In the 16th century someone decided that Da Vinci’s notebooks had to be dismembered. It took us 400 years to solve their mistake.

Upon his death, in 1519, Leonardo da Vinci He left more than just paintings and frescoes that crown him as one of the great references of Renaissance painting. Just as (or even more) important to understanding the depth of his genius are his personal notebooks, full of notesillustrations, graphics… come from his own handwriting and sprinkled with his characteristic mirror writing. By chance of history, in the 16th century this bibliographical treasure suffered a ‘act of editorial vandalism’ that has conditioned the way we understand Leonardo. Until now. An unfortunate legacy. The name of Francesco Melzi Maybe it doesn’t tell you much. And it’s normal. Melzi was an Italian painter of the 16th century whose memory has been eclipsed for posterity by geniuses of the stature of Michelangelo, Raphael Sanzio and Leonardo Da Vinci, of whom he was a disciple. However, Melzi does stand out for something, a role that has conditioned our way of understanding the author of ‘La Mona Lisa’: upon Leonardo’s death, Melzi became his executor, responsible for looking after his manuscripts. That enormous legacy made up of hundreds and hundreds of manuscript sheets ended up in the hands of Pompeo Leoni (1533-1608), a sculptor from Arezzo, in Tuscany, who one day decided to dismember Leonardo’s notebooks. The result was disastrous, although to be honest Leoni’s objective was not to destroy the notebooks, but to ‘reorganize’ them following an arbitrary criterion. And what was the result? Basically Leoni dedicated himself to separating, classifying and putting together sheets of Leonardo’s notebooks and loose pages in a whimsical way. Based on what he considered best. The result was that many of the annotations that Da Vinci had recorded in the same set of manuscripts between the mid-1470s and his death in 1519 were divided into two different codices. In one, the largest, Leoni included all material (drawings and writings) of a technical or scientific nature. The second, smaller codex was reserved for material that in his opinion had an artistic and figurative character. From Italy to England. Leoni’s ‘attack’ did not end there. At the beginning of the 17th century his son-in-law, Polidoro Calchi, decided to get rid of the material he had inherited from the sculptor, which caused Da Vinci’s old notebooks to end up scattered around the world, separated by hundreds of kilometers. The first codex, that of technical annotations, today known as Codex Atlanticusended up in the hands of Count Galeazzo Arconati, who in turn donated it in 1637 to the Veneranda Biblioteca Ambrosiana. The second codex traveled even further. Around 1620 he ended up in England and half a century later was integrated in the Royal Collection at Windsor. Righted the wrong. More than four centuries later that capricious dismemberment of Da Vinci’s annotations has been amended at last. At least in part. A few days ago the Italian embassy in the United Kingdom, the Ministry of Culture and representatives of the Galileo Museum, the Veneranda Biblioteca Ambrosiana and the Royal Collection Trust presented in London a new tool named ‘Leonardotheka 2.0’. The name gives a clue to its approach: it is nothing more nor less than an immense ‘library’ digital of Da Vinci’s legacy, a resource that allows many of the manuscripts of the Renaissance genius to be consulted in an accessible and agile way. The Galileo Museum slide that from now on, whoever wishes will be able to explore the material by accessing the archives independently or with cross searches, in addition to “the results of more than 200 years of research” on Da Vinci’s career and work. 3,500 pages. Beyond that advantage, what is really important about Leonardotheka 2.0. is that, as remember The authorities of Florence have gathered around 3,500 manuscript pages by Leonardo that in some cases had been separated since the end of the 16th century. It is a virtual union, not a physical one, but it is still a milestone and helps to right the mistake made centuries ago by Pompeo Leoni. In total, the digital library brings together the 1,119 folios of the Codex Atlanticus and 550 pages from the Royal Collection of Windsor. Some sources specify that it is about one third of Da Vinci’s entire surviving legacy, which also includes the codices preserved in Madrid. Is it that important? Regardless of what it may mean for researchers, Leonardotheka 2.0 is important for several reasons. The main one is that it has allowed us, in words of the Galileo Museum, “reconstruct the original state of Leonardo’s manuscript legacy before Leoni’s disastrous intervention” in the 16th century. And that is not a minor detail. Although the separation between art and science might make sense to Leoni, the truth is that goes against of the Renaissance mentality that Leonardo embodied. “It offers a new perspective on his thinking, vision and working methods,” they underline from Florence. “The platform highlights the connection between scientific studies and the figurative drawings of the Tuscan genius.” Beyond Leonardo. “This project not only helps to recover the complexity of Leonardo’s work in its original form, but also contributes to the new interpretation, in development for several years, of this crucial period in European history. Using digital tools designed to analyze the original texts, Leonardotheka 2.0 will make this challenge possible,” highlights Michele Ciliberto, from the National Institute of Renaissance Studies. Filling gaps. The second reason why the project is so important is that it has allowed us to recover pieces that had been damaged when the notebooks were dismembered in the 16th century. To be more precise, those responsible for the Leonardotheka they assure who have been able to “reconstruct” 50 manuscripts “thanks to the insertion of fragments preserved in Windsor within the pages of Codex Atlanticus, restoring their original context.” One of the reconstructions carried out by the experts has made it possible to “reconcile” the drawing of a horse preserved in the British collection with a note on an equestrian monument preserved in the Codex Atlanticus. “The restored folio probably … Read more

Mathematicians have been trying to solve the mystery of Da Vinci’s ‘vitruvio’. The answer was in sight

The history of art is full of universal icons, but few, very few, reach the popularity level of the ‘Vitruvio man’ drawn around 1490 by Leonardo da Vinci. And it is logical. Artistic and scientific issues apart, the work has become a reference Pop. The original is preserved in the Accademia di Belle Arti Venice, but the same face, the same body, has stamped over the last decades in books, t -shirts, sweatshirts, backpacks and posters. That without counting every time we have seen it reproduced on the big screen. The most curious thing is that despite that exhibition, the ‘man of vitruvio’ is still surrounded by mysteries. Or so it was until now, at least. A London dentist believes having solved the complex mathematical puzzle that Leonardo hidden in the work. A name: Marcus Vitruvius. Leonardo da Vinci’s is (by far) the most famous, but the Tuscan genius was not the only one in representing the man of vitruvio. We keep more or less similar samples from other artists, such as Francesco Di Giorgio Martini either Giacomo Andrea de Ferrara. And it’s normal. After all, these are exercises based on the canon of the human body of Marcus Vitruvius (Exactly, hence his name), a Roman architect and engineer. It was he who many centuries before Leonardo theorized about human physiognomy in Of archiecture. “In the body, the central point is the navel. If a man placed himself on his back, with extended hands and feet and a compass focused on the nave The architect theorized Roman in the first century before our era, convinced that a man’s proportions can adjust to a square. But … how to do it? That is the theory. Different thing is practice. Throughout the different artists have launched themselves to represent human physiognomy partially inspired by the canon of proportions proposed by vitrubio. Not everyone with equal fortune. By 1490 Leonardo Da Vinci, who then was around 40, got down to work in one of his notebooks and prepared a drawing that during the last five centuries has fascinated scholars and profane. The work shows a man in several overlapping positions, standing, with extended legs and more or less open arms. All perfectly registered in a square and in a circle in an exercise that would probably have fascinated the Roman architect. We have recorded the result in memory and a quick search arrives on Google to find good quality reproductions, but there is a pending mystery: how the hell did Leonardo did? The great ask unknown. Yes, the result is obvious. And yes, the drawing is there for those who want to copy it in detail. But … what recipe Did Vinci continue to plan and execute it? What calculations did you use? Was it based on any pattern? And if so, what system did you employ? “The search for the Da Vinci geometric method has generated numerous theories, each of which tries to explain the measured relationship between the circle and the square in the original drawing,” Explain Rory Mac Sweeney, the British dentist who believes he has found the key. “For more than 500 years, the Da Vinci geometric system for the precise relationship between the circle and the square in his drawing of the ‘Vitruvio man’ has remained in the mystery,” Mac Sweeney abounds, which has just published An article reviewed by parts in Journal of Maythematics and Arts. What if the key is the golden proportion? His theory is just that, a theory, but it is interesting because it offers an alternative to the most popular explanation, which argues that to draw his drawing Da Vinci was inspired by the Aurea proportionan idea that reinforces the collaboration of the Tuscan with his compatriot Luca Paciolithe author of Of divine proportion. The problem, Remember Mac Sweeneyis that this explanation has not just been perfect. “It produces a significant error, which seems unlikely given Leonardo’s geometric precision.” Good riddle, bad explanation. Other authors have provided alternative explanations to the mystery of Vitruvio, such as Leonardo was based on octagons or a heptagon, but Mac Sweeney believes all these theories present “a fundamental problem”: they approach more or less the measures used by the artist in his diagram, but in the opinion of the British researcher it is difficult to connect them with the themes that really obsessed Da Vinci. “They are still purely abstract mathematical exercises, without connection with Leonardo da Vinci’s documented interest in human anatomy, natural functional and main relationships. As geometric riddles, they work. As explanations of Leonardo’s methodology and intentions, they do not offer a convincing justification of their specific decisions,” Reflect. Hidden “with the naked eye”. The most curious thing is that Mac Sweeney believes that the solution “has been hidden with the naked eye” in the handwritten annotations left by Leonardo himself next to the drawing. Specifically, it refers to a comment in which the artist points out that, with the body in a certain posture, the space between the legs forms an equilateral triangle. For a long time it was believed that this phrase was a simple poetic ornament, pure rhetoric or a practical guide for composition, but the British expert believes that it is the key to mystery. And what is special? That the triangle adjusts to a natural pattern, one that Mac Sweeney knows well for his dentist profession: Bonwill’s trianglean imaginary equilateral triangle of the human anatomy that marks the fundamental geometric relationship for the proper functioning of the jaw. “Connects the mandibular condyles with the midpoint of the lower central incisors and corresponds precisely to Leonardo’s explicit reference to an ‘equilateral triangle’ in its construction of the ‘vitruvio man’”, Clarify. “The construction of Leonardo demonstrates the same tetrahedral principles present in craniofacial architecture,” insists The British dentist before citing studies and calculations that reinforce its hypothesis. “The equilateral triangle, which Leonardo made explicit reference between the legs of the figure, when replicating six times around the navel, creates the … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.