Leonardus Vincius Pictor
His soul and credo remained in one portrait?
In this case the portrait does not represent any historical person. It is a mixture of helpful features of the models, which the artist adapted to his own original design
An unfinished portrait of Isabella d’Este. Next to a quick sketch from memory (?) – Raphael’s impression after seeing the portrait of “Mona Lisa” around 1504.
In all of this history, besides less obvious, but always spectacular statements on her subject, intrigues the perseverance in succumbing to a few dubious or non verifiable facts also in other, more serious and free from illusions studies. At the faint susceptibility on the criticism and equally small abilities of refutation, every decent even theory will lose its scientific nature, and here in face of its lack, how to count even on the famous commentary of Vasari – so doggedly quoted, that today for good clung already to the portrait of Mrs. Lisa.
Here exceptionally probably, it’s proper to get over a question from the kind of tiresome ones: What did the artist mean? And so on forth…, or some similar, well after all fact, that quite a lot he thought then undoubtedly will last within a few next centuries. It’s obvious also a matter of a young age of Vasari in the moment, when the Master left Italy forever. Having barely six, and in the year of the death of Leonardo eight years, only just began his education in home Arezzo and will pass almost half a century of his painting for the manor Medici house before he decide to write anything about Leonardo and other authors of the Italian Renaissance.
Originating the art history didn’t avoid the row of the inaccuracy not to say mistakes – as one of historians (K. Estreicher) translating the work of Vasari into Polish in the introduction to it marked:
“Thanks to Vasari we know colloquial language about the art from those times better than for treaties. We know that these views weren’t established that they were inaccurate not to say incorrect (…). He used as he knew epithets from conversations with artists not paying attention to the fact that he was inconsistent (…). We also know how in the 16th century talked between themselves those, who had the most for saying about the art”.
Relevant text of the Vasari commentary, contains what is coming: “For Mr. Francisco del Giocondo Leonardo painted the portrait of Mrs. Lisa, his wife, and although he spent four years at this work, the image left unfinished. It is involved now to king Francis in Fontainebleau in France. Anybody who wants to see, like the art is able to imitate the nature, here will see it without the difficulty. Because smallest even details have been devoted here with the possible gentleness. Eyes have glitter and the humidity living.
Around eyes one can notice, are given red – blue veins and eyebrows, which only with the biggest lightness it is possible to make. One can see growing out of eyelids, rare and bent eyelashes which cannot be painted of more course. Nose, with all its beautiful shadows, pink and soft, seems to be living. In corners and in round – off, there how the mouth lips turn red are being combined with the color of the face, seem to be true, like body and blood. Who good observe the hollow of the neck, he will see the pulse beats. (…) And for at least Mrs. Lisa was of great beauty, Leonardo searched for additional impulses from fields of art. While she posed, somebody has always played and sang; got even different jesters so that they amused her. (…) In the Leonardo’s portrait such a charming smile was found, that it seemed to be more heavenly than human. The image is being regarded for most wonderful, almost lively”
In spite of considerable divergence of the portrait with the description, how as well of lack mentioning at least so essential in it – the landscape background, creating in a masterly fashion the homogenous integrity with foreground, and which Vasari wouldn’t omit after all interjecting a word about unprecedented, masterful way of painting – this description is the underlying reason for a legend, in which Mrs. Lisa Gherardini, third in a row wife of the Florentine citizen (silk trader),
is bravely playing the role assigned to her. Actually, we don’t know at least whether she didn’t lend here only her smile.
Earlier, namely before 1625, portrait catalogued in France wore the name “Courtisane au voile de gaze”, until Cassiano del Pozzo didn’t see exactly in it, that sitter from the Leonardo’s portrait described by Vasari. Here one can mention about widely rather known a belief that Vasari could never see this painting of Leonardo and writing about “Gioconda”
or had in front of him different, or what’s also possible, used only a verbal message from someone of his numerous friends (mentioned in preface to his “Lives”).
The image evoked not a small wave of the admiration then, and enraptured town councilors of Florence, how Vasari wrote, they decided for the special decree to the Master, to paint something what will bring such a glory also to the town. If really are being talked here the events of which the result were precipitated works at furnishing the room (of Grand Council) giving the place up to the image of Leonardo and to second – of Michelangelo (how I already wrote), it is possible with the bigger belief to come to conjectures of the seventeenth-century painter and chronicler Paolo Lomazzo, that Leonardo painted two “Giocondas” or, what possible – twice one? However it would be more clearly, if to make more distinct separation between well-known date of beginning the “Battle of Anghiari”, given by Leonardo alone –
“a di 6 di giugno 1505 in venerdi al tocco delle ore 13 cominciai a coloire in palazzo…”(“on Friday of June the sixth 1505 with striking the thirteenth hour I began the painting in the palace…”, Codex Madrid II) which the date says about the beginning of transferring the draft from the carton made out earlier, to plaster. As it is obvious, carton to the “Battle of Anghiari” came into existence in the Room of the Popes at Dominican friars (with this time Florentine), and in that case primal image of “Gioconda” which so enraptured town councillors giving the beginning for entire matter, came into existence outside Florence so Leonardo would begin his work a few years earlier – before 1503, that is when stayed more close to circles of the manor house of Milan and of Mantua, ruled through both of uncommon look princesses d’Este – Isabella and her sister Beatrice.
On the courts of their spouses into a very astonishing way, inspiring by power of their personality, the erudition and
unprecedented look they were able to focus most excellent Renaissance writers and artists. Adored by emperors and poets unfolded their patronage above such “aces” of the Renaissance as Leonardo da Vinci, Donato Bramante, Andrea Mantegna or Rafael.
The last one around 1504 (it’s then, he arrived to Florence), made out the sketch of interesting us portrait, in which
Leonardo’s sitter is clearly younger and still hasn’t removed (reportedly according to the contemporary fashion) eyebrows and has distinct eyelashes. The background landscape is just such, that Vasari could omit it in his commentary and flanking the sitter columns also still exist. Apart from that, what’s arresting here, it’s different a little bit way of arranging the hair-do.
But if instead of differences start to look for resemblances amongst these few portraits and then basing on the precise line of Leonard’s drawings – face a “depicting it” in spatial view, considerably it’s easier to prove correctness of earlier theses about closer connections of the “Mona Lisa” portrait , with a very special work of Leonardo, to date recognized as the carton to never finished portrait of Isabella d’Este (also in Paris, Louvre). Isabella was already taken under attention, however all attempts to associate with the discussed portrait, a wee bit more than evidence, resembled interceding a cause and nobody in principle convincing. Influence on it had apparently, existing portrait of Isabella d’Este (museum in Vienna) of Tytian’s brush. In spite of, that not taken by nature convinced in the issue of resemblances in traits, that there isn’t any.
Earlier A. Mantegna and Giovani Santi (father of Rafael, died in1494), tried to paint Isabella but in both cases portraits didn’t find princess’s recognition. However about such recognition for works of Leonardo, we are judging among others from the princess’s correspondence. It’s awkward enough in such a situation to propagate the legitimacy of the conduct, of which the master Leonardo rather didn’t accept, always lower depositing chances or possibilities of the sculpture in the relationship with painting. However, since the first sketches let on certain moderate optimism I decided, that gradually I would model one by one parties of the form in clay.
At Leonardo moreover, I could count on exceptionally consistent taking principles of using the light, hence enough just, how started (only approaching), to appoint resemblances of Leonardo-like shapes and forms, I scooped more and more the belief up, that they concern the same person. Thanks to the fuller information about placing the model in 3D space,
what’s essential, little only changed in the part of shoulders and the head in both examples, and of characteristic points – constant within the face, marked on both complementing each other portraits, quite possible was turning the gotten this way solid around its own (vertical) axis, and in the consequence proving resemblances.
It seems (while comparing faces), that lack of an eye-brow and eye-lashes causes the only substantial difference between this and original profile of Isabella. Connects here disinclination for a presence even a piece of the jewelry in both cases and points out rather on closer to Savonarola’s times also the initial work on “Mona Lisa” portrait. Secondly, he had tried to conceal her contour of forehead by a sort of pendant or flower fixed upon a headband, but he finally left unfinished his work.
Anyway, the miracle happened when he gave up and changed troublesome direction of the view, then (with time) he created a portrait – the best ever painted by human hand. I mean time much longer than a few year period, which used to be considered earlier. Going back to modeling however, both portraits one should transform into one scale before, what considerably it’s easier and faster and for all it’s certainly more precisely to achieve with a computer aided method. Independently whereas from the method, if the gotten effect will give just enough the positivity, shouldn’t we think whether it is worthwhile looking in that direction for today missing and described by Vasari portrait? If it really shows Lisa Gherardini, it rather with her also we should combine that profile, than with Isabella d’Este (in the obvious way should here to occur connection of expelling – or is presenting this woman in two editions, or the second one.
Taking this into consideration a more sensible belief is, that to the portrait (the one on poplar board in Louvre), which we all admire, presenting originally Isabella, the artist returned inspired with completely new idea, adding the landscape background with time. The charm and look of “Mrs. Lisa” certainly had a meaning there. After 1505 his considering
on the landscape theme (especially on blurred one) and interest in the aerial perspective clearly get more and more intensify. Before it came and before were cut (probably by Leonardo alone) edges with those columns, of which remains of bases up today are seen in the painting of “Mona Lisa – Gioconda”, the portrait could be seen by Rafael. Sensual sketch of Rafael (most confidently, drawn from the memory), I treated here as the form of a dividing in time line, demarcating the very known fact of becoming the portrait (or of portraits), from equally obvious fact of following after then a sequence of undoubted alterations the one we know today, passed through.
Customary linking the Vasari commentary with this portrait, has always awaked doubts. Written several dozen years after Leonardo, apart from quoted divergences in the description, is talking about unfinished work of the Master, while that admired for nearly five centuries artwork it is hard to call unfinished.
It’s also discutable, what exactly Leonardo presented for the cardinal Luigi d’Aragona in his workshop in Cloux near Amboise. During this visit in autumn 1517, secretary of the cardinal, Antonio de Beatis noted that he had seen three images, amongst which was found a portrait “of certain Florentine lady, made by nature at the Giuliano Medici request”,
considering as unimportant perhaps – adding, or recognizing name of the sitter.
Laconic mention, with its form clearly running away from well-known “contemplative astonishments” in more late
descriptions of Leonard’s Gioconda, is exceptionally effectively making our guesses hard about the real version of the events in the studio, in addition having the status of the earliest record from the period. It’s possible that it would make a spot of bother less a little bit, if to accept the scenario drawn higher up with the additional assumption – ruling out all versions of becoming of this work on any order. This image wouldn’t be a realization given or ordered usually by some of patrons.
It would come into existence within a dozen or so last years of the Leonardo’s life, under his exclusive influence and absorbing the sum of his experience into a kind of heuristic, and in addition special treatise on Nature – the only managed to finish and consistently kept hidden (here an analogy to writing he used which in some way made the reading hard for casual recipient after all). Probably from its very beginning i.e. already after the visit of Rafael (c 1504), work under coming into existence wasn’t demonstrated for anybody right up until the day, it was found by the deathbed of Leonardo.
To what extent such a view would be correct, it seems to point out known circumstances in which Leonardo’s doubt grew up and in which he could decide for such an exceptional but also effective method of form for the most important part of his intellectual possession. That fatal faint of patrons (to whom one by one he put his hope for the accomplishment of his plans on), shared almost all of his works. Remained huge set of manuscripts and an awareness of a chance for tidying them up and perhaps to make interested somebody helpful in the rest of researching efforts, of a long and creative life. Probably also, choice of exactly such resolving gave him the only possibility to express his own discursive thought beside – typical for a completely different way of thinking – the intuitivity.
On the one site – how Mary Rzepinska writes in the preface to her translation of the Leonard’s “Treaty” – “wanting of systematizing, of codifying the painting, desire for taking hold of in general rules, parallel to rules of the nature, to physical laws; on the other – chaotic terminology, not adjoining to notions and expressed plots, of new mental contents, desperate fight against the syntax of the Italian language, which already achieved wonderful pliability in the poetry, but still didn’t reach the brightness and conciseness of the scientific description”.
He would put onto possibilities which are sticking at the reception with our most important sense (here he mentioned ten functions of the eye) and in very painting itself, about which how we remember wrote: “…it doesn’t need the translation to various languages, (…) is introducing work of the nature to senses with the bigger truth and the certainty than words or writings are doing (and) is available for all generations… ” etc., etc.
If to add that for both – for us today and probably for those long after us, there’s a lack we will still be feeling of a different than intuitive, connector between empirical reality and the world of our experiences, what’s more, this lack of “logical passing” from impressions of our senses to the set of suiting them notions and theoretical principles we gathered through the ages describing the world, a huge majority of us isn’t much disturbing and it didn’t disturb in Leonardo’s
times, hence probably the solitude of the Master and his turn to the times which will come after him – the turn as much successfully provided, as today’s recognizability of Mrs. Lisa’s image, almost so universal as a trademark of “Coca Cola” or known still more – five wheels of the Olympic logo, really wouldn’t be a purpose only (in itself), but a simultaneous, outstanding medium facilitating the contact and understanding a rich content of the entire work of Leonardo – of persistent, independent way of searches, for putting hypotheses, discovering new truths every now and then about the world.
Image for the price of four thousands of ducats (in gold), found its way to the collection of the king of France in Fontainebleau, sold probably through Francesco Melzi (c.1493-1570) – the pupil and the main heir to the Master.
So let us try, quoting the Cesare Luporini words and to suppose, that:
“Gioconda’s mysterious smile isn’t showing (…) the moment or character of the personage (…), not even the landscape isn’t – even in the highest sense – the script but the spectacle or rather a vision of nature and history where from as men we are coming through vast expanses of development of the time (…), endless measure of details (as the road, descending by double curve of an unrestricted course; or growing longer in front of eyes this bold bridge tried out on spattering waters), these are not symbols, but condensed (…) meanings of the effort and inflexibilities of the human life amongst the nature “.
Mentioned road to this unknown region which Leonardo seems to point out, right behind that bridge disappears unfortunately behind the first rock niche. Waiting perhaps, for the next daredevils and next bridges? After all neither the biting cold nor silence on this remote place aren’t able to extinguish barely lasting smile which for the marvel, effectively is relieving our natural fear of the unknown.
The whole lot is losing its exceptional effect if to restore present earlier columns, therefore I am claiming, that Leonardo intentionally removed them cutting away from both sides c. eight-centimeter edges of the image. Going back to the Beatis and Vasari relations – it is possible, they both alone wrote about the same, i.e. about the Florentine lady i.e. Mrs. Lisa. A four-year period of the work, which Leonardo according to Vasari spent above the portrait of Lisa Gherardini,
couldn’t pass unnoticed in Florence, in spite of as like in the case of Isabella d’Este, also here it didn’t reach the completion of an order. Current opinions aren’t excluding conscious simplifications, which Vasari could lead, collecting documentation years later to his “Lives”. In case of “Gioconda” for example, most clearly he connected both independent motifs into the one-off. Those pieces of information obtained from everywhere were based on still vivid memories, especially amongst Florence artistic circles. There probably, he won interesting details about painting sessions at the music with “Mrs. Lisa” and her uncompleted portrait. The effects of these sessions one can neither express today nor close the description in some formula since the image went missing.
Concluding, let us stress here significantly, that description traditionally cited is inapplicable to what we are seeing in that portrait today and Vasari himself not having an opportunity to watch wrote only what he had heard about it. Ergo, saw and described in his distinctive manner but an earlier version – an unfinished portrait of “Mona Lisa”. In any case the one, we admire today, which have been concealed once by Leonardo, distinctly exceeds the previous one also by time, Master had spent on it. Hard to imagine what would be like Vasari’s commentary left under the proper one.
It’s hard to predict also whether something yet will come to light, from still lost works of Leonardo (his two codes from years of the turning point of the 15th/16th c., only in 1967 – in Madrid) and whether it’s enough, to know correct interpretation of what we know about him (about himself alone wrote nothing, or hardly nothing).
However confidently it is possible to say, that with his analytical thinking he marked out and “straightened” (another way to understand His last work – “John the Baptist” (?))
…convoluted then footpaths of getting know and understanding processes in surrounding us Nature. Her at first broad but empirically found principles, inspired and helped in creating next ones, after all to triumph with mathematically formulated criteria in minds of Galileo, Newton, Faraday, Maxwell and farther ones, until recently bygone twentieth century, in which the most brilliant of its physicists wrote, that he could see science as the image. Image – a copy of the uniformity and harmoniousness of the world. Since matter is uniform, said Einstein during the celebration of Max Planck’s sixtieth birthday anniversary, laws ruling it should also have an advantage of the versatility. Admittedly he – the idealist, didn’t mean the work of Leonardo, but certainly it is worthwhile resembling – after physicists, that evolution of views
on the simplicity and the harmoniousness of the world did a full circle just then (embracing also the Renaissance, with its fascination for world of thought of ancient Greeks and Romans), to return at the considerably higher and even more subtle level of cognition.
Leonardo knew well works of the antiquity, always however kept distance and the guardedness in the assessment, as he made it alike towards his own epoch and likings of Italian humanists (except perhaps of their exaggerated talkativeness and superficial only cognitions), naming such authors as “trumpeters of other people’s ideas”.
Today’s Leonardo certainly wouldn’t reach for brushes and paints. If to remind here the letter of Leonardo, in which once offered the Prince of Milan his services and keeping it in genuine order we will find the painting there only at the last, tenth position amongst placed in points abilities.
First nine from the beginning, are the proposals of technical solutions raising the effectiveness of the attack and the defense against enemy, that is in fact concerning the sphere of state security. And the one unfortunately prince Lodovico made of light, choosing rather his play on the lute, whether arranging mentioned earlier courtly entertainment. Sad epilogue of farther -teen year activity under the care of the prince, is more or less well-known – French army stood up beneath the walls of Milan with the best artillery in the world then. Proud prince bitterly regretted his more previous braggings, as at his court the French king is a courier, the Pope, chaplain and the Emperor alone – his banker.
Good-natured Leonardo let us admit, even today working hard and only musing at work about future technologies let us say: A.D. 2500 or “only” A.D. 2050 would rather find with difficulty an understanding for his planes at contemporary, even the most understanding bosses of bold, with the right budget and with certainty prestigious scientific centers of Europe whether of… America? There probably readily he would agree with words of the famous creed of Albert Einstein:
“Most beautiful and deepest experience given to the fate of the man – it is a feeling of the mystery .It is the underlying reason for a religion and for all of the deepest aims in art and science.
The one who didn’t experience such a feeling seems to me, if not the dead, in any case blind… “.
Profile of Leonardo included in Vasari’s “Lives..”
Above, mirrored profile, that does not match the criteria set earlier in the text
Fragment of “School of Athens” Here Rafael unified everyone by an “equal Greek profile”(?)
Below my version according to Vincius’s “Self-portrait”
…and my younger version of Leonardo
