Secretive message of the master Leonardo, in as much as it exists certainly has nothing to do with the “twentieth seventh hand” in the “Last Supper”. Doubts most often pass, when to confront such an idea of interpretation with existing, still sixteenth-century replicas. There that hand with the knife clearly, belongs to St. Peter who based it with back of the wrist against his own hip. It is quite natural and frequent in his works, the way of arranging the hand (here exceptionally with “cutlery”) and wrist is just enabling the way it wrists. Stays only a matter of more, or less essential habits and table manners. At the Windsor Castle Royal Library are being kept preliminary studies to the figures of the “Last Supper “, and among them also that arm with marked direction of hand. Exceptional rank of destruction of the mural in the refectory, may cause misunderstandings and generate a temptation of easy solutions, hence as I think, peculiar restraint to a substantive content in many commentaries. His pre drawn sketches to the figures of apostles far less suffered damages, and if any commentary here (at such a pace of damage in the refectory) – the earlier, the more valuable for new attempts of interpretation. Therefore far more of help here will be both sketches and for example the classic already today, text of J. W. Goethe. 

Based on researches prematurely dead Joseph Bossi, the inhabitant of Milan from the origin (born 1777), containing also a considerable amount of facts of unfortunate history of this painting, from which would be worthwhile quoting a part (here in free translation from the original German) before launching any attempt of supplements, or even changing our entire idea about Leonardo’s paintings.

That is, only in 1807 fates of the refectory, and with it of the “Last Supper” undergoes an improvement. Two years earlier Milan (with Napoleon on the throne) becomes capital city of the Italian Republic. Prince Eugene Beauharnais as viceroy wants on Lodovico il Moro pattern, to grace beginnings of his regency, to attend decaying artworks of Milan.

How Goethe is writing, a project of the realization of the copy of Leonardo’s mural is supposed to come into existence, this time in the form of mosaic, as the technique protecting lasting of artwork in such a wet conditions far more effectively, than the painting technique applied originally. The management over making the project out mentioned earlier Bossi is embracing, starting to collect a rich iconographic material and thoroughly studying c. thirty earlier copies, since the state of the original makes impossible precise reconstructing. The fatal location and the quality of work of builders from before three hundred years (three hundred which passed till Bossi’s times), it is scarcely a beginning of the story. Whole of monastic buildings, in which refectory located most low relative to the land, was repeatedly flooded with floods.

First well-known, took place still in 1500 and Leonardo alone conducting his works had to see effects for it. Second from 1800 Goethe could probably see personally determining the water level in the refectory and growing humidity – source of the destroying mould there. Times of the Italian campaign of Napoleon of which he is writing about, left particularly a disgraceful card in this history. (In 1796 Napoleon took 13 manuscripts of Leonardo out of Ambrosiana, and treaty “De Divina Proportione” by L. Pacioli. After the ending of Napoleonic wars in 1815 only the “Codex Atlanticus” has returned). 

Admittedly general Bonaparte in person visited and admired paintings in Santa Maria delle Grazie, but right after the departure of the future emperor, his army organized for themselves up in the refectory the stable and the magazine with fodder, ignoring left orders. In such situation Joseph Bossi started by mounting windows and put the new floor, tear off by Frenchmen, then finally turned to install the scaffolding by the mural, which let us remind, has an impressive dimensions 4.20/9.10[m], with figures about of more than natural size (in the scale 1.5 : 1). Making it took Leonardo sixteen years – according to Goethe, instead of a few how other authors want.

Goethe most clearly is fusing the series of laborious repair works, which Leonardo carried out still in 1510. Mainly a flood and an earlier damp were at fault, of which destructive role Master Vincius unfortunately poorly judged, experimenting with oil on plaster techniques. The traditional ones didn’t guarantee Master enough time and a possibility of providing any improvements or changes on plaster. (Anyway, half a century earlier F. Bruneleschi needed sixteen years to raise the gigantic, well about the span of 45 m dome of the Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence, but most probably nor he, neither anyone else could undertake then, so many separate tasks at the same time – works at fortifying the Piombino, fortification of Imola and other cities, whether wonderful project of the regulation Arno river (dating back to the conflict lasting then with Pisa) and of numerous channels of Tuskany – they originated contemporary cartography, geodesy, the hydrology and certainly they are not depleting the largeness of works at that time he executed. 

In this place also one should remind, that finished not a long time ago (1999) conservator’s works at the mural lasted over twenty years.) Then also should not surprise, his work at painting of “St Anna” and about ten years over the painting of “Leda” whether with “St John the Baptist”, since he devoted to the majority of executed orders only a part of his time, working at the same time at some theoretical problems, sometimes only concerning the ordered painting. But oftentimes when the problem found the explanation, the painting remained unfinished in spite of extended, even ten years or more period of the work.

The legend bonded with the beginning of the “Last Supper”, maliciously quoted from time to time, is talking about a man posing to the figure of the Judas. He admitted himself to the Master that ten years earlier seated to the figure of the Christ in this mural. That legend seems to be closer to the truth (at least for a period, works were lasting), than widely accepted dating of that work. The fact, that after 1498 Leonardo creates next magnificent compositions, and is travelling quite a lot: Genoa, Venice, Mantua, Urbino, Bologna and many other cities, including a few longer even stays at Florence and at Rome, must not indicate absolutely completion of his work in the refectory. The mural probably in its general part was ready, since the king of France felt a desire, to take it (even together with a wall) out of the country. 

Together with the French occupation of Milan, the prince (employer of the mural) lost the duchy and spent the rest of his life in the captivity. At the not completed work still however a substantial fragment was missing – of a very originally solved central part (Judas Iscariot in the direct neighborhood of the Christ), by which according to Vasari words Leonardo spent the most of time. That novel solution most probably caused the long row of changes in ready presentations of the rest of apostles with unusual, but how typical among Italians, language of the gesture of their hands. It is also obvious, that then pupil of Leonardo, Marco d’Oggiono taken to help as a few other, still before the beginning of work at “Last Supper”, is continuing creating the copy, in which many researchers discern fragments of participation of Master alone.

Looking on relatively fast progressing destruction of the mural (in 1517 it already required more serious efforts in making legible the whole), Leonardo could undertake a decision of making the copy out, still under works by the original. Dated for 1510, made in the reduced size and served, as the pattern for bigger, on a wall of the refectory of the other monastery – in Castelazzo. It is the first one around three most accurate and most essential for us of copies, according to which Bossi planned to make his own draft out in the 1:1 scale. In it also, he recognized interesting parts concerning heads and hands of apostles, particularly the face of the Christ, by which as Goethe wanted, the master Leonardo trying to help the pupil, showed the greater confidence drawing scratches of the Saviour. On genuine mural as we know:

“(…) gave apostles heads (…) the great majesty and the beauty but the head of the Christ left not finished, not seeing a possibility to grant a heavenly divinity, with which he thought that was necessary for the head of the Christ” – G. Vasari.

The second copy – mural on the wall in Ponte Capriasca, dated in a row for 1565, is Pietro Lovino’s work. Important, since her author printed names of the apostles by figures, and the third copy from 1612 of Andrea Bianchi authorship, called Vespino, came into existence ordered by the cardinal Federico Borromeo (1564 -1631), archbishop of Milan, the founder of the Ambrosiana Library, in which that one only in a 1 : 1 scale (from before repaintings) is up today. Unfortunately Bossi dies at the age of 38 leaving the work begun and rich comparative material which he earlier collected. In the published, not by coincidence his work still in 1810 (the 300 anniversary of the Leonardo’s work), containing mentioned materials about “Last Supper”, put also a Giuseppe Benaglia drawing showing the” Self-portrait” of Leonardo da Vinci, and made out, what clearly marked according to eighteenth century Rafaello Albertolli copy (the original was then inaccessible).

However that detail all the way to 1960 didn’t prevent incorrect treating of a copy, as genuine work of master Leonardo even then, when that appropriate was able for watching in Turin. Occasionally today, we have quite opposite situations – reproductions of the Turin original (sometimes retouched with purpose of better look), are provided with the commentary allowing treat it as the 19th-century copy.

More serious, well irreparable unfortunately transformations underwent mural in the eighteenth century in the refectory. Goethe is pointing especially on two, let us say more gently – unlucky painters. At first Bellotti in 1726, then certain Mazza, who in 1770 year didn’t hesitate even before scraping off (!) of the genuine painting layer. It’s no wonder that Goethe compared acting both of artists with a job of Herostrates in Ephesus. (It is interesting how in that case he would treat damages a hundred years later, when through Europe rolled down two horrible world wars, with how essential in them participation of his compatriots? The refectory laid in ruins and only with some miracle wall with the mural during air raid survived – no securities made then would help).