The story of the Last Supper. Leonardo da Vinci. The Last Supper: description of the painting, photo, secrets of the fresco "The Last Supper"

Truly, there is no secret in the world that would not someday become obvious, for manuscripts do not burn. And we continue to debunk one of the most shameless historical myths, regarding the name defamed by the Christian Church Mary Magdalene. Recently it has become important for us to have important coverage of this topic, because Rigden Djappo himself speaks with great respect about her and her “great feat”, which we will certainly come to later, as evidenced by those presented in the book " Sensei 4. Primordial Shambhala" materials describing the completely unknown history of this mysterious and beautiful woman. Very soon in the "Primordial Knowledge" section we will post detailed content this priceless, in our opinion, literary work.

In the meantime, following the article “One of the secrets of Mary Magdalene, beloved disciple of Jesus Christ,” we continue the search for inconvenient official Church truth, trying to figure out what and why from us - ordinary people- have been hidden for thousands of years, what can you do, we have to say it straight, by the so-called “clergy”. Having received the keys of Knowledge, “doors and eyes open” for any person, he begins to see the surrounding reality from a radically different angle, and first of all, it becomes unclear to him why these people call themselves “clergy” and hide so many secrets? If people knew the truth, a lot in this world could change, and we are convinced, for the better for people.

Today we turn to the monumental painting of Leonardo da Vinci" Last Supper ", depicting the scene of the last supper of Jesus Christ with his disciples. It was written in the years 1495-1498 in the Dominican monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. The reason for our conversion in it? Like many unbiased biblical scholars, we became very interested, why is it clear that there is a woman next to Jesus , while the Church for thousands of years has been urging people to believe in the version - about a certain Apostle John, from whose pen the fourth, one of the canonical Gospels “of John the Theologian” came out - the “beloved disciple” of the Savior.

So, let's look at the original first:

Location

Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan, Italy.

"Last Supper" (official information, according to Wikipedia)

General information

The dimensions of the image are approximately 460x880 cm, it is located in the refectory of the monastery, on the back wall. The theme is traditional for this type of premises. The opposite wall of the refectory is covered with a fresco by another master; Leonardo also put his hand to it.

Technique

He painted “The Last Supper” on a dry wall, and not on wet plaster, so the painting is not a fresco in the true sense of the word. The fresco cannot be altered during work, and Leonardo decided to cover the stone wall with a layer of resin, gabs and mastic, and then paint over this layer with tempera. Due to the chosen method, the painting began to deteriorate just a few years after the completion of the work.

Figures depicted

The apostles are depicted in groups of three, located around the figure of Christ sitting in the center. Groups of apostles, from left to right:

Bartholomew, Jacob Alfeev and Andrey;
Judas Iscariot (wearing green and blue color) , Peter and John (?);
Thomas, James Zebedee and Philip;
Matthew, Judas Thaddeus and Simon.

In the 19th century, notebooks by Leonardo da Vinci with the names of the apostles were found; previously only Judas, Peter, John and Christ had been identified with certainty.

Analysis of the picture

The work is believed to depict the moment when Jesus utters the words that one of the apostles will betray him (“and as they were eating, he said, “Truly I say to you, one of you will betray me”), and the reaction of each of them. As in other depictions of the Last Supper of the time, Leonardo places those sitting at the table on one side so that the viewer can see their faces. Most previous works on the subject excluded Judas, placing him alone at the opposite end of the table from where the other eleven apostles and Jesus sat, or depicting all the apostles except Judas with a halo. Judas clutches a small pouch, perhaps representing the silver he received for betraying Jesus, or an allusion to his role among the twelve apostles as treasurer. He was the only one with his elbow on the table. The knife in Peter's hand, pointing away from Christ, perhaps refers the viewer to the scene in the Garden of Gethsemane during the arrest of Christ. Jesus' gesture can be interpreted in two ways. According to the Bible, Jesus predicts that his betrayer will reach out to eat at the same time he does. Judas reaches for the dish, not noticing that Jesus is also reaching for him. right hand. At the same time, Jesus points to bread and wine, which symbolize the sinless body and shed blood, respectively.
The figure of Jesus is positioned and illuminated in such a way that the viewer's attention is drawn primarily to him. The head of Jesus is at a vanishing point for all lines of perspective.
The painting contains repeated references to the number three:

The apostles sit in groups of three;
behind Jesus there are three windows;
the contours of the figure of Christ resemble a triangle.

The light illuminating the entire scene does not come from the windows painted behind, but comes from the left, just like real light from the window on the left wall. In many places the picture passes golden ratio; for example, where Jesus and John, who is on his right, put their hands, the canvas is divided in this ratio.

"The Last Supper. Mary Magdalene sits next to Christ!" (Lynn Picknett, Clive Prince. "Leonardo da Vinci and the Brotherhood of Zion")

(a book worth reading for its analytical perspective)

There is one of the most famous - immortal - works of art in the world. Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper fresco is the only surviving painting in the refectory of the monastery of Santa Maria del Grazia. It is made on a wall that remained standing after the entire building was reduced to rubble as a result of Allied bombing during World War II. Although others have presented their versions of this biblical scene to the world wonderful artists- Nicolas Poussin and even such an idiosyncratic author as Salvador Dali - it is Leonardo’s creation that, for some reason, amazes the imagination more than any other painting. Variations on this theme can be seen everywhere, and they cover the entire spectrum of attitudes towards the topic: from admiration to ridicule.

Sometimes an image looks so familiar that it is practically not examined in detail, although it is open to the gaze of any viewer and requires a more careful consideration: its true deep meaning remains a closed book, and the viewer glances only at its cover.

It was this work of Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) - the suffering genius of Renaissance Italy - that showed us the path that led to discoveries so exciting in their consequences that at first they seemed incredible. It is impossible to understand why entire generations of scientists did not notice what was available to our astonished gaze, why such explosive information patiently waited all this time for writers like us, remained outside the mainstream of historical or religious research and was not discovered.

To be consistent, we must return to the Last Supper and look at it with fresh, unbiased eyes. This is not the time to consider it in the light of familiar ideas about history and art. Now the moment has come when the view of a person who is completely unfamiliar with this so famous scene will be more appropriate - let the veil of bias fall from our eyes, let us allow ourselves to look at the picture in a new way.

The central figure, of course, is Jesus, whom Leonardo, in his notes relating to this work, calls the Savior. He thoughtfully looks down and slightly to his left, his hands are stretched out on the table in front of him, as if offering the viewer the gifts of the Last Supper. Since it was then, according to the New Testament, that Jesus introduced the sacrament of Communion, offering bread and wine to the disciples as his “flesh” and “blood,” the viewer has the right to expect that there should be a cup or goblet of wine on the table in front of him in order for the gesture to appear justified . Ultimately, for Christians, this supper immediately precedes the passion of Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane, where he fervently prays “let this cup pass from me...” - another association with the image of wine - blood - and also the holy blood shed before the Crucifixion for the atonement of sins of all humanity. Nevertheless, there is no wine before Jesus (and not even a symbolic amount of it on the entire table). Could these outstretched arms mean what in the vocabulary of artists is called an empty gesture?

Given the absence of wine, it is perhaps no coincidence that of all the bread on the table, very few are “broken.” Since Jesus himself associated with his flesh the bread to be broken in the supreme sacrament, is there a subtle hint sent to us of the true nature of Jesus' suffering?

However, all this is just the tip of the iceberg of heresy reflected in this picture. According to the Gospel, the Apostle John the Theologian was physically so close to Jesus during this Supper that he leaned “to his chest.” However, in Leonardo this young man occupies a position completely different from that required by the “stage instructions” of the Gospel, but, on the contrary, exaggeratedly deviated from the Savior, bowing his head in right side. An unbiased viewer can be forgiven if he notices only these curious features in relation to a single image - the image of the Apostle John. But, although the artist, due to his own preferences, of course, was inclined towards the ideal of male beauty of a somewhat feminine type, there can be no other interpretations: in this moment we are looking at a woman. Everything about him is strikingly feminine. No matter how old and faded the image may be due to the age of the fresco, one cannot help but notice the tiny, graceful hands, delicate facial features, clearly female breasts and a gold necklace. This is a woman, precisely a woman, which is marked by clothing that especially distinguishes her. The clothes she wears represent mirror reflection clothes of the Savior: if he is wearing a blue tunic and a red cloak, then she is wearing a red tunic and a blue cloak. No one at the table wears clothing that is a mirror image of Jesus' clothing. And there are no other women at the table.

Central to the composition is the huge, widened letter “M”, which is formed by the figures of Jesus and this woman taken together. They seem to be literally connected at the hips, but suffer due to the fact that they diverge or even grow from one point to another. different sides. As far as we know, none of the academicians ever referred to this image other than “St. John”; they also did not notice the compositional form in the form of the letter “M”. Leonardo, as we have established in our research, was an excellent psychologist who laughed when he presented his patrons, who commissioned him with a traditional biblical image, in highest degree unorthodox images, knowing that people will calmly and calmly look at the most monstrous heresy, since they usually see only what they want to see. If you have been called upon to write a Christian scene, and you have presented to the public something which at first sight is similar and responsive to their wishes, people will never look for ambiguous symbolism.

At the same time, Leonardo had to hope that perhaps there were others who shared his unusual interpretation of the New Testament, who would recognize secret symbolism in the painting. Or someone someday, some objective observer will one day understand the image of the mysterious woman associated with the letter “M”, and ask questions that clearly follow from this. Who was this “M” and why is she so important? Why did Leonardo risk his reputation—even his life, in those days when heretics were burning at the stake everywhere—to include her in a fundamental Christian scene? Whoever she is, her fate cannot but cause alarm as the outstretched hand cuts her gracefully arched neck. The threat contained in this gesture cannot be doubted.

The index finger of the other hand, raised right in front of the Savior’s face, threatens him with obvious passion. But both Jesus and “M” look like people who do not notice the threat, each of them is completely immersed in the world of his thoughts, each in his own way is serene and calm. But all together it looks as if the secret symbols were used not only to warn Jesus and the woman sitting next to him (?), but also to inform (or perhaps remind) the observer of some information that would be dangerous to make public in any other way. Did Leonardo use his creation to promulgate some special beliefs, which in the usual way would that be just crazy? And could these beliefs be a message addressed to much more to a wide circle, and not just his immediate environment? Maybe they were intended for us, for the people of our time?

Young Apostle John or Mary Magdalene?

Let's get back to looking at this amazing creation. In the fresco on the right, from the observer's point of view, a tall bearded man is bent almost double, telling something to a student sitting at the edge of the table. At the same time, he almost completely turned his back to the Savior. The model for the image of this disciple - Saint Thaddeus or Saint Jude - was Leonardo himself. Note that the images of Renaissance artists, as a rule, were either accidental or were made when the artist was beautiful model. IN in this case we are dealing with an example of the use of an image by a follower of double entendre ( double meaning). (He was preoccupied with finding the right model for each of the apostles, as can be seen from his rebellious offer to the most irate prior of St. Mary's to serve as a model for Judas.) So why did Leonardo portray himself as so clearly turning his back on Jesus?

Moreover. Unusual hand aims a dagger at the stomach of a student sitting just one person from “M”. This hand cannot belong to anyone sitting at the table, since such a bend is physically impossible for the people next to the image of the hand to hold the dagger in this position. However, what is truly striking is not the very fact of the existence of a hand that does not belong to the body, but the absence of any mention of it in the works about Leonardo that we have read: although this hand is mentioned in a couple of works, the authors do not find anything unusual in it. As in the case of the Apostle John, who looks like a woman, nothing could be more obvious - and nothing more strange - once you pay attention to this circumstance. But this irregularity most often escapes the attention of the observer simply because this fact is extraordinary and outrageous.

We often hear that Leonardo was a devout Christian whose religious paintings reflect the depth of his faith. As we can see, at least one of the paintings contains images that are very dubious from the point of view of an orthodox Christian. Our further research, as we will show, has established that nothing could be so far from the truth as the idea that Leonardo was a true believer - by implication, a believer according to the canons of the generally accepted or at least acceptable form of Christianity. Already from the curious anomalous features of one of his creations we see that he was trying to tell us about another layer of meaning in a familiar biblical scene, about another world of faith hidden in the generally accepted images of wall paintings in Milan.

Whatever the meaning of these heretical irregularities - and the significance of this fact cannot be exaggerated - they were absolutely incompatible with the orthodox tenets of Christianity. This in itself is unlikely to be news to many modern materialists/rationalists, since for them Leonardo was the first true scientist, a man who had no time for any superstitions, a man who was the antithesis of all mysticism and occultism. But they also could not understand what appeared before their eyes. Depicting the Last Supper without wine is tantamount to depicting a coronation scene without a crown: the result is either nonsense, or the picture is filled with other content, and to such an extent that it represents the author as an absolute heretic - a person who has faith, but a faith that contradicts the dogmas of Christianity. Perhaps not just different, but in a state of struggle with the dogmas of Christianity. And in other works of Leonardo we find his own peculiar heretical predilections, expressed in carefully crafted relevant scenes, which he would hardly have written in exactly the same way, being simply an atheist earning his living. There are too many of these deviations and symbols to be interpreted as the mockery of a skeptic forced to work according to an order, nor can they be called simply antics, such as, for example, the image of St. Peter with a red nose. What we see in the Last Supper and other works is the secret code of Leonardo da Vinci, which we believe has a striking connection with our modern world.

One can argue what Leonardo believed or did not believe, but his actions were not just the whim of a man, undoubtedly extraordinary, whose whole life was full of paradoxes. He was reserved, but at the same time the soul and life of society; he despised fortune tellers, but his papers indicated large amounts, paid to astrologers; he was considered a vegetarian and had a tender love for animals, but his tenderness rarely extended to humanity; he zealously dissected corpses and observed executions with the eyes of an anatomist, was a deep thinker and a master of riddles, tricks and hoaxes.

With such a contradictory inner world it is likely that Leonardo's religious and philosophical views were unusual, even strange. For this reason alone, it is tempting to dismiss his heretical beliefs as something of no relevance to our modern times. It is generally accepted that Leonardo was an extremely gifted man, but modern trend to evaluate everything in terms of "era" leads to a significant underestimation of his achievements. After all, at the time when he was in his creative prime, even printing was a novelty. What can one lone inventor, living in such primitive times, offer to a world that is swimming in an ocean of information through the global network, to a world that, in a matter of seconds, exchanges information through telephone and fax with continents that were not yet discovered in his time?

There are two answers to this question. First: Leonardo was not, let's use the paradox, an ordinary genius. Majority educated people knows that he designed a flying machine and a primitive tank, but at the same time some of his inventions were so unusual for the time in which he lived that people with an eccentric turn of mind can imagine that he was given the power to foresee the future. His bicycle design, for example, became known only in the late sixties of the twentieth century. Unlike the painful trial-and-error evolution that the Victorian bicycle underwent, Leonardo da Vinci's road eater already had two wheels and a chain drive in its first edition. But what is even more striking is not the design of the mechanism, but the question of the reasons that prompted the invention of the wheel. Man has always wanted to fly like a bird, but the dream of balancing on two wheels and pressing the pedals, taking into account the deplorable state of the roads, already smacks of mysticism. (Remember, by the way, that unlike the dream of flying, it does not appear in any classic plot.) Among many other statements about the future, Leonardo also predicted the appearance of the telephone.

Even be Leonardo great genius than they talk about historical books, the question still remains unanswered: what possible knowledge could he have possessed if what he proposed made sense or became widespread only five centuries after his time. One can, of course, make the argument that the teachings of a first-century preacher would seem to have even less relevance to our time, but the indisputable fact remains: some ideas are universal and eternal, the truth, found or formulated, does not cease to be the truth after the passage of centuries. ..

(to be continued)

"The Da Vinci Code" (scandalous novel by Dan Brown)

Particularly heated debates erupted in the world after the film adaptation of Dan Brown's scandalous novel " The Da Vinci Code", where, among other things, he states that Mary Magdalene was not only the beloved disciple of Jesus, but also the consort, that is, the wife . The book has been translated into 44 languages ​​and published total circulation more than 81 million copies. "The Da Vinci Code" tops the New York Times bestseller list, considered by many to be best book decades. The novel, written in the genre of an intellectual detective thriller, was able to awaken widespread interest in the legend of the Holy Grail and the place of Mary Magdalene in the history of Christianity.

However christian world reacted very sharply to the release of the book and film, Dan Brown's version was crushed by a thousand critical responses and comments. One of the zealous ministers of religion put it most eloquently, even calling for a boycott of the film: “piercingly anti-Christian, full of slander, crimes and historical and theological errors regarding Jesus, the Gospel and a hostile church.” However, putting aside religious narrow-mindedness, one thing can be said for sure: none of the critics was alive then, and real story can't know. It may be known to the one whose name is inscribed in the title of our site, and we will return to his words.

SKETCH FOR "THE LAST SUPPER"

Well, now let's look at Leonardo Da Vinci's blank, the surviving sketch for The Last Supper. Second figure from the left, in top row, feminine outlines, smoother and lighter forms are clearly visible. Who is this if not a woman?

SUMMARY

Everyone sees what they want to see, this is one of the mysterious laws of human consciousness. And if a person’s consciousness believes that white is black, it will confidently prove that it is right. We were not present when the famous monumental painting was painted genius artist, just as they were not present at the epoch-making events of the life of Jesus Christ, and therefore it would be fairer to end this article with the statement that we cannot know for sure whether it is John or Mary, however, subjectively, in the painting by Leonardo Da Vinci there is a woman, and therefore no one other than the beloved disciple of Jesus - Mary Magdalene. The Church’s opinion that the Apostle John the Theologian is in the picture is of the same degree of subjectivity. 50/50 - no more!!!

Prepared by Dato Gomarteli (Ukraine-Georgia)

PS: another reproduction, photo of the “Last Supper” mosaic from St. Isaac’s Cathedral in St. Petersburg, and again we see the woman:

Last Supper.

Location and history of creation:

The famous fresco is in the churchSanta Maria delle Grazie, located on the square of the same name in Milan. Or rather, on one of the walls of the refectory. According to historians, the artist specifically depicted in the picture exactly the same table and dishes that were in the church at that time. By this he tried to show that Jesus and Judas (good and evil) are much closer to people than they seem.

The painter received an order to paint the work from his patron, the Duke of Milan.Ludovico Sforzain 1495. The ruler was famous for his dissolute life and from a young age was surrounded by young bacchantes. The situation did not change at all because the Duke had a beautiful and modest wife.Beatrice d'Este, who sincerely loved her husband and, due to her meek disposition, could not contradict his way of life. We must admit thatLudovico Sforzahe sincerely revered his wife and was attached to her in his own way. But the dissolute duke felt the true power of love only at the moment of the sudden death of his wife. The man's grief was so great that he did not leave his room for 15 days. And when I came out, the first thing I did was orderLeonardo da Vincifresco, which his late wife had once asked for, and forever stopped all entertainment at court.

The work was completed in 1498. Its dimensions were 880 by 460 cm. Many connoisseurs of the artist’s work agreed that it was best"Last Supper"You can see it if you move 9 meters to the side and rise 3.5 meters up. Moreover, there is something to see. Already during the author's lifetime, the fresco was considered his best work. Although, calling the painting a fresco would be incorrect. The fact is thatLeonardo da VinciI wrote the work not on wet plaster, but on dry plaster, in order to be able to edit it several times. To do this, the artist applied a thick layer of egg tempra to the wall, which subsequently did a disservice, beginning to collapse just 20 years after the painting was painted. But more on that later.

Idea of ​​the piece:

"The Last Supper"depicts the last Easter dinner of Jesus Christ with his disciples and apostles, which took place in Jerusalem on the eve of his arrest by the Romans. According to scripture, Jesus said during a meal that one of the apostles would betray him.Leonardo da VinciI tried to depict the reaction of each of the students to the prophetic phrase of the Teacher. To do this, he walked around the city, talked to ordinary people, made them laugh, upset them, and encouraged them. And at the same time he observed the emotions on their faces. The author's goal was to depict the famous dinner from a purely human point of view. That is why he depicted everyone present in a row and did not draw a halo above anyone’s head (as other artists liked to do).

Now we have reached the most interesting part of the article: the secrets and features hidden in the work of the great author.

1. According to historians, the most difficult thing isLeonardo da Vincigiven the writing of two characters: Jesus and Judas. The artist tried to make them the embodiment of good and evil, so for a long time he could not find suitable models. One day, an Italian saw a young singer in a church choir - so spiritual and pure that there was no doubt left: here he was - the prototype of Jesus for him."Last Supper". But, despite the fact that the image of the Teacher was painted,Leonardo da VinciI corrected it for a long time, considering it insufficiently perfect.

The last unwritten character in the picture was Judas. The artist spent hours wandering through the worst places, looking for a model to paint among the degraded people. And now, almost 3 years later, he got lucky. Lying in the ditch was an absolutely degenerate guy in a state of strong alcohol intoxication. The artist ordered him to be brought to the studio. The man could hardly stand on his feet and had no idea where he was. However, after the image of Judas was painted, the drunkard approached the picture and admitted that he had already seen it before. To the author’s bewilderment, the man replied that three years ago he was completely different, led a correct lifestyle and sang in the church choir. It was then that some artist approached him with a proposal to paint Christ from him. So, according to historians, Jesus and Judas were copied from the same person in different periods his life. This once again emphasizes the fact that good and evil go so close that sometimes the line between them is imperceptible.

By the way, while workingLeonardo da Vincidistracted by the abbot of the monastery, who constantly hurried the artist and argued that he should paint a picture for days, and not stand in front of it in thought. One day the painter could not stand it and promised the abbot to write off Judas from him if he did not stop interfering in the creative process.

2. The most discussed secret of the fresco is the figure of the disciple located at the right hand of Christ. It is believed that this is none other than Mary Magdalene and her location indicates the fact that she was not Jesus' mistress, as is commonly believed, but his legal wife. This fact is confirmed by the letter “M”, which is formed by the contours of the couple’s bodies. Supposedly it means the word "Matrimonio", which translated means "marriage". Some historians argue with this statement and insist that the signature is visible in the paintingLeonardo da Vinci- letter "V". The first statement is supported by the mention that Mary Magdalene washed Christ’s feet and dried them with her hair. According to traditions, only a legal wife could do this. Moreover, it is believed that the woman was pregnant at the time of her husband’s execution and subsequently gave birth to a daughter, Sarah, who marked the beginning of the Merovingian dynasty.

3. Some scholars argue that the unusual arrangement of the students in the picture is not accidental. They sayLeonardo da Vinciplaced people by... zodiac signs. According to this legend, Jesus was a Capricorn and his beloved Mary Magdalene was a virgin.

4. It is impossible not to mention the fact that during the bombing during the Second World War, a shell that hit the church building destroyed almost everything except the wall on which the fresco was depicted. Although, the people themselves not only did not take care of the work, but also treated it in a truly barbaric manner. In 1500, a flood in the church caused irreparable damage to the painting. But instead of restoring the masterpiece, the monks in 1566 made a hole in the wall with the image"Last Supper"a door that “cut off” the characters’ legs. A little later, the Milanese coat of arms was hung over the Savior’s head. And at the end of the 17th century, the refectory was turned into a stable. The already dilapidated fresco was covered with manure, and the French competed with each other: who would hit the head of one of the apostles with a brick. However, there were"Last Supper"and fans. The French king Francis I was so impressed by the work that he seriously thought about how to transport it to his home.

5. No less interesting are the thoughts of historians about the food depicted on the table. For example, near JudasLeonardo da Vincidepicted an overturned salt shaker (which at all times was considered bad omen), as well as an empty plate. But the biggest point of controversy is still the fish in the picture. Contemporaries still cannot agree on what is painted on the fresco - a herring or an eel. Scientists believe that this ambiguity is not accidental. The artist specifically encrypted the hidden meaning in the painting. The fact is that in Italian “eel” is pronounced “aringa”. We add one more letter, and we get a completely different word - “arringa” (instruction). At the same time, the word "herring" is pronounced in northern Italy as "renga", which means "one who denies religion." For the atheist artist, the second interpretation is closer.

As you can see, in one single picture there are many secrets and understatements hidden, which more than one generation has been struggling to uncover. Many of them will remain unsolved. And contemporaries will only have to speculate andrepeat a masterpiece the great Italian in paints, marble, sand, trying to extend the life of the fresco.

On the fifth day after the Lord’s triumphal entry into Jerusalem, on Thursday, the disciples asked Jesus Christ: “Where do you tell us to prepare Passover for You?” (The Passover lamb was to be slaughtered on Friday evening).

Jesus Christ said to them: “Go to Jerusalem; there you will meet a man carrying a jug of water; follow him into the house and tell the owner: The teacher says: where is the upper room (room) in which I would celebrate the Passover with My disciples? He will show you a large, furnished room; cook there." Having said this, the Savior sent two of His disciples: Peter and John. They went, and everything was fulfilled as the Savior said, and they prepared Easter.

In the evening of that day, Jesus Christ, knowing that He would be betrayed that night, came with His twelve apostles to the prepared upper room. When everyone reclined at the table, Jesus Christ said: “I greatly desired to eat this Passover with you before My suffering, because, I tell you, I will no longer eat it until it is accomplished in the Kingdom of God.” Then he stood up, took off his outer clothing, girded himself with a towel, poured water into the washbasin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and wipe them with the towel with which he girded. Having washed the feet of the disciples, Jesus Christ put on His clothes and, lying down again, said to them: “Do you know what I have done to you? Behold, you call Me Teacher and Lord, and you call Me correctly. So, if I, your Lord and Teacher, washed your feet, then you should do the same. I have given you an example, so that you also do what I have done to you.”

By this example, the Lord showed not only His love for His disciples, but also taught them humility, that is, not to consider it a humiliation for themselves to serve anyone, even an inferior person.

After eating the Old Testament Jewish Passover, Jesus Christ instituted the Sacrament of Holy Communion at this supper.

And while they were eating, Jesus took bread and, having blessed it, broke it and, giving it to the disciples, said: “Take, eat; This is My Body, broken for you for the remission of sins (that is, for you it is given over to suffering and death, for the forgiveness of sins).” Then he took the cup with grape wine, blessed, thanking God the Father for all His mercies to the human race, and, giving it to the disciples, said: “Drink from it, all of you, this is My Blood of the New Testament, shed for you for the remission of sins.”

These words mean that, under the guise of bread and wine, the Savior taught His disciples the same Body and Blood, which the next day after that He gave over to suffering and death for our sins. How bread and wine become the Body and Blood of the Lord is a mystery, incomprehensible even to the Angels, which is why communion is called a Sacrament.

The Lord gave the commandment to always perform this Sacrament, saying: “Do this in remembrance of Me.” This sacrament is being performed with us now and will be performed until the end of the century during a divine service called Liturgy or Liturgy.

During the Last Supper, the Savior announced to the apostles that one of them would betray Him. They were very saddened by this and in bewilderment, looking at each other, in fear they began to ask one after another: “Am I not, Lord?” Judas also asked: “Isn’t it me, Rabbi?” Jesus says to him: “You said.” John reclined next to the Savior. Peter signaled to him to ask who the Lord was talking about. John, falling to the Savior’s chest, quietly said: “Lord! Who is this?" Jesus answered just as quietly: “The one to whom I dip a piece of bread and give it.” And, dipping a piece of bread, he handed it to Judas Iscariot, saying: “Whatever you are doing, do it quickly.” But no one understood why the Savior told him this. And since Judas had a box of money, the disciples thought that Jesus Christ was sending him to buy something for the holiday or to give alms to the poor. Judas, having accepted the piece, immediately left. It was night.

Jesus Christ, continuing to talk with His disciples, said: “Children! I won’t be with you for long now. I give you a new commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you. By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for each other. And there is no greater love than this, that someone lays down his life (gives his life) for his friends. You are My friends if you do what I command you.”

During this conversation, Jesus Christ predicted to the disciples that they would all be offended because of Him that night, they would all run away, leaving Him alone. The Holy Apostle Peter said: “Even if everyone is offended because of You, I will never be offended.” Then the Savior said to him: “Truly I tell you, this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times and say that you do not know Me.” But Peter began to assure even more, saying: “Even though I had to die with You, I will not deny You.” All the other apostles said the same thing. But still the Savior’s words saddened them.

Comforting them, the Lord said: “Let not your heart be troubled (that is, do not grieve), believe in God (the Father) and believe in Me (the Son of God). The Savior promised His disciples to send from the Father another Comforter and Teacher, instead of Himself - the Holy Spirit: “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Comforter, the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him and does not know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you (this means that the Holy Spirit will abide with all true believers in Jesus Christ - in the Church of Christ). A little more - and the world will no longer see Me; and you will see Me; for I live (I am Life; and death cannot overcome Me), and you shall live. But the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, will teach you everything and remind you of everything that I have told you.” The Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth, “Who proceeds from the Father, He will testify about Me; and you also will testify, because you were with Me from the beginning” (John 15:26-27).

Jesus Christ also predicted to His disciples that they would have to suffer a lot of evil and troubles from people because they believe in Him: “In the world you will have tribulation; but take heart (be strong): I have overcome the world (that is, I have overcome evil in the world).”

The Savior ended His conversation with a prayer for His disciples and for all who would believe in Him, so that the Heavenly Father would preserve them all in firm faith, in love and in unanimity (in unity) among themselves.

Having finished the supper, they went beyond the Kidron stream, to the Mount of Olives, to the Garden of Gethsemane.

NOTE: See Matt. 26, 17-35; Mk. 14, 12-31; OK. 22, 7-39; In. 13-17; 18, 1.

"The Last Supper" by Leonardo da Vinci is perhaps one of the top 3 most mysterious and controversial works famous Italian. A fresco that is not essentially a fresco. An experiment lasting three years. A fertile field for speculation about the meaning of the symbols and the true personalities of those depicted. An impossible challenge for restorers. All this is about one of the most famous works art in the world.

Bad luck begins: who ordered Leonardo's "Last Supper"

He also paid a lot of attention to the development Agriculture, industry, science and culture. Of the painters, he especially favored Leonardo da Vinci. His brush belongs to the portrait of Lodovico’s mistress and mother of his son Cecilia (Cecilia) Gallerani, better known as “The Lady with an Ermine”. Presumably, the painter immortalized the Duke's legal wife Beatrice d'Este, as well as his second favorite and the mother of another illegitimate son, Lucrezia Crivelli.

Lodovico's home church was the chapel at the Dominican monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie, and its abbot was a close friend of the duke. The ruler of Milan became a sponsor large-scale reconstruction church, which he saw as a future mausoleum and monument to the Sforza dynasty. The vanity plans were exacerbated by the sudden death of his wife Beatrice and daughter Bianca in 1497, two years after Leonardo began work on The Last Supper.

In 1495, when the painter received an order to paint one of the walls of the refectory chapel with a nine-meter fresco with the popular gospel story, telling about last meeting Christ with the Apostles, where he first revealed the sacrament of the Eucharist to his disciples, no one could even suspect what a long and difficult fate awaited her.

Experimental art of Leonardo da Vinci

Instead of using the good old technique of applying tempera to fresh plaster (in fact, which gave the name to the fresco, which comes from the Italian fresco - “fresh”), Leonardo began to experiment. The subject of his experiments consistently became literally all the factors and stages involved in the creation of frescoes, starting from the construction of scaffolding, for which he tried to invent his own mechanisms, and ending with the composition of plaster and paints.

Firstly, the method of working on wet plaster was categorically not suitable for him, which set quite quickly and did not allow him to thoughtfully work on each fragment and endlessly refine it, bringing it to perfection, as Leonardo da Vinci usually painted his paintings. Secondly, traditional egg tempera did not provide the degree of brightness of the colors he needed, since it faded somewhat and changed color when drying. And mixing pigments with oil made it possible to obtain more expressive and brilliant paints. In addition, it was possible to achieve different densities of shades: from very thick and opaque to thin, luminous. This perfectly corresponded to da Vinci’s love for creating filigree light and shadow effects and his signature sfumato technique.

But that's not all. In order to make the oil emulsion more suitable for the requirements of wall painting, the painter decides to add egg yolk to it, thus obtaining a hitherto unprecedented composition of “oil tempera”. As time will tell, in the long term the bold experiment did not justify itself.

It’s time to do: the long history of the creation of “The Last Supper”

Secondly, the long process meant a corresponding increase in the financial costs of painting, especially since a whole team worked on it. The scope of the preparatory work alone for the application of plaster, primer and white lead coating requires the involvement of all members of the Leonardo studio.

The abbot's patience gradually came to an end, and he complained to the duke about the slowness and laziness of the artist. According to the legend cited by Vasari in his Lives, da Vinci answered Lodovico in his defense that he could not find a suitable scoundrel to serve as a model for Judas. And that if a person of the required degree of disgusting is never found, he “he can always use the head of this abbot, so annoying and immodest”.

There is another legend about the sitter who posed for the painting of Judas. So beautiful that if the situation is far from reality, it would be worth inventing it. The artist seemed to be looking for his Judas among the very dregs of society, and in the end he chose the last drunkard from the gutter. The “model” could barely stand on her feet and didn’t think much, but when the image of Judas was ready, the drunkard peered at the painting and said that he had already had to pose for her before.

It turned out that three years before these events, when he was a young and chaste singer in a church choir, a certain painter noticed him and offered him the role of a model for the image of Christ. It turns out that the same person, at different periods of his life, happened to be both the embodiment of absolute purity and love, and the prototype of the greatest fall and betrayal. Beautiful parable about the fragile boundaries between good and evil and how hard it is to climb up and easy to slide down.

Escaping beauty: how many Leonardos are left in The Last Supper?

Numerous restorations and attempts to save the painting by the legendary Italian only aggravated the losses. British art critic Kenneth Clark in the 30s of the last century examined preparatory sketches and early copies of “The Last Supper” made by artists who took part in its creation. He compared them with what remained of the fresco, and his conclusions were disappointing: “Exaggerated grimacing faces, as if descended from Michelangelo’s Last Judgment,” belonged to the brush of a feeble mannerist of the 16th century.”.

The last and most extensive restoration was completed in 1999. It took about two decades and required an investment of more than 20 billion lire. And no wonder: the restorers had to work more delicately than jewelry: it was necessary to remove all the layers of early restorations, without damaging the crumbs that remained from the original painting. Supervisor restoration work I recalled that the fresco was treated like this, “as if she were a real invalid”.

Despite the voices of critics that, as a result, the Last Supper has lost the “spirit of the original,” today it is still closer to what the monks of the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie saw before them during the meal. The main paradox is that one of the most famous and recognizable works of art in the world contains only no more than 20 percent of the original.

In fact, this is now the embodiment of a collective interpretation of Leonardo da Vinci’s design, obtained through painstaking research and analysis of all available information. But, as often and densely happens in art world, the difficult fate of the exhibit only adds points and value to it (remember the story of the abduction and discovery of Davinci’s Mona Lisa, which brought her to the absolute top of mass culture).

The fresco was painted with a thick layer of egg tempera on dry plaster. Beneath the main layer of paint is a rough compositional sketch, a study in red, in a manner anticipating the usual use of cardboard. This is a kind of preparation tool. It is known that the customer of the painting was the Duke of Milan Lodovico Sforza, at whose court Leonardo gained fame as a great painter, and not the monks of the monastery of Santa Maria della Grazie. The theme of the picture is the moment when Jesus Christ announces to his disciples that one of them will betray him. Pacioli writes about this in the third chapter of his book “The Divine Proportion”. It was this moment - when Christ announces betrayal - that Leonardo da Vinci captured. To achieve accuracy and lifelikeness, he studied the poses and facial expressions of many of his contemporaries, whom he later depicted in the painting. The identities of the apostles have repeatedly been the subject of controversy, however, judging by the inscriptions on a copy of the painting kept in Lugano, they are (from left to right): Bartholomew, James the Younger, Andrew, Judas, Peter, John, Thomas, James the Elder, Philip, Matthew, Thaddeus and Simon Zelotes. Many art historians believe that this composition should be perceived as an iconographic interpretation of the Eucharist - communion, since Jesus Christ points with both hands to the table with wine and bread. Almost all scholars of Leonardo's work agree that the ideal place to view the painting is from a height of approximately 13-15 feet above the floor and at a distance of 26-33 feet from it. There is an opinion - now disputed - that composition and its system of perspective are based on the musical canon of proportion. What gives The Last Supper its unique character is that, unlike other paintings of its kind, it shows the amazing variety and richness of the characters’ emotions caused by Jesus’ words that one of his disciples would betray him. No other painting of the Last Supper can even come close to the unique composition and attention to detail in Leonardo's masterpiece. So what secrets could he encrypt in his creation? great artist? In The Discovery of the Templars, Clive Prince and Lynn Picknett argue that several elements of the structure of the Last Supper indicate symbols encrypted in it. First, they believe that the figure on the right hand of Jesus (to the viewer's left) is not John, but a woman.

She is wearing a robe, the color of which contrasts with the clothes of Christ, and she is tilted in the opposite direction from Jesus, who is sitting in the center. The space between this female figure and Jesus is shaped like a V, and the figures themselves form an M.

Secondly, in the picture, in their opinion, next to Peter a certain hand is visible, clutching a knife. Prince and Picknett claim that this hand does not belong to any of the characters in the film.

Thirdly, sitting directly to the left of Jesus (to the right for the audience), Thomas, addressing Christ, raised his finger.

And finally, there is a hypothesis that the Apostle Thaddeus sitting with his back to Christ is actually a self-portrait of Leonardo himself.

Let's look at each point in order. Upon closer examination of the painting, it turns out that the character to the right of Jesus (to the viewer - to the left) actually has feminine or feminine features. Prince and Picknett assure readers that under the folds of clothing one can even see female breast. Of course, Leonardo sometimes liked to give feminine features to male figures and faces. For example, a careful examination of the image of John the Baptist shows that he is endowed with almost the features of a hermaphrodite with pale, hairless skin.
But what does it matter if in the painting “The Last Supper” Jesus and John (the woman) leaned in opposite directions, forming a space between them in the form of the letter V, and the contours of their bodies forming the letter M? Does this have some symbolic meaning? Prince and Picknett argue that this unusual arrangement of figures, one of which has distinctly feminine features, contains a hint that this is not John, but Mary Magdalene, and the V sign is a symbol of the sacred feminine. The letter M, according to their hypothesis, means the name - Mary/Magdalene. You can agree or disagree with this assumption, but no one will deny its originality and courage. Let's focus on the bodyless hand. Whose hand is visible on the left, next to the figure of Peter? Why is she clutching a dagger or knife so menacingly? Another oddity is that Peter’s left hand seems to be cutting the throat of the neighboring figure with the edge of his palm.

What did Leonardo mean by this? What does Peter's strange gesture mean? However, upon closer examination, it is clear that the hand with the knife still belongs to Peter, and does not exist on its own. Peter twisted his left hand, and therefore its position is clearly unusual and extremely awkward. As for the second hand, threateningly raised to John/Mary’s throat, there is an explanation for this: Peter simply puts his hand on his/her shoulder. Most likely, disputes on this matter will continue for a very long time. As for Thomas, sitting to the left of Jesus (to the viewer's right), he actually raised the index finger of his left hand in a clearly threatening manner. This gesture of John the Baptist, as Prince and Picknett call it, is present in many paintings by Leonardo, as well as other painters of the era. It supposedly symbolizes the underground stream of knowledge and wisdom. The fact is that John the Baptist actually played a much more important role than the one assigned to him in Scripture. For those who wish to learn more about this, I recommend reading the book "The Discovery of the Templars." The Apostle Thaddeus depicted in the painting seems to bear some resemblance to Leonardo, if we compare his image with famous self-portrait great artist. In many of Leonardo da Vinci's paintings of Jesus or the Holy Family, the same detail is noticeable: at least one of the figures is turned with its back to the main character of the painting. For example, in the painting “The Adoration of the Magi.” The recently completed restoration of The Last Supper has made it possible to learn a lot about this amazing picture. In it, and in many other paintings by Leonardo, some secret messages and forgotten symbols are actually hidden. However, their true meaning It is still not entirely clear to us what gives rise to more and more new guesses and assumptions. Be that as it may, much remains to be done in the future to unravel these mysteries. I would like us to be able to comprehend even to the smallest extent the plans of the great master.