101 Things You Didn't Know About Da Vinci (10 page)

34
An architecture of the imagination

As if creating some of the first Renaissance architectural paintings wasn't enough, Leonardo also painted scenes that demonstrated a sort of “faux architecture.” This term might sound odd, but bear with us. These works contained architectural elements that had more in common with flights of fancy than with anything rooted in concrete reality. The
Adoration of the Magi
of 1481 is one of the best examples. Commissioned for the monastery at San Donato Scopeto, Leonardo worked on this scene during his years under Lorenzo de Medici, and it was the first work that he created largely on his own. While the painting focuses on Mary, the baby Jesus, and the three Magi, the scene also contains about sixty other people, a variety of animals, and other natural elements.

Although Leonardo never finished this painting, it is clear that the scene contains architectural elements that were, at least partially, more imaginary than real. Take, for example, the staircase depicted in the background. It could be part of a medieval castle, or maybe it belongs to the ruins of a Roman imperial palace. Either way, these structures would have been completely out of place for this religious scene set in a lush countryside—not the best place to build a castle, which surely would have required at least basic defenses.

The scene is a fanciful composition, to be sure. Its early sketches were even wilder, showing animals in different perspectives and poses. Some sketches had parts of the stairs dating from a different period and age; some were even composed of different materials. It was a motley crüe of painting, and Leonardo probably loved painting every minute of it. There are multiple points of perspective, and the scene almost looks more like a collage than one coherent painting.

Perhaps Leonardo's playful side came to the fore through these sorts of details, or maybe they afforded Leonardo the opportunity to contrast his new skills against a more whimsical background. Whatever the reason, the fanciful architecture incorporated within Leonardo's paintings increases the depth of his work and speaks to both his inherent creativity and his willingness to take risks.

35
It's all in the details

Leonardo had a knack for capturing facial expressions, and you can see that even in his early works.
Lady with an Ermine
, painted around 1490 (or perhaps earlier), is a portrait of Cecilia Gallerani, the young mistress of Duke Ludovico Sforza. Often called the first modern portrait, this work is much different than established methods of portrait painting in the fifteenth century. Leonardo posed Cecilia in three-quarter view, rather than in the strict profile view favored at the time. There's also an added sense of motion inherent in this scene, as she twists her head and upper body, fixing her gaze on something outside the field of view. The warm lighting provides a three-dimensional look that has an almost sculptural effect. The painting also renders the detailed embroidery and ribbons on Cecilia's gown with painstaking precision. The beauty of Cecilia's face, and her enigmatic half-smile, evoke a later (and more famous) portrait—the
Mona Lisa
.

Another one of Da Vinci's famous faces is found in his
Portrait of Ginevra de'Benci
which could date to as early as 1474, when Leonardo was still working with Verrocchio. It includes some elements typical of Leonardo's style, such as a mystical backdrop and detailed background rendering, and it also shows botanical elements, such as the juniper bush. The portrait itself is much flatter and has none of the three-dimensionality of
Lady with an Ermine
or some of Leonardo's other later works. However, her face and skin do have that marble appearance found in Leonardo's later works, and the emphasis on the ringlets of her hair is also typical Leonardo.

Another early work,
Portrait of a Musician
, dates from around the same period (1482–1483). However, attributing this painting to Leonardo is problematic—there are no records mentioning the painting, nor is there any documentation for its commission. The painting has some elements of Leonardo's style, but one of his students could also have been the artist—the likeliest suspects include Bernardino Luini, Giovanni Boltraffio, and Ambrogio de Predis.

So what's the proof of Leonardo's influence here? For starters, you can look at the shadowed background, the length of the figure, and the three-quarter view of the subject. But that's not all. The delicate bone structure required detailed knowledge of anatomy, and Leonardo was one of only a handful of painters who had that skill. Then there's the subject's casual, unforced pose, delicate fingers, and curling hair. All of these details point to Leonardo. This painting also remained unfinished, and various elements are only sketched in—and who was our favorite artist known for leaving works half done? None other than Leonardo!

36
Monks and lawyers and artists, oh my!

Who would've thought that Leonardo had a legal run-in with Catholic monks? That's exactly what happened with
The Virgin of the Rocks
. In fact, this project was actually done twice because of the lawsuit that ensued!

The chapel of the Immaculata at the church of San Francesco Grande, in Milan, originally commissioned
The Virgin of the Rocks
in 1483 as an altar-piece. One of Leonardo's first commissions in Milan, the painting relates to the Immaculate Conception, the Catholic Church's teaching that Mary was conceived without original sin. The Italian papacy charged Leonardo with the task of portraying the Virgin in a pure, holy, and innocent manner.

The original contract was very specific, spelling out the exact subject of the picture. The premise seems straightforward enough: The monks of San Francesco wanted the Virgin to be the painting's central focus, with prototypical Greek angels flanking her. Leonardo designed his work to fit into a panel, which would have been framed by painted or gilded shutters. Evangelista and Ambrogio de Predis were to complete the surrounding work. Details of the background (mountains and rocks) were also laid out before Leonardo began work on the project. The original contract even called for specifics on the Virgin and angels' robe colors! Despite all of the specifics, Leonardo did take some artistic license. For instance, he exchanged one of the angels for St. John.

This wasn't exactly a rush job, but the contract length was short—only eight months to complete the entire painting. It was supposed to be completed prior to the Feast of the Immaculate Conception, held annually on December 8. Predictably, Leonardo ran into some trouble finishing the painting on schedule, and the work became the subject of a lengthy lawsuit. The eventual result was that two versions of the work were created—one is presently part of the Louvre's collection, while the other resides in London's National Gallery.

In addition to the missed deadline, Leonardo and de Predis apparently had a dispute with the monks about their commission. Leonardo complained to the monks that they hadn't received their full payment, and the initial amount negotiated for the entire work had barely covered the cost of the frame! Disputes and lawsuits over time and money continued for many years.

Eventually, the monks deemed the first version incomplete, thus forfeiting the rest of the money and giving Leonardo ownership of the painting. Leonardo probably gave this version as a gift to King Louis XII of France, who helped resolve the lawsuit, and this is the version that now hangs in the Louvre. Leonardo renegotiated the contract with the monks, who agreed to pay for a second version in 1506. The monks gave Leonardo and de Predis two years to complete this painting, paying them half the amount originally negotiated. This version was actually finished on time and was finally hung in the chapel on August 18, 1508. It remained there until 1781, when it passed through the hands of a number of collectors, eventually ending up in the National Gallery of London.

While Leonardo is likely the sole artist behind the Louvre version, this may not be the case with the second. The newer painting contains a few significant changes from the older version. The colors are brighter and bluer, the angel on the right is no longer pointing at St. John (who is now holding a cross), and halos have been added above the Virgin Mary and one of the angels. Leonardo probably supervised the creation of this second painting, but it is likely that other artists in his studio did the actual painting.

37
The life and times of
The Last Supper

One of Leonardo's signature paintings,
The Last Supper
is also one of the most accident-prone and least well preserved. Leonardo completed this giant wall painting in 1498. It depicts the moment at which Jesus announces that one of his disciples is going to betray him (ultimately, it is Judas).

Duke Ludovico Sforza, Leonardo's patron at the time, commissioned the painting. Sforza had selected the Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie as his family chapel, and Leonardo was hired to paint a large mural of the Last Supper on one wall of the refectory (a room where meals are served). Although the work was to be done on a grand scale—thirty feet long and fourteen feet high—Leonardo was not one to turn down a challenge.

Leonardo completed
The Last Supper
, certainly one of his great masterpieces, in only three years. This time scale seems especially miraculous when compared to many of Leonardo's other projects, which either were never completed or dragged on for many years.

The work's design is one of Leonardo's most innovative. The perspective makes the painting appear to be a logical extension of the room, with the eye invariably drawn to the head of Christ at the center. The Apostles are crowded around the table in natural poses, in contrast to the stiff appearance of most versions of this scene during Leonardo's time.

Each Apostle has a distinctive appearance and character. Apparently, Leonardo modeled each of their faces on a particular individual. The two main figures, Judas and Christ, gave Leonardo the greatest difficulty. Christ's expression, a model of serenity, is a dramatic contrast to the Apostles' stunned and conflicted faces.

One legend tells of Leonardo's difficulty with modeling Judas, Jesus' betrayer. Supposedly, the chapel's prior complained about how long the painting was taking, and Leonardo retorted it was because he was lacking a model for Judas, but the prior seemed to him a good candidate! Leonardo got away with this slight, but luckily doesn't seem to have made a habit of it.

Leonardo worked on
The Last Supper
in his characteristic style. Days of frantic work, during which Leonardo worked all day without stopping, were followed by days during which Leonardo was not seen at all. After being absent for several days, he would sometimes appear, gaze silently at the painting for several hours, excitedly add a few brush strokes, and then disappear again. Leonardo did eventually finish the work, however, and the public immediately recognized it as a masterpiece.

So all was well—Leonardo finished this sacred artwork and everyone was happy. Right? Unfortunately,
The Last Supper
began to deteriorate almost as soon as it was finished, once again due to Leonardo's love of innovations. Instead of using the usual method of fresco painting, in which paint was applied to a wall of fresh, wet plaster, Leonardo designed a new method where he applied paint directly to dry plaster. This method let him work much more slowly and methodically and allowed a wider range of colors and tones in the paint. Unfortunately, that's where the good news stopped. This method proved unstable, and the paint began flaking off the wall during Leonardo's lifetime.

By 1586, the masterpiece had degraded to such an extent that it was hardly visible. Over the years, a number of attempts were made to restore the painting. Unfortunately, these methods often caused more harm than good, or they involved so much overpainting that little of Leonardo's masterpiece remained visible.

The work also suffered from more practical concerns in the church. At one point, workers cut a door opening through the bottom of the image—at the expense of Christ's feet, which were removed because of it. In 1796, Napoleon's troops even used the room containing the painting as a stable, of all things! After that,
The Last Supper
still had more than its share of disasters to endure. A flood in 1800 left it covered in a layer of green mold, and Allied bombing in 1943 blew the ceiling off the church rectory. Given this tumultuous history, it's surprising anything is left of
The Last Supper
at all!

An initial restoration was completed in 1954, and finally a twenty-two-year-long project was completed in 1999. The restoration attempted to remove centuries' worth of preservation and repainting, to reveal Leonardo's original intent. The process was truly painstaking, requiring restorers to reattach tiny flakes of the original paint in their original locations. Unfortunately, parts of the work are beyond repair, including the facial expressions of the Apostles. However, a number of copies exist, some dating from before the deterioration had become problematic. If you compare these views to the currently restored version, you can imagine how spectacular the original of
The Last Supper
must have been right after it was painted.

38
There's something about Lisa

Just about everyone knows the
Mona Lisa
—it's the painting for which Leonardo da Vinci is, perhaps, most famous. Completed in 1506, this work of art went through a number of iterations before the design and execution were finally finished. What is it about this particular piece that has created such a lasting impact on the artistic world?

The subject of the
Mona Lisa
was most likely the wife of Francesco del Giocondo. A silk merchant in the late fifteenth century, Giocondo was also involved with the government in Florence, and he and his wife Lisa were probably married around 1495. The portrait poses Lisa as a pyramidal foreground to a distant, somewhat foggy landscape in the background. The glow on her chest radiates to include her face and hands, creating a softness not previously seen in Renaissance painting. This painting was much smaller than many of Leonardo's other works. It measures approximately 30" × 40" and consists of oil paint on a wooden panel.