of one of the guards who came to arrest Christ.

Andrey He clasped his hands, so amazed were he by the Teacher’s words. Critics agree that this gesture reflects the directness and spontaneity of his nature (it is not for nothing that he is the First-Called): the apostle sincerely does not understand how it is even possible to commit betrayal.

James the Younger, as Leonardo explained in one of his letters, what worries him most is the knife that Peter grabbed. With his left hand he touches Peter’s back in order to moderate his ardor.

Bartholomew leaned his whole body towards Christ. He - this is the interpretation of most critics - cannot comprehend what Jesus said.

Thomas. Raising his finger, he calls God the Father as a witness. This gesture is quite canonical. It can mean both the inevitability of God’s will and a reproach sent to Heaven for indifference to the fate of Christ.

Jacob the Elder He spread his hands in horror. He is as passionate as Peter, but Leonardo wants to show that his hero's emotions do not result in action, but in an inner cry.

Philip. Figures with the same hands pressed to the chest can be found in many medieval paintings. This meant assurance of love.

Simon. The most reasonable of the apostles. His hands seem to say: “This cannot be” - a reaction, according to researchers, similar to Andrei’s reaction, but more restrained, coming from the mind, and not from feeling.

Matthew- the most emotional of the apostles. Leonardo, art critics say, portrayed him as proving to Simon that betrayal is quite possible. With a gesture, he seems to call on Christ to once again confirm his words.

Thaddeus. His hand froze in a gesture that usually verified the truth of what was said. Thaddeus suspects one of his dinner companions of betrayal. It is believed that da Vinci portrayed himself in the image of Thaddeus.

Well, everything is clear and, in general, not even surprising. With such perfect symmetry of both hemispheres of the brain. Although, even among people with such a “genetic anomaly,” such a masterly conscious division of the activity of the nervous commands of the right and left hemispheres is considered a rarity and a special advantage.

Chapter 11 DOLL OF DESTINY

I don’t even know whether the contents of the previous chapter can be considered as a body of evidence. I put forward a very risky assumption in order to immediately accept even the most convincing evidence. We will have to temporarily put off sensational conclusions and check everything again. Only from a slightly different angle.
Leonardo could work 24 hours a day.
So far we have discussed exclusively the innate qualities of Leonardo da Vinci. Now let’s try to put his character, hobbies and what is now called “under the magnifying glass of truth.” leisure" That is, we, of course, already understood that this man worked like a clockwork hare 24 hours a day. But it is impossible to assume that he never rested or had fun.
Leonardo had absolutely no personal life.
There is another layer of secrecy that, if removed, would greatly simplify our investigation. True, in a very indirect way. The fact is that a person who decided to inquire how Leonardo da Vinci fared in such an important part of any human destiny, how personal life, the presence of a loved one and, finally, family and children (even illegitimate ones), will face a hollow and almost absolute emptiness.
The unpleasant story that happened to the young Leonardo back in his homeland in Tuscany and which significantly tarnished his reputation over the centuries is, of course, a weighty argument in favor of the policy of hushing up this part of the genius’s life, but evidence of, let’s say, unconventional orientation is quite difficult to completely hide. Which doctrine, by the way, is confirmed by the emerging story of the failed trial. And it turns out that this accusation of dubious authenticity is almost the only documentary evidence of at least some kind of personal life of da Vinci. It was this state of affairs that allowed the gay movement to modern world elevate this brilliant man to the rank of your icon. This, they say, is what kind of people are “with us.” It's funny, by God.
The modern gay movement has not entirely justifiably elevated Leonardo to the rank of its icon.
It would also be nice to try to clarify one more point, which for some reason very rarely raises questions among people who are interested in the legacy of the personality of Leonardo da Vinci, which is strange, because this point is very important and can shed a fair amount of light on such a controversial nature. Moreover, in our case, he will serve as a guide for further progress along the path of truth. We are talking about the degree of da Vinci’s religiosity, if any was characteristic of him at all. And it is the history of the genius’s relationship with the most “ideologically strong” organization of that time that will lead us in further investigation.
As for leisure and entertainment, there is not much evidence here either. But I’ll start with the one that sincerely pleased me, amused me and gave me, despite its insignificance, a very vivid idea of what this unusual person was unusual feeling humor. I concede locally on the pages of this book to Giorgio Vasari. This is the one who apparently had problems with humor.
He attached to a lizard, found by a gardener working in the Belvedere vineyard, and which had a very strange appearance, wings filled with mercury. When the lizard moved, its wings fluttered as it walked. He also gave her eyes, horns and a beard, after which he tamed her and kept her in a box. All the friends he showed it to were frightened and ran away in fear.
Well written. I imagined this picture very vividly! Leonardo laughing and his respectable visitors retreating to the doors in panic. Da Vinci's imagination was clearly fine. The modern ones who created horror films are, in comparison, poor copyists of other people's ideas.
Everything else that I managed to unearth in connection with the “leisure” of the great man is not so funny, but very, very non-trivial. Let's call on Vasari for help:
In one room he installed blacksmith bellows and attached animal intestines to them at one end. Inflating them through bellows, he filled the entire room, which was very large, with them. Those people who were in the room had to hide in a corner. He showed these people how transparent and airy intestines, which previously occupied very little space, became huge, arguing that this also happens with human talents.
...In Rome, he prepared a wax paste, from which he made tiny animals during walks, which were filled with air inside. When air was blown into them, the figures flew up, and when the air came out of them, they fell to the ground.
The later biographer of Leonardo da Vinci, who lived almost two hundred years after the death of the genius, the Frenchman Michel Tregny, is worthy of all respect, because he did a colossal amount of work to obtain and then process the testimony of his contemporaries about Leonardo, after which he wrote a small one, but consisting exclusively of reliable facts monograph. So, in this work of a French researcher, a very interesting observation is given, which gives the most clear idea of da Vinci’s character.
Wanting to please and amuse his acquaintances, Leonardo da Vinci constantly came up with some new things and devices. A lion made of wood that could walk a few steps and reveal its chest filled with lilies, or a flock of iron birds that could fly. But contrary to the feelings he expected in people, with his crafts he evoked not fun at all, but some kind of almost superstitious fear in the people who saw them. Without giving up his attempts, over time, he became at first indifferent to the feelings his crafts aroused in people, and then completely abandoned their production. At the same time, when asked to make some kind of toy, he replied that if you make a likeness of a living one not for fun, but for the sake of simple curiosity, then it is blasphemous and unworthy of a person.
Original statement. Something tells me that behind these seemingly meaningless words there is some kind of thought that has been suffered and thought out more than once. So, with rest, everything is more or less clear. It's time to move on to the issue of personal life.
It's complete darkness here. Not even a single love letter. Not a single direct indication from contemporaries and later biographers of the presence of at least some kind of heartfelt affection. In principle, almost nothing but guesswork and assumptions made clearly at random. Not a single scandalous story. But this man worked at the courts of the most brilliant European ruling dynasties. He was constantly surrounded by beautiful and well-groomed women. But he himself was very handsome man!
Somewhat angry at this turn of events, I, having overcome some internal barrier, tried to scour the Internet on sites belonging to movements for non-traditional sexual orientation, thinking that perhaps these people were so desperate to count Leonardo da Vinci among their like-minded people that they were ready to do serious work in search of evidence. Nothing like this. All the same far-fetched assumptions and nothing concrete. The only thing the information boiled down to, which I was able to more or less confirm, was the constant presence of young people near Leonardo, whose talents and gifts he supported not only financially, but also by directly teaching them.
But this kind of vague evidence can provide food for speculation, but not for serious evidence. Although, of course, they lead to certain thoughts. The same Vasari, out of simplicity (or am I underestimating him?) gives one of these comments.
In Milan, Leonardo took as his pupil the young Milanese Salai, who was distinguished by extraordinary grace and beauty, and beautiful, curly hair, which Leonardo greatly admired. He taught his pupil many rules in art, and some of the works attributed to Salai in Milan were actually corrected by the hand of Leonardo.
I absolutely do not want to descend to the level of the “yellow press”, in whose style they seek out facts from life that are dubious from the point of view of generally accepted morality famous people just to defame these people. Having made a forced admission that it seems that the rumors about Leonardo da Vinci’s unconventional orientation are based, albeit on shaky ground, I would like not to focus the attention of readers on this particular fact.
Was there such a feeling as love at all in the life of Leonardo da Vinci (no matter whether it was for a man or a woman)?
The position I have taken in this long-standing dispute is rather based on an attempt to unravel a completely different mystery. If we abstract from specifying which gender this person entered into (if at all) intimate relationships with, then main question still remains unanswered: “Was there in the life of Leonardo da Vinci such a feeling as love (no matter for a man or a woman)?” After all, this is very important for the most complete understanding of the personality of any person!
I was so passionate about searching for an answer to this question that I even abandoned excessive scrupulousness and began to carefully look at Leonardo’s relationships not only with women, as I had done before, but also at his reviews of the men around him. Nothing. That is, nothing at all. At least, at least remotely indicating the presence of an affair, albeit a short one.
How so? How can you live not the best short life and never even fall in love seriously? Thoughts about the existence of some, in modern language, “obstacles of insurmountable force” involuntarily come to mind. What could be the essence of these obstacles? Perhaps those people who, well, let’s say, actively participated in the process of “creating a genius,” deliberately created obstacles for the feeling that arose, eradicating it in the bud.
From the point of view of common sense, no matter how disgusting this meaning may be, such an assumption is quite logical. After all, if Leonardo da Vinci was the central part of the genetic experiment, then it is absolutely clear that after such “luck” as the birth of such a brilliant genius, the organizers of this experiment longed for its continuation. And such an uncontrollable feeling as love could lead the course of “experience” in a completely unnecessary direction.
The Masons benefited from the unconventional sexual orientation Leonardo.
After all, it is quite possible that the result of love (and especially for a woman, not a man) could be a child. And, oh horror, a completely random child from a completely random woman!! But if we accept this explanation, then a conclusion that is completely prohibitive in terms of the degree of cynicism arises. The Masonic organization that stood “behind the scenes” of this inhumane experiment was profitable Leonardo's unconventional sexual orientation. Also because, having information about inclinations that were so cruelly punished in the XTV century, it was possible to control a person completely stably throughout his life. Hold it on a hook inserted very deep into the throat.
But then it is not clear how the organization, which controlled and held even Leonardo’s desires in an iron fist, hoped to continue the experiment and get the “planned” children? Those very ones that should have become the next stages towards the creation of a “perfect person”. Stupid question. Of course, it could be forced. But Leonardo never had children! Not a single one, not even one out of wedlock. Or...or were they? It’s just that the general public didn’t need to know about it at all? Yes, perhaps this is possible. Even a woman who, willy-nilly, more clearly demonstrates the fact of expecting offspring, and even then, with a strong desire, can hide the fact of the birth of a child if she tries. What can we say about a man on whom, pardon the vulgarity, it is not written anywhere that he has just been involved in the process of creating this very child.
That’s when I truly repented that several months ago I took on the task of unraveling such a fascinating (as it seemed to me then) mystery of the personality of Leonardo da Vinci. Could I at that time have even partially imagined what abominations and abominations shown by people in achieving their goals that I would have to face? Of course not, to an ordinary person and it’s hard to imagine such a thing.
Leonardo da Vinci, who turned out to be just a toy in the hands of experienced and soulless “puppeteers” - the Freemasons.
But it’s too late to repent of your own indiscretion. Whether I wanted it or not, I could no longer stop at this point in my investigation. And not at all because banal curiosity moved me forward. I’m not a street onlooker who, without looking up, looks at a pedestrian crushed by a car. Not at all. I just couldn’t help but feel enormous sympathy for this great man, who turned out to be just a toy in the hands of experienced and soulless “puppeteers.”
How was this immensely talented and, it seems, also immensely unhappy man supposed to feel, realizing that neither his life nor his soul belonged to himself? It’s terrible to live like this, completely alone, illuminated only by the light of your own genius.
I wanted to find evidence, to make sure that even such monstrous knowledge did not completely break this strong man. That even such a powerful system as the organization of Freemasons, capable of conceiving and implementing such global tasks, could not, by grinding his life into mincemeat, undermine his will to freedom. This is the evidence I wanted to find.
I chose the following direction of search - to understand how Leonardo da Vinci treated the very concept of “freedom”, this time. And to check whether he was looking for consolation from the only one who was not subject to the domineering hand of the Masons - from God. That's two.
As for freedom, remember, in the previous chapter I quoted from the book of Vasari, which told how Leonardo constantly came to the market and bought birds from traders in order to then release them into the wild? Now it’s clear what feelings could have prompted him to take such unconventional actions. When I re-read some documentary materials, looking at them from a new angle, I saw what had been lying on the surface all this time - a lot of things in Leonardo’s life did not happen and did not happen because of his fanatical desire for independence from rulers and any kind of superiors.
All the reproaches against him regarding the started and unfinished work, all his quarrels with employers due to failure to fulfill their obligations may have been provoked by Leonardo’s fierce resistance to the restriction of his personal freedom. And this is perfectly understandable. It was enough for him to feel the constant pressure of someone else’s power over the very essence of his birth and later life, in order to also endure attempts to control it from some people, even dukes, cardinals and even kings, who imagine themselves to have this very power.
Naturally, da Vinci knew what he was dealing with. Compared to the real possibilities of the organization of the Freemasons, even the “great and terrible” Duke of Sforza, even the cruel and “frostbitten” Medici in their impunity, were simply foolish children playing for power.
It may be that " by-effect"The genetic programming of the superman is V his inability to love?
But all these discussions relate exclusively to Leonardo da Vinci’s attitude to freedom or to what he himself was forced to consider his freedom. But what about that very feeling, even if it was for a man, that was able to heal even the most wounded heart? I'm talking about love now. Why didn’t da Vinci even try to find such a “medicine for the soul” among representatives of his own sex? Is it really a “side effect” of the genetic programming of a superman that he lacks the ability to love? Could this really be retribution for the fact that a person is trying to measure his strength with God? And it is absolutely impossible to interfere with such a great sacrament as the formation human soul, nothing to pay for it. Moreover, it turns out that it is not the one who “calls the tune” who pays, but the one who is guilty before God only by the very fact of his birth? It's very possible. But this can no longer be confirmed or denied. And the gap in the several hundred years that have passed since that time is by no means an obstacle to this. There are simply mysteries of the universe, the answers to which are not worth searching for. At least for those people who do not set out to conduct godless genetic experiments.

Chapter 12 PROOF OF THE ACT OF CREATION

So, history shows that Leonardo da Vinci, for reasons unknown to us, abandoned attempts to turn to human feelings for help. But what prevented him from turning to another healing source for his disfigured soul - to faith in God? And did it hurt? Or, despite his more than ungodly projects, Leonardo did not consider himself an unbeliever; he simply meant by the power of God something much more than his contemporaries, who were very limited by dogmas and superstitions? Possibly, but don't jump to conclusions. It would be better, and more objective, to try to conduct a documentary study of this issue. Moreover, the answer to it, quite possibly, will lead us to the final point of the investigation itself.
If we talk about documentary evidence on this topic, then at first glance they all “cry” about the complete absence of any religiosity in Leonardo da Vinci, at least in its classical sense. The same (our old acquaintance) Vasari quite definitely responds to this topic.
And such were the bizarre lines of his mind that when he philosophized about natural phenomena, he sought to comprehend the properties of all herbs, while continuing at the same time to observe the movement of the sky, the course of the moon and the paths of the sun. As a result, a heretical view of things was born in his mind, which did not agree with any religion. Leonardo apparently preferred to be more of a philosopher than a good Christian.
As for the relationship with God (and not the clergy, please do not confuse it), the absence or, conversely, the superlative degree of these relationships is most clearly manifested in the work of da Vinci. More precisely, in that part that extended to painting, sculpture and architecture. If we consider precisely this side of his life, bearing in mind a comparative analysis of his public statements and diary entries, then some deep contradiction becomes noticeable. Despite all its depth, this contradiction can be explained very simply, and it, by the way (like much in our investigation), is completely logical.
Leonardo da Vinci, with his such a powerful intellect, to take the word of uneducated and superstitious churchmen, who, being bearers of the “word of God,” themselves understood absolutely nothing about the essence and meaning of this “word,” would be at least strange. Apparently I'll have to do it small retreat and do your own comparative analysis. But I assure you, this will be done for very practical purposes, with a view to bringing our thematic investigation to its logical conclusion.
The institution of the Church at all times (except perhaps the very dawn of its existence) has always reminded me of the “struggle of the Nanai boys.” Meaningless in its very essence - after all, it is known that both boys are one person in disguise, such a “successful” clownery. Fighting against “enemies” and spending all means, opportunities and abilities on this fight, the Church at the same time served as a “factory” for the production and assembly of these very “enemies”. Now I am not talking about external enemies - representatives of other religions. We will talk about the so-called “heretics” and their new, more modern formation - atheists and agnostics, the number of which has especially increased since the significant breakthrough in scientific and technological progress.
The persistence of the Church institution in its dogmas, which boil down to the assertion that faith and knowledge are incompatible, has given rise to a kind of “watershed,” the essence of which boils down to the statement: “either you you believe or trying to understand.” And the fanaticism with which the churchmen adhere to such a radical point of view was precisely the reason why so many people who could be the pride of any religion and at the same time find “patented” peace of mind and “join the bosom of the Church” completely legally, turned out to be extra “cogs” left after assembly.
with their own with my own hands The Church has deprived itself of individuals capable of not only glorifying it for millennia, but also strengthening its influence on the path of development of humanity as a whole. It’s evil when you think about all these limited people who, interpreting and preaching every point Holy Scripture literally, at all times they “exited” due to hypocrisy and pomposity.
Let's leave the dark ones for a while troubled times Middle Ages. In the end, then total lack of education and dogmatic (without additional explanations) faith helped prevent the death of humanity as a whole. I would like to think that due to the “visual morality” of the Ten Commandments. Unfortunately, common sense suggests that fear of "hellfire" was a more effective deterrent. But now, when the level of education even in the most backward countries of the world is higher than the most advanced views that existed in the Middle Ages!
But all this education is by no means able to support a person literally “crushed” by knowledge, the essence of which, when applied in practice, does not solve the main issues at all. But the “statement of the unresolved question” has not changed at all since the “Dark Ages” and it sounds like this:
“Where do we come from, where and why are we going?* One can finally understand that the total measure of objective knowledge of humanity changes over time towards a quantitative increase, but the questions that concern the soul remain unchanged since the birth of conscious humanity. Well, why not set the right priorities? What kind of sheepish stubbornness is this?
It’s great if it’s enough for a person to attend (yawning) a church service once a year, a month, a week... It’s hard to believe that such a person, observing “external” religiosity, will be in complete agreement with own life and fate. Well, let there be forced humility. But what to do if a person, for example, chose nuclear physics as his profession and, being talented, encountered in the process of his work issues that affect not at all material aspects our world?
But the mathematical beauty of the creation of our Universe surprisingly contributes to religious awe. I guess I can based on historical examples guess what will happen in this case. Deprived of the minimum deterrent that lies in the moral realm, such talented person“without hesitation” he will sell his discoveries to any group of people who can pay for them. But these people could, by the will of fate, turn out to be any terrorist group! So much for dogmas. So much for “caring for every lost soul!” So, maybe, instead of hammering in more than educated people, that the most important thing in faith is humility and awareness of one’s own insignificance, is it worth paying attention to the “mutilation of the soul” of individuals gifted by nature with a powerful intellect as the most “valuable material”? By the way, in the 21st century the authority of the Church generally “hangs by a thread.” We can assume that any gifted scientist, who has seen “with his own eyes” and much more closely the majesty of the Creator’s plan, can (if he has such a fantasy) create his own and much more relevant and popular religion. In demand precisely because this religion will correspond to gross reality Everyday life a person forced to survive in an age dominated not by the soul, but by technological advances. And to get an answer to the question, what is more important - getting a loan for the next “material value” or peace of mind, associated with the absence of debts, alas, the modern institution of the Church (Orthodox or Catholic) is completely unsuitable.
Leonardo da Vinci came very close to contemplating the “conventional face of the creator.”
Well, it’s time to end the lyrical digression and return to the fate of a man who stands at a higher level of knowledge than most of his contemporaries. But, as promised, I will not ignore the conclusions made just above, but, on the contrary, I will add them to the search. So what assumptions can we make based on the reasoning in this chapter? As usual, I will first put forward a crazy guess, and only then, based on documented facts, will I be able to either refute it or confirm it.
Leonardo da Vinci, who was denied even the most minimal sense of self-worth by the Freemasons, sought justice and consolation from the Creator.

Leonardo da Vinci was not only gay, but also a father
Italian scientists decided that Leonardo da Vinci could easily have had an illegitimate son. This version is exactly the opposite of the generally accepted one, that the Renaissance master was gay.
Alessandro Vezzosi, director of the museum in hometown artist near Florence, I am sure that Leonardo was 17 years old when his son Paolo was born. In a letter dated 1479, the Duke of Bologna Giovanni Bentivoglio writes to Lorenzo the Miraculous about "Paolo, the boy of Leonardo da Vinci of Florence." “In a village with only about 1,000 people living at the time, how many people could there be named Leonardo da Vinci?” asks Vezzosi.

The Duke's letter was first published eight years ago by another Leonardo scholar, Carlo Pedretti, but was interpreted differently: "Every boy who appeared next to Leonardo was always perceived as a boyfriend," says Vezzosi, who, however, less sure that we're talking about specifically about my son. True, there is a reservation: “A single document does not give one hundred percent certainty.”

Vezzosi also refers to several sketches of a woman playing with children, by Leonardo. According to the scientist, this proves that the great artist had experience of fatherhood.

Sigmund Freud. Leonardo da Vinci. Childhood memory.

Since the publication of Sigmund Freud's famous essay Leonardo da Vinci and his Memoirs of Childhood (1910), this Renaissance master has come to be seen as an enormous influence on modern gay psychology. In this essay, written while he was analyzing his feelings for his former intimate friend Wilhelm Fliess, Freud first developed the basis of his theory of the causes of homosexuality. Freud's essay analyzes Leonardo's memories of his childhood, reflected in his diaries: “Perhaps my earliest memory is the vision of a bird of prey landing on the edge of my cradle, opening my mouth with its tail and beginning to whip my lips with its tail.” According to Freud, this episode is in fact not a childhood memory, but a later sexual fantasy transferred to the subconscious level. Sexual fantasies themselves, Freud further writes, “merely repeat various forms a situation in which we are all in early childhood We felt pleasant when we were in our mother’s arms and sucked her breast.”

From this premise, Freud derives an argument as brilliant as it is dubious: “The boy suppresses his love for his mother, he imagines himself as her, identifies himself with her and accepts his personality as a model, within the framework of similarity with which he subsequently chooses new objects for Thus, he turns into a homosexual. This means that he has actually switched to autoeroticism: in the boys that he now likes as he grows up, he subconsciously sees himself first of all in childhood. We can say that he is looking for the object of his love. on the path of narcissism."

Freud then goes on to argue that “by suppressing his love for his mother, the homosexual retains it on a subconscious level and subconsciously strives to remain faithful to her. Being a fan of boys and falling in love with them, he avoids women, thus remaining faithful to his mother... A man who seems to be interested only in men is actually attracted to women, like any normal man; but in each case he is in a hurry to transfer the excitement received from the woman to the man, and this situation is reproduced over and over again thanks to what he has acquired. homosexual structure of his subconscious psyche." According to Freud, in such transformations of desire lies the answer to the phenomenon mysterious smile Mona Lisa Gioconda. It is difficult to overestimate the enormous influence (maybe positive, but most likely negative) that this powerful but highly controversial Freudian reading of Leonardo’s image had on the fate of countless gay men who underwent various types of psychotherapy courses in order to “cure” their homosexuality. Freud's explanation of the "mechanism" by which a person acquires homosexuality has formed the basis of many overly simplified medical and psychoanalytic concepts of homosexuality in this century, and we are only now beginning to get rid of them. Perhaps Freud's most famous subject of analysis, Leonardo continues to have a major influence on gays and lesbians today. But there is another influence, due to the actual personality of Leonardo himself. This is the influence of a man of indomitable creative energy and insight, a man whose homosexuality is generally recognized as inextricably linked with his genius. If Leonardo himself was gay, who would dare to reproach a person just for being gay? The force of such an argument is irresistible.

100 Brief Lives of Gays and Lesbians Russell Paul

18. LEONARDO DA VINCI (1452–1519)

Leonardo da Vinci was born in 1452 in the city of Vinci, in the province of Tuscany in Italy. The illegitimate son of a Florentine notary and a peasant girl, he was raised by his paternal grandparents. Leonardo's extraordinary talent was noticed by the artist Andrea del Verrocino, and Leonardo became his student at the age of fourteen. Ten years later, still living near Verrocino, Leonardo, along with three other students, was accused of committing “ungodly acts” with a seventeen-year-old sitter named Giocobo Saltarelli. They received a harsh penalty.

In 1482, Leonardo found himself in Milan at the court of Ludovico Sforza, where he compiled his famous Notes and created such masterpieces as the Madonna of the Cave (1483–1486) and now largely lost in history. original form fresco “The Last Supper” (1495–1498) in the Cathedral of Santa Maria delle Grazi. When the French army invaded Italy in 1499, Leonardo returned to Florence, becoming a military engineer for Caesar Borgia. His magnificent fresco in honor of the Borgia victory over the French was never completed - Leonardo could not resist his never-waning interest in innovative experiments in the field of fresco painting and switched to other works. During this Florentine period he also painted his famous Mona Lisa (1503).

In 1507, Leonardo entered the service of the French king Louis XII, working first in Milan, then in Rome, where he was able to prove himself in such fields of science as geology, botany and mechanics. In 1515, the French king François I placed the castle of Cloux at his disposal, where conditions were created for him for scientific research.

Leonardo was a very secretive person who surrounded himself with an aura of secrecy - all his notes, for example, were made in code. Because of this, we know little about his private life, except for the fact that he always had many handsome young men around who served as his assistants. These are Cesare de Sesto, Boltraffio, Andrea Sa Laino and a young aristocrat named Francesco Melzi, whom Leonardo adopted and made his heir. He was also surrounded by a charming ten-year-old boy named Caprotti. Leonardo nicknamed him “the little devil” because he constantly tried to steal something from Leonardo. Leonardo recorded all these disappearances methodically, but with ironic and generous comments, in his diaries. The image of this boy is found in Leonardo’s drawings and sketches dating back almost twenty years to his work.

Leonardo worked slowly, and the completion of his work was always delayed (the final revision of the Mona Lisa alone took four years). Many of his contemporaries believed that he was wasting his talent and the time allotted to him. As the historian Vasari writes, on his deathbed Leonardo lamented that he had offended God and people by not having time to fulfill his duty in art.

Leonardo died at Cloux Castle in 1519.

Francesco Melzi was by his side until the last minutes. An all-encompassing universal genius, Leonardo was an extraordinarily expressive and original artist, a versatile thinker, an innovator and a scientist with a broad outlook. He left us more than eight thousand pages of diary entries containing scientific projects, inventions, architectural designs and sketches.

Since the publication of Sigmund Freud's famous essay Leonardo da Vinci and his Memoirs of Childhood (1910), this Renaissance master has come to be seen as an enormous influence on modern gay psychology. In this essay, written while he was analyzing his feelings for his former intimate friend Wilhelm Fliess, Freud first developed the basis of his theory of the causes of homosexuality. Freud's essay analyzes Leonardo's memories of his childhood, reflected in his diaries: “Perhaps my earliest memory is the vision of a bird of prey landing on the edge of my cradle, opening my mouth with its tail and beginning to whip my lips with its tail.” According to Freud, this episode is in fact not a childhood memory, but a later sexual fantasy transferred to the subconscious level. Sexual fantasies themselves, Freud further writes, “only repeat in different forms the situation in which we all felt pleasant in early childhood - when we were in our mother’s arms and sucked at her breast.”

From this premise, Freud derives an argument as brilliant as it is dubious: “The boy suppresses his love for his mother, he imagines himself as her, identifies himself with her and accepts his personality as a model, within the framework of similarity with which he subsequently chooses new objects for your love. Thus he turns into a homosexual. This means that he has actually switched to autoeroticism: in the boys that he now likes as he grows up, he subconsciously, first of all, sees himself as a child. We can say that he is looking for the object of his love along the path of narcissism.”

According to Freud, in such transformations of desire lies the solution to the phenomenon of the mysterious smile of Mona Lisa Gioconda.

It is difficult to overestimate the enormous influence (maybe positive, but most likely negative) that this powerful but highly controversial Freudian reading of Leonardo’s image had on the fate of countless gay men who underwent various types of psychotherapy courses in order to “cure” their homosexuality. Freud's explanation of the "mechanism" by which a person acquires homosexuality has formed the basis of many overly simplified medical and psychoanalytic concepts of homosexuality in this century, and we are only now beginning to get rid of them. Perhaps Freud's most famous subject of analysis, Leonardo continues to have a major influence on gays and lesbians today. But there is another influence, due to the actual personality of Leonardo himself. This is the influence of a man of indomitable creative energy and insight, a man whose homosexuality is generally recognized as inextricably linked with his genius. If Leonardo himself was gay, who would dare to reproach a person just for being gay? The force of such an argument is irresistible.

From the book of Leonardo da Vinci author Dzhivelegov Alexey Karpovich

Alexey Dzhivelegov LEONARDO DA VINCI

From the book Great Prophecies author Korovina Elena Anatolyevna

The Dream of Leonardo da Vinci Ragno Nero was not the only one who practiced divination in Italy during the High Renaissance. Even the masters of the painting and sculpture workshop dabbled in this. Their “stories about the future” were especially popular in the Society they formed.

From the book by Michelangelo Buonarroti by Fisel Helen

The emergence of a rivalry with Leonardo da Vinci Michelangelo repeatedly asked himself the question: how does Florence, in its current plight, continue to finance art? But he was not the only artist whom she supported - as a result of the French

From the book of Leonardo da Vinci by Chauveau Sophie

The main dates of the life of Leonardo da Vinci 1452 - the birth of Leonardo in Anchiano or Vinci. His father has been serving as a notary in Florence for three years. He marries sixteen-year-old Albiera Amadori. 1464/67 – Leonardo’s arrival in Florence (exact date unknown). Albiera's death and

From the book 10 geniuses of painting author Balazanova Oksana Evgenievna

Embrace the immensity - Leonardo da Vinci “And, carried away by my greedy attraction, wanting to see the great mixture of diverse and strange forms produced by skillful nature, among the dark wandering rocks, I approached the entrance to big cave, before which for a moment

From the book by Leonardo da Vinci [with illustrations] by Chauveau Sophie

From the book Imaginary Sonnets [collection] author Lee-Hamilton Eugene

25. Leonardo da Vinci about his snakes (1480) I love to watch how their living pile flows onto the floor, like the juices of Evil; Their color is black, then white, Here is the blue of the wave, here is the green of the emerald. There is no dam created for their swell, Its place is the ocean, where darkness reigns; These flexible ones are silent

From the book 50 geniuses who changed the world author Ochkurova Oksana Yurievna

Vinci Leonardo da (b. 1452 - d. 1519) Brilliant Italian artist, architect, engineer, inventor, scientist and philosopher, who has proven himself in almost all areas of natural science: anatomy, physiology, botany, paleontology, cartography, geology,

From the book The Most Spicy Stories and Fantasies of Celebrities. Part 2 by Amills Roser

From the book Artists in the Mirror of Medicine author Neumayr Anton

LEONARDO DA VINCI INTRODUCTION “In the history of art, Leonardo became Hamlet, whom everyone discovered in a new way.” These are the words of Kenneth Clark, one of the deepest experts on this mysterious phenomenon in the sky Italian Renaissance, Marianna Vladimirovna Alferova very aptly emphasizes

The smile of Gioconda (Leonardo da Vinci) Woman of the world In the stream of oncoming faces, always look for familiar features... Mikhail Kuzmin All our lives we are looking for someone: a loved one, the other half of our torn self, a woman, finally. Federico Fellini on heroines

From book Foreign painting from Jan van Eyck to Pablo Picasso author Solovyova Inna Solomonovna

short biography Leonardo da Vinci April 15, 1452 - Leonardo was born in the village of Anchiano near Vinci. His mother, about whom almost nothing is known, was presumably named Katerina. His father is Ser Piero da Vinci, 25 years old, a notary, from a dynasty of notaries. Leonardo –

From the book Parachute author Kotelnikov Gleb Evgenievich

Chapter 2 Leonardo da Vinci Leonardo da Vinci (Leonardo da Vinci) - Italian painter, sculptor, encyclopedist, engineer, inventor, one of the most outstanding representatives of the culture of the High Renaissance, was born on April 15, 1452 in the city of Vinci near Florence (Italy).

From the author's book

Chapter II. Leonardo da Vinci. Faust Verancio In the fifteenth century in Italy there lived a wonderful man named Leonardo da Vinci. He was a painter, a sculptor, a musician-composer, an engineer, a mechanic, and a scientist. His beautiful paintings and are proud of the drawings