The character seen in the famous portrait at the Louvre is not that of Lisa del Giocondo or Mona Lisa, but that of Isabelle d'Aragon and Sforza, the daughter of the King of Naples Alphonse II d'Aragon. Isabelle married her cousin Gian Galeazzo Sforza, the heir to the Duchy of Milan, to consolidate the ties between the Kingdom of Naples and the Duchy of Milan. So, it is the portrait of a princess and not a commoner. Leonardo da Vinci was at that time in the service of Ludovico Sforza, the uncle of Gian Galeazzo who exercised regency at the court of Milan. Isabelle's young husband disappeared prematurely at the age of 25 without being able to exercise power, allegedly assassinated on the orders of his uncle. German historian Maike Vogt-Luerssen tells us that after her widowhood, Isabelle and Leonardo formed a secret couple and had 5 children. Therefore, it was his beloved's portrait that Leonardo da Vinci painted, which explains why he took it to Amboise in France and kept it until the end of his life, like keeping a family photo nowadays. There was thus an emotional connection with Isabelle that did not exist with Lisa del Giocondo, whose portrait was only a commission. The research I myself have done on the landscape indicates that it is based on an authentic location, which would confirm Maike Vogt-Luerssen's theory, as it undoubtedly pays homage to Isabelle d'Aragon's family origins. It seems obvious to me that the identity of the character in this portrait has been confused between an actually received commission, that of the silk merchant's wife, and the portrait of Leonardo's partner, which is the one seen today at the Louvre. All of this is probably now well known to the so-called specialists of Leonardo da Vinci, who do not want to acknowledge the inconsistencies of the official version because they have spent their entire lives defending a version they now know to be outdated. As Mark Twain said, "It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." www.kleio.org/de/geschichte/renaissance/monalisa/ml_fakten/ www.equinoxmagazine.fr/2021/11/28/la-joconde-serait-catalane/
Easy there. Watch Great Art Explained’s long version video on the Mona Lisa. The wedding at Cana is an amazing painting and it is a shame that it is overlooked but the Mona Lisa is the Mona Lisa.
guys, if the monalisa painting is fragile, the cracked cracks can be updated, just erase using kerosene 'simple right' and don't bother to make it again 'because if you make it again it's not considered original' okay, thank you
The Isleworth Mona Lisa has actually got more validation than the mainstream museum questionable portraits. If only they would disclose an actual fact based evidence of a unequivocal pre 1911 photograph validating the original of the so called Gioconda. Its hilarious the world is so deluded with that pile of hearsay in the Louvre.
The character seen in the famous portrait at the Louvre is not that of Lisa del Giocondo or Mona Lisa, but that of Isabelle d'Aragon and Sforza, the daughter of the King of Naples Alphonse II d'Aragon. Isabelle married her cousin Gian Galeazzo Sforza, the heir to the Duchy of Milan, to consolidate the ties between the Kingdom of Naples and the Duchy of Milan. So, it is the portrait of a princess and not a commoner. Leonardo da Vinci was at that time in the service of Ludovico Sforza, the uncle of Gian Galeazzo who exercised regency at the court of Milan. Isabelle's young husband disappeared prematurely at the age of 25 without being able to exercise power, allegedly assassinated on the orders of his uncle.
German historian Maike Vogt-Luerssen tells us that after her widowhood, Isabelle and Leonardo formed a secret couple and had 5 children. Therefore, it was his beloved's portrait that Leonardo da Vinci painted, which explains why he took it to Amboise in France and kept it until the end of his life, like keeping a family photo nowadays. There was thus an emotional connection with Isabelle that did not exist with Lisa del Giocondo, whose portrait was only a commission. The research I myself have done on the landscape indicates that it is based on an authentic location, which would confirm Maike Vogt-Luerssen's theory, as it undoubtedly pays homage to Isabelle d'Aragon's family origins.
It seems obvious to me that the identity of the character in this portrait has been confused between an actually received commission, that of the silk merchant's wife, and the portrait of Leonardo's partner, which is the one seen today at the Louvre. All of this is probably now well known to the so-called specialists of Leonardo da Vinci, who do not want to acknowledge the inconsistencies of the official version because they have spent their entire lives defending a version they now know to be outdated.
As Mark Twain said, "It is easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
www.kleio.org/de/geschichte/renaissance/monalisa/ml_fakten/
www.equinoxmagazine.fr/2021/11/28/la-joconde-serait-catalane/
If ever a video cried out for Closed Captions, this is it.
-As always Mona Lisa,
keeps us interested in it.
coletta hutts a i love these 🗨 🤗❤
6:00 did he just say Superman? 🤨😂
Easy there. Watch Great Art Explained’s long version video on the Mona Lisa. The wedding at Cana is an amazing painting and it is a shame that it is overlooked but the Mona Lisa is the Mona Lisa.
Top! Vraiment intéressant!
guys, if the monalisa painting is fragile, the cracked cracks can be updated, just erase using kerosene 'simple right' and don't bother to make it again 'because if you make it again it's not considered original' okay, thank you
10 years that was really modern tech!! Wow
VERY NICE...VERY GOOD....PHOTOS ......MONA LISA......
ANNA SYLVESTER who she? And where are ???🙄😕☻😍😍🤦♀️💗💗💗🗨❤
incroyable de voir ça c'est fou de voir la toile si prêt
Actully pain is always interesting... some ppl hide it in smile,.never ever share and no one understood them
"The roots of wit and charm tap secret springs of sorrow"
Auden
Or maybe Leonardo just wasnt satisfied with the hand and lips like every other artist
Esta echa de dinosaurios. Serpientes.pajaros y muchos más animales
En español por favor.
Who draw this? Elusory 😕😕🤦♀️
*NO DNA & NO BONES*
*Case Closed*
English ain't my language!!
He did everything except hire an English speaker.
It is an edition, the Isleworth Mona Lisa is the original!
The Isleworth Mona Lisa has actually got more validation than the mainstream museum questionable portraits.
If only they would disclose an actual fact based evidence of a unequivocal pre 1911 photograph validating the original of the so called Gioconda.
Its hilarious the world is so deluded with that pile of hearsay in the Louvre.
Nekamo😂😂😂😂