Leonardo da Vinci - The Last Supper
Throughout the course of art history, there have been countless artists who have turned their hand to depicting the events of The Last Supper; where Jesus shares a final meal with his disciples, revealing that one of them will soon betray him.
But there is little doubt that Leonardo da Vinci’s version remains the most recognisable of them all - even though it has essentially been falling apart since only a few years after he completed it.
This was Leonardo’s first real attempt at a major Fresco painting - commissioned by Ludovico Sforza (The Duke of Milan) as decoration for the dining hall at the monastery of Santa Maria delle Grazie.
And though he was already widely considered a genius at this stage of his career - admittedly, there was still some trepidation with offering this project to Leonardo.
You see, the man from Vinci also had rather an unfortunate reputation for failure too - with at least a dozen unfinished or unrealised projects on his CV thus far.
And in fact, it was well known that Leonardo’s real obsession at the time of this commission was actually a monumental bronze statue of a horse, which he was supposed to have completed for Ludovico more than a decade earlier.
Thus, from the moment Leonardo set foot inside the Santa Maria delle Grazie with his paintbrushes in hand; there was more than a degree of scepticism over whether he would actually complete the work.
For the first year of the project . . . the signs were not good.
Traditionally, Fresco painting required an artist to work very quickly - with a mixture of wet plaster being laid first on to the appointed wall (or ceiling), and the actual decorative painting work then needing to be fully completed in the time it took for the plaster to dry.
But in classic form, Leonardo was sure he had a better technique, which would allow for a much slower and more considered approach instead. Hence, he improvised with a mixture of mediums, including a bizarre blend of tempera, gesso, coal tar, and various other experimental pigments, which would (in theory) allow him to work directly on to dry wall instead.
Yet in spite of all best intentions, Leonardo’s inventive technique proved highly inconsistent.
Even in the course of painting his first figures, his paintwork started flaking from the wall - leaving the artist caught in a kind of Sisyphean cycle, having to start all his work from the beginning again.
But while these early problems were slowly being dealt with - the brothers at Santa Maria also grew even more frustrated with Leonardo for his manner of working too.
After all, Leonardo was certainly not a man to keep a regular schedule.
Sometimes, he would paint non stop, for hours on end - perhaps even turning up in the middle of the night to “correct” some minor detail in a work that was still not even fully sketched out.
Other times, he was known to go missing for days or weeks at a time - with no word of when he would return to the painting.
And then, when he was finally on site again, the brothers would often spy on him just standing in front of the work . . . lost in a world of his own, until eventually he might deign to lay a single brushstroke, before leaving again.
Thus it is no wonder why the brothers of Santa Maria started to despair over this work.
Frankly, Leonardo’s manner of painting would have tested the patience of the saints themselves. And as more time went on, the prior of Santa Maria did indeed feel it necessary to confront Leonardo about what was happening.
Reminding the artist that the work was already delayed - the prior respectfully asked if there was any chance at all of hurrying up a bit.
But by way of response, Leonardo was clearly in frustrated mood too!
_
In writing to the head of the Monastery - he explained that the current delay was mainly because he had been struggling to find the perfect villainous face for the character of Judas. So, essentially, they had two choices;
Either let him continue working at the speed he felt with another small extension on the deadline in order to find a suitable model . . . or, to speed things along, the other alternative would be to paint Judas with the features of that prior who had complained!
Naturally, the head of the monastery chose the first option.
Leonardo was granted yet another extension to the project. And in the end, it took him a total of three years to finish his commission (which incidentally, is only slightly less than the time it took Michelangelo to singlehandedly paint the entire Sistine Chapel ceiling!!)
But still, in its final form, even the complaining prior himself would have had to admit that all the delays had been worth it!
This was a masterpiece, in every sense of the word.
And that is why it is such a shame that we now no longer have the chance to really appreciate it in its full glory.
Leonardo’s experimental fresco technique may have held for a time. But with every passing year, more flakes fell from the wall.
And nowadays - while it is still an icon of the art world - what we actually see on the wall at Santa Maria are our best possible attempt at preserving whatever is left of Leonardo’s fading treasure.
Yet still . . . what a treasure it is!
Bonus work
I couldn’t leave today’s article without also sharing one of the full scale copies of the Last Supper.
Painted by Leonardo’s assistant, Giampietrino - it may not match the sheer genius of his master. But still, it was painted directly from the original - as, as such, is the closest we can come now to admiring the finer details of Leonardo’s iconic masterpiece.
Perfect read about this iconic work for this Easter weekend. Thank you!
Great essay!
I recently read in the book Monuments Men, about the allied soldiers who worked to save antiquities during WWII, that the painting was almost destroyed by inaccurate allied bombing. A forward-thinking sandbagging effort by the Italians saved it.