More than Meets The Eye?

I'm sure that you know I have zero patience with Da Vinci code flights of fancy. If not, read this. Now we've got a similar situation with another scholar claiming that there's more to Leonardo than meets the eye.

According to the Guardian, Silvano Vinceti claims that the initials "LV" can be seen in Mona Lisa's right pupil, and maybe the letters of the name of the unidentified woman in the left pupil. Here's an extract from the Guardian article.

"Invisible to the naked eye and painted in black on green-brown are the letters LV in her right pupil, obviously Leonardo's initials, but it is what is in her left pupil that is far more interesting," said Vinceti, the chairman of the Italian national committee for cultural heritage.

Vinceti said that the letters B or S, or possibly the initials CE, were discernible, a vital clue to identifying the model who sat for the Renaissance artist. She has often been named as Lisa Gherardini, the wife of a Florentine merchant, but Vinceti disagreed, claiming Leonardo painted the Mona Lisa in Milan. He said he would announce his conclusions next month.

"On the back of the painting are the numbers '149', with a fourth number erased, suggesting he painted it when he was in Milan in the 1490s, using as a model a woman from the court of Ludovico Sforza, the Duke of Milan," said Vinceti, who claimed earlier this year that he had identified the lost remains of the painter Michelangelo da Caravaggio."

 This reminds me of a claim made about a Poussin painting, about a decade ago. The researcher in question stated that the hem of the gown of a female figure in his London Saving of Moses contained the word "CAPO", an allusion to the woman's head, Moses as the head of the Jewish people, and the French king as head of state, the monarch often being compared to Moses. I gave this scholar the benefit of the doubt at the time, but several years later under microscopic analysis the letters were shown to be random brush marks. What lies beneath, or not.

The moral here- as with the Leonardo- is that there might be more than meets the eye- but there could also be considerably less. We await with baited breath Vinceti's report next year.

(Thanks to Ben Sweeney for tipping me off about this story).

Comments

[H Niyazi]

Nice summation David!

What is most annoying is the widespread coverage this story got and not one shred of evidence or photo to show for it.

This Vincenti has a lot of Barnum and Bailey in him, which is quite distasteful. One usually expects a researcher to calmly presenting their findings for peer review and analysis, not whip up a media frenzy with naught to show for it.

Things are obviously done differently in Italy :)

H

[Ben Sweeney]

Great article as usual..David;;;; Let us see the evidence then if legit, see where it takes us."Cerca Trova" Seek and you shall find, if the letters are there then why? Human Nature is again on display, of course those with agendas will devise a way to make a buck or pound but if letters are there then we should carefully look at every painting. Leonardo as an optic scientist would be happy. This is not about Mona's true identity, it about Leonardo and his technique. The venerated Mona has nothing to worry about, only those who have made a living claiming to know her and her creator.
best, ben sweeney

[Art History Today]

Thanks

H- we'll have to wait and see.

Ben- We seem to be dealing with all things Leonardo at the moment. Good to hear from you.

[Derek Bair]

I thought you would be interested in what I found regarding the Mona Lisa and other Leonardo art. I have a preview on my site itsjustlife.com or itsjustlife.com/monsalai.html and I have pictures to back up what I found. ;-)