Part 3 - Conclusion

Through out Posts 1 & 2, the underlying goal has been:

Originally Posted By: this writer
Reminder - this is about evaluating the claim that Leonardo da Vinci, ostensibly because of his studies of Euclid, Ptolemy, and Pythagoras, employed a "Y" in painting the name of "Mar- y" by “optical illusion” on the sleeve of The Mona Lisa, a name not occurring in his Italian, using a [color:#000099][b]“letter” not in his alphabet that had not even evolved into English usage at the time he painted The Mona Lisa !!
[/color][/b]

As has been documented, “symbols” ( such as the Pythagorean “Y” ) have repeatedly been mistaken for “letters” ( such as the modern-day English “Y” ).

“Symbols” don’t spell words, “Letters” spell words !!

The claim that the works of Euclid, Ptolemy, or Pythagoras somehow taught Leonardo da Vinci to adapt a “Y-Symbol” to function as a “Y-Letter” so that he could identify The Mona Lisa as really being “Mar-y” simply cannot be reconciled with the fact that the alphabets of the languages in question at the time of their development (pre & post Leonardo da Vinci’s time) did not (and still do not other than modern-day “borrowed” words) contain a “Y”.

As seen from the information provided in Posts 1 & 2, it does not matter what historic setting a “Y” being used as a symbol is found. As a “symbol”, a “Y” can potentially appear in a geometric equation of Euclid or Ptolemy, a mathematical-religious relationship of Pythagoras, or be used as a symbol or mark by Templars or Masons but it does not represent anything used as a word-construction.

Finally, what did Leonardo say about “how to paint folds” ??

Originally Posted By: Leonardo da Vinci, “Treatise On Painting”
“…that in the mass of light there be not any dark fold, and the mass of shadows none receiving too great a light. They must go gently over, describing the parts; but not with the lines across, cutting the members with hard notches, deeper than the part can possibly be; at the same time, it must fit the body, and not appear like an empty bundle of cloth…I do not deny that we ought not to neglect introducing some handsome folds among these draperies, but it must be done with great judgment, and suited to the parts, where, by the actions of the limbs and position of the whole body, they gather together.”


Leonardo goes on to explain in great detail how “foreshortening” as the folds come nearer to the viewer is critical. He also speaks to the weight of the fabric wherein more rounded peaks are for heavier cloth whereas lighter cloth has a sharper edge to the fold.

If one looks beyond the attempt to trace the name of “Mary” on the folds of The Mona Lisa, all of the above techniques are readily observed. The cloth is heavy so the folds correspond to Leonardo’s recommendations. As the cloth gets nearer to the hands, and thus nearer to the viewer, they are foreshortened accordingly.

Exercising all of the above described techniques was not an attempt by Leonardo to create an “optical illusion” to reveal the “real identity” of The Mona Lisa – most especially using a word and a letter that did not exist in his native Italian, nor in the Greek, nor in the Arabic, nor in the English, of his day.

So...why did Leonardo study Euclid, Ptolemy, and Pythagoras ??

All one has to do is read his manuscripts and look at his drawings on the use of Geometry to create perspective and other uses to understand why he studied those fathers of Geometry for use in his paintings. It wasn’t to learn about a ”Y” that did not exist in their languages.

…and Grrr82CU smile

Last edited by Lisa Shea; 12/30/12 07:33 AM.

Thanks For Visiting !!