The last supper :The secret of Mary Magdalene

A common belief surrounding the last supper
is that the same model was
used for both Jesus and Judas. The
story often goes that the innocent
looking young man, a baker, posed at
nineteen for Jesus. Some years later Leonardo discovered a hard bitten
criminal as the model for Judas, not
realizing he was the same man. There
is no evidence that Da vinci used the
same model for both figures & the
story usually overestimates the time it took Leonardo to finish the mural. Some writers identify the person to
Jesus right not with the Apostle John
(as is supposed by iconographical
tradition and confirmed by art

historians) but with Mary Magdalene.

This theory was the topic of the book The Templar Revelation (1997), and plays a central role in Dan Brown's novel Da Vinci Code (2003). They propose that the person in the
painting seated, from a viewer’s pointofview, to the left of Jesus is Mary
Magdalene rather than John the
Apostle, as most art historians identify
that person. By the same token the
Apostle Philip (3rd figure to the left of
Jesus, and the only other beardless male) could possibly be another
woman (Martha). Furthermore, they
point out that the body angles
between Jesus and the Apostle John
form the letter M, a reference to the
Magdalene, & that she & Jesus are dressed in similar but oppositely
colored clothes, a negative image of
each other.They also mention a
number of other signs: a mystery knife
pointed at one of the characters, that
Da Vinci himself is in the painting with his face pointing away
from Jesus,& that Jesus is
confronted by an admonishing hand
to his right making the John gesture,an index finger pointing up. Andrea del Castagno's version of The Last Supper, depicting St. John sleeping.The above points are often debated
with the following counter arguments: Leonardo was requested to paint the
Last Supper, which naturally included
Jesus & his Twelve Apostles. As
there are only 13 figures in the
painting, an apostle would have been
missing to make way for Mary Magdalene. Somebody would have
noted a missing male apostle earlier.
Some have suggested that on the front
of the figure of Simon Peter there is one hand with a dagger which is
associated to nobody in the picture,
but in clearer reproductions this is
seen to be Peter's right hand, resting
against his hip with the palm turned
outward;the knife points towards Bartholomew (far left) who was to be executed by being flayed. It may also indicate Peter's impulsive nature,as he
cuts off a soldier's ear.A
detailed preliminary drawing of the arm exists. The figure in question is presumably
wearing male clothing, as he is
wearing the same kind of garments as,
for instance, Jesus. Other paintings from that period also show John to be a very boyish or feminine looking figure with long fair hair. This was because John was the
youngest & most unquestioningly
devoted of the apostles. Hence he is
often shown asleep against Jesus's
shoulder. It was common in the period
to show neophytes as very young or even feminine figures,as a way of
showing their inferior position.Leonardo also portrayed a male saint
with similar effeminate features in his
painting St. John the Baptist. Alternative theories There have also been other popular
speculations about this. It has
been suggested that there is no cup in
the painting, yet Jesus' left hand is
pointing to the Eucharist and his right to a glass of wine.(There are several
glasses on the table, but they are
difficult to see owing to the
deterioration and restorations.) This is
not the glorified chalice of legend as
Da vinci insisted on realistic paintings. He criticised Michelangelo for painting muscular, superhuman figures in the Sistine Chapel.It is claimed that if one looks
above the figure of Bartholomew, a
Grail-like image appears on the wall.
Whether Da vinci meant this to be a
representation of the Holy Grail cannot be known, since as pointed out earlier
there is a glass on the table within
Christ's reach. The "Grail" has
become noticed probably because it
only appears when viewing the
painting in small scale reproductions. Zooming in on the painting reveals a
cluster of geometrical shapes, possibly
intended to represent marble wall
decoration, or more likely, paneling on a door.They only appear to form a golden chalice when parts are
deliberately occluded.hence the mistry is yet unsolved