Leonardo da Vinci's "Last Supper"; a non-fiction Interpretation

the following clip is a filling version of a PowerPoint presentation I prepared in 2006 after the release of the movie The Da Vinci Code the film as you may recall was based on Dan Brown's extremely popular and controversial novel the heated controversy unleashed at that time concerned the assertion that Jesus Christ was secretly married to or at least had an intimate relationship with Mary Magdalene and that Mary was pregnant with their child at the time Jesus was crucified this theory is actually centuries-old and interest in it had already been successfully reawakened several years previously in another best-selling book entitled the Holy Blood and the Holy Grail it describes how Joseph of Arimathaea took the expecting Mary Magdalene under his wings and in order to protect her from the persecutions of the early Christian era brought her across the Mediterranean to the South of France where her child was born the book further tells of a secret society which was allegedly formed to protect the offspring and bloodline of the holy couple and to preserve the secret of its existence throughout the ages it asserts that the secret society is still in existence today Dan Brown retells this legend in his novel adding the claim that Leonardo da Vinci was one of a long line of grandmasters of this secret society and encoded its clandestine knowledge in his famous Last Supper fresco the subject is still relevant for us today because many families of today's ruling global elite trace their ancestry to a bloodline which is allegedly of the lineage of the Israelite King David a prominent ancestor of Jesus Christ I have already touched upon the subject in greater detail in another short film entitled Obama Akhenaten and the Temple of Solomon even if you are not interested in Dan Brown in bloodlines or secret societies you will find that learning about the symbology of Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper one of humanity's greatest art masterpieces will be a valuable enrichment of your general education so I hope you enjoy the following film version of my previous PowerPoint presentation entitled a nonfiction interpretation of Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper this presentation is intended as a tool to help us differentiate between what is fiction and what may be true in The Da Vinci Code interpretation of the symbology of the Last Supper let us begin with the da Vinci Code scene where the two fugitives are in the mansion of sir leigh teabing who later turns out to be the villain teacher as he begins interpreting the Last Supper symbology for professor Langdon and Sophie Neveu the first statement he makes is the scene is supposed to be depicting the breaking of bread and the blessing of the wine the model for the communion if there are no glasses of wine on the table not one glass of wine can be seen this is not quite correct as a matter of fact there are indeed glasses of wine on the table 12 of them to be exact the wine glasses of each of the Twelve Apostles with the exception of Peter's glass which appears to be blocked by the figure of Judas as well as Jesus class can be seen in front of each of the figures Leonardo's original fresco is unfortunately quite faded so some of the finer details are difficult to recognize here we see a very well-preserved painted copy of the Last Supper made during the Vinci's time in which the details are more easily recognizable of course it seems surprising to us to see clear transparent glasses depicted which were not known in the 1st century AD when Jesus lived but were already commonly used during the time of the Renaissance the artistic custom of da Vinci's time they know particularly at historical accuracy ancient figures were almost always depicted wearing contemporary garments and in contemporary environments the Florentine painter Domenico Deol and I'll also painted a famous version of the Last Supper 15 years before Leonardo observing the details of Gillan dials painting we can see various kinds of transparent and translucent glassware depicted drinking glasses wine and water crafts dipping bowls this again illustrates the common practice of Italian Renaissance painters of using contemporary Venetian glass designs in their compositions specifically Leonardo's work shows the moment after Jesus has announced that one of those sitting at the table will betray him the 12 apostles react with various degrees of outrage and shock the notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci named all of the disciples in the order in which they are shown which is how we come to identify them Leonardo grouped the Apostles into four groups of three from left to right they are Bartholomew James the lesser and Andrew formed the first group of three all of them appearing surprised Andrew holds both of his hands up in front of him in a frightened gesture Leonardo identifies the second group of three as being Judas Iscariot Simon Peter and John Judas is holding a bag of silver in his right hand while reaching for a piece of bread with his left the third group is made up of Thomas James the great and Philip these three appear in varying degrees of shock Thomas with his hand raised and Philip seemed to be requesting some sort of explanation while James the great between them appears to be recoiling from Jesus in horror the last three Matthew Jude Thaddeus and Simon the zealot appear to be discussing the matter with each other in a rendition of Luke 22 verse 23 they began to question among themselves which of them it might be who would do this it would be helpful at this point to read the Gospel accounts of the scene the painting depicts from the Gospel of Luke and he took bread and gave thanks and broke it and gave unto them saying this is my body which is given for you this do in remembrance of me likewise also the cup after supper saying this cup is the New Testament in my blood which is shed for you but behold the hand of him that betrays me is with me on the table they began to enquire among themselves which of them it was that should do this thing from the Gospel of John verily verily I say unto you that one of you shall betray me then the disciples looked on one another doubting of whom he spoke now there was leaning on Jesus bosom one of his disciples whom Jesus loved summoned Peter therefore beckoned to him that he should ask who it should be of whom he spoke from the Gospel of Matthew and as they did eat he said verily I say unto you that one of you shall betray me and they were exceeding sorrowful and began every one of them saying unto Him Lord is it I and he answered and said he that dips his hand with me in the dish the same shall betray me from the Gospel of Mark and as they sat and did eat Jesus said verily I say unto you one of you which is eating with me shall betray me and they began to be sorrowful and to say unto him one by one is it I and another said is it I and he answered and said unto them it is one of the twelve that dips with me in the dish it is obvious that each of the four writers of the Gospels remembers the scene a little differently some describe certain details which the others omit a synthesis of the accounts reveals these main points jesus expounds on the jewish kiddush blessing of bread and wine and introduces the later Christian sacrament of communion he afterwards announces that one of the twelve will betray him the disciples began heatedly discussing among themselves who it could be some of them asked Jesus directly is it I the idea comes up that Peter should ask John who apparently had a particularly close relationship with Jesus to ask the master who the traitor is Jesus apparently consents to give a sign in the form of an action he will take simultaneously with the traitor involving the dipping of bread let us consider each of the above points individually as they are depicted in the painting Jesus announces that one of the twelve will betray him the presence of a traitor and his unknown identity is symbolized by the ownerless hand holding a life it is obvious that da Vinci went to a great deal of trouble to make this symbolic device of the ownerless knife subtle yet clearly recognizable the sketch of the position of Peters arm is the most detailed of all the preparatory studies da Vinci drew for the Last Supper the angle of the two arms in relation to each other also makes it obvious that Peters arm on which he is leaning cannot be the arm holding the knife another quality differentiating the two arms is the color of the coat sleeves the sleeve of Peters coat is blue whereas the sleeve of the arm holding the knife is brown the disciples begin heatedly discussing among themselves who the trader could be the agitated movement among the figures the discussion and the questioning is obvious Phillip is portrayed pointing to himself with a questioning gesture as her saying is it I James motions to Peter who in turn whispers to John but he should ask Jesus to reveal the traders identity to them Peters motion is not threatening as Dan Brown suggests in The Da Vinci Code but seems rather to be the friendly familiar gesture of someone who lays his hand on the shoulder of another to whom he feels close while speaking privately with him Jesus gives a sign in the form of an action he takes simultaneously with the trader involving the dipping of bread with his left hand Jesus is showing a piece of bread as if saying this is my body which is given for you while his right hand is giving the sign by making a reaching motion at the same time as Judas in his book dan Brown articulates a theory which is repeated in The Da Vinci Code film that the person sitting to the right of Jesus is in reality marry mankind he points out John's feminine appearance and the fact that he and Jesus are wearing complementary colors John refers to himself several times in his Gospel as the disciple who Jesus loved there is another very old theory which interprets these references as indicating that there might have been a homosexual relationship between John and Jesus da Vinci himself being homosexual may have been expressing and adherence to this theory by depicting John as being very feminine this could also be one explanation for the complementary colors he uses for the clothing of Jesus in John it was however not unusual from medieval and renaissance artists to give young men a feminine delicate appearance the depiction of the Apostle Philip is also very feminine furthermore the root of the word loved which john uses in these references is agape divine love as opposed to fellows family love or friendship or eros sexual love John was the youngest of the Apostles and it appears from other gospel episodes that Jesus had a somewhat fatherly or older brother like relationship to him this is brought out especially in the scene after the crucifixion when Jesus was still on the cross speaks to his mother and John when Jesus therefore saw his mother and the disciple standing by whom he loved he said unto his mother woman behold thy son then said he to the disciple behold thy mother and from that hour the disciple took her unto his own home while our little study doesn't address Dan Brown's further da Vinci Code theories concerning the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene it does make it clear but his suggestions of a da Vinci connection and his interpretation of the symbology of the Last Supper are not based on accurate scholarship and seemed to be at best purely fictional you

Channel: MetaphysicaTV

Views: 66,300

Rating: 4.2615385 out of 5

Keywords: Last Supper (Art Subject), da Vinci Code, Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, Merovingian, Mary Magdalene, Joseph of Arimathea, Temple of Solomon, Leonardo da Vinci, King David, Jesus Christ, Priory of Sion, Victor Zelikovsky, The Da Vinci Code (Book)

Id: oxa2pLcwJM8

Length: 18min 24sec (1104 seconds)

Published: Sun Jun 09 2013