4/4 Secrets of the Mona Lisa
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 ต.ค. 2024
- First broadcast: Dec 2015.
The Mona Lisa: bewitching, seductive, world famous. In the minds of millions, she is the ultimate work of art. Yet behind the enigmatic smile, she remains a mystery, fuelling endless speculation and theories.
But is that all about to change? Is the world's most famous painting finally giving up its secrets?
Presented by Andrew Graham-Dixon, this landmark film uses new evidence to investigate the truth behind her identity and where she lived. It decodes centuries-old documents and uses state-of-the-art technology that could unlock the long-hidden truths of history's most iconic work of art.
Leonardo's way of teaching us true knowledge without words….pure , simple, elegant!
Truly,You have pieced this puzzle together in such a way,utilizing the greatest techniques and people that I am convinced,the Lisa Del Giacondo portrait was underneath,and layered with overlay versions that make the Louvre copy what it is now,hopefully we have this right,however a percent of intrigue still exists,thank You for making this series.
I enjoyed this so much
Sempre meraviglioso scoprire Dettagli , rivelati da ricerche così approfondite, incredibile!
Very interesting documentary!
Very, very informative, I'm impressed! Makes me wish I've gone and seen the painting while station in Europe.
your rite!
Gee, Leonardo painted the Mona Lisa, Daddy wasn't happy with it so he changed it to suite his own vision. Artistic License.
I'm missing your point
I always believed that Mona Lisa was a portrait of his orphaned mother. Painted her as a queen and as a Saint
Why doesn’t the documentary mention the Prado Mona Lisa which adds to the mistery and provides new answers?
That was epic … mesmerising
Why don't they get the guy at 0:13 to look at the Isleworth Mona Lisa?
The problem with the Isleworth Mona Lisa is that the picture is locked away somewhere and hasn't been seen publicly for quite a while.
The biggest strike against the Isleworth version is the fact that it's painted on canvas - and Leonardo apparently never painted his oil paintings on canvas but always on wood. But I would be very interested in further testing.
3:00
Where are the columns?
There's another glitch in the idea that the original version of the Mona Lisa has been eventually overpainted by Leonardo in order to create his very own private version: after the restauration of the Prado Mona Lisa it was shown that the Prado version has been subjected to exactly the same corrections as the original painting!! The logical conclusion is that the Prado Mona Lisa must've been painted side by side with the original painting. It may have been done by a student of Leonardo who was working in his studio while Leonardo created his Mona Lisa. And when Leonardo decided to change his painting, the student had to correct his painting as well!
The mystery of the Mona Lisa hasn't been solved at all but is alive and well.
And also it doesn't explain why both Leonardo and Francesco had one, if there was only one physical painting. Also (and more damningly)... where are the columns Raphael saw when he drew the first Mona Lisa? They're nowhere. I find it unlikely Raphael made such a mistake, that then magically appears on a canvas from the right era. And I don't understand why they say "photo fit" when the dress is entirely different. What's up with the chest veil
The corrections in the Mona Lisa are probably intentional. The Mona Lisa is the image of the beast from the sea discussed in Revelations, the last chapter of the Bible. She's a diabolical entity. The pyramid in front of the Louvre was originally constructed from 673 panes of glass. However assuming that the corners and apex were fused together to reinforce the delicate material's structural integrity, that would reduce the individual pane count to 666. The mark of the beast is a simple letter x or any of its other variations: the swastika, or a circle with a central dot. The pyramid actually forms an x shape when viewed from above too.
5:58 also, the eyes looking at us. That's different too. Pretty big difference.
I have the 1st Mona Lisa originally finished in 1503, so Blessed
At last some light has been thrown on mystery of mona lisa
Awesome.
ok, can we see this cool camera examine that other, younger Mona Lisa?? 🙂
Precioso retrato de mujer sabia sumisamuu apreviada por todo el mundo
I've been studying about Leonardo's "code", and the hidden lineage of Jesus and the figure of Mary Magdelene. The Mona Lisa somehow seems to present into this composite storyline as a minor character possibly signifying a member of this lineage. The bloodline was known only to a very few elites who I'm sure were apprised of the marriage of Jesus and Mary and their later life in Tibet. Leonardo was aware of these "heretical" secrets and provided myriads of clues in his works. I believe he also had access to some form of remote viewing or time contraction. He is likely one of the most enigmatic figures in history, a veritable "bandit" who made away with the lies of the Vatican and their invented character "Jesus Christ".
Wow, that's all I can say... It's kind of scary when you come to think of it, isn't it?
yes.
Not really
they say the first painting , her head was bigger but then in the reenacted version the head looks smaller??
There's a VERY big flaw in the final conclusion: If Raffael drew a scetch of the original version of the Mona Lisa - why did he draw colums??? If they had originally been there, the x-ray analysis should have revealed them!
Personally I believe that the final version shows an idealised version of Leonardo himself as Lillian Schwartz has discovered when she superimposed the Mona-Lisa face over Leonardo's self-portrait as an old man...
I'm not so sure about that I think it might even go deeper. Considering what seems to be a Shroud of Turin combined with the female headdress reserved for saints, perhaps we're looking at a trinity towards nature
I had the impression that the Mona Lisa was symbolic of the combination (balance) of the male and female in one person. I can't disregard this idea since Leonardo was totally heretical, believing in the esoteric concept of man's progression toward the divine.
Top! Il a fait Mona Lisa sienne ! Ce que elle a l air triste sous ce sourire apparent !
He was so pleased with the bliwjobs he was getting tht he let his little head take over his big head and decided to paint his bit of crumpet on the side but during the painting process he started to regain his big head senses and realised tht his wife would kill him so did his best to disguise the image to the best of his abilities without offending his bit on the side he was as the say between a rock and a hard place .
It's funny you should mention crumpet because the hidden Mona Lisa resembles Adolf Hitler's personal cook Constanze Morliarly. She had similar mousy facial features. Of all the women to choose as one of his eternal vampiress companions...her?
Raphaels sketch shows the eyes looking at you. The image under shows the eyes looking left. This is not the original underneath. Raphael says so..
What if it's ALL a joke? And they're planning to make a joke of the butt. "The Sting."
In their minds there's something lacking. What they need's a darn good whacking.
Mona Lisa 🎉
Face of the hybrid sphinx B4 it was turned to stone.
Probabilmente e stata in Realtà Quella sposa di Del Giocondo ma...Idealizzata
They were Leonard's love
I am a believer!
This was the same woman shown in Leonardp The last Supper initially assumed to be a man for years. Maybe even Lilith The 1 st woman created by Y.....H with the perfect creation ,not Eve !!!
Melvyn Braithwaite
She's his mother.
They were 2 moan aloud Lisa.s but only 1 of them would go down on Leonardo
So this is the first picasso.
With the eyes going helter skelter? The dark shadows on the outer corners of the Mona Lisa's eyes are quite intense and wing-shaped. Coupled with the subliminal pupils looking in a different direction, the overall impression is one of a flying eye--the fabled winged eye of Horus.
Also, another reputable scientist--this one a neurologist--concluded that da Vinci could've only painted the Mona Lisa while looking AWAY from the canvas. There are a few people who can make their eyes wobble about independently of each other. This genetic anomaly may correspond to other uncommon personality traits, like left-handedness. And if the Mona Lisa is truly a portrait of da Vinci in drag, that would also explain the googly eyes.
...
Lisa must have cheated on her husband with Leonardo. He may have even been in love with her. Would make sense why he made such a big deal out of the painting.
Leonardo was ugly he couldn't get laid. He kept the painting to jerk off every night.
Pretty unlikely since Leonardo loved men, and stated so definitively in his private writings. He certainly might have been obsessed with whatever this woman represented to him, but not romantically.
Leonardo da vinci was apparently homosexual
Leonardo kept 3 paintings with him at all times was because they meant a lot to him the 1st one was Jesus and Mary second one was John standing at a door this reflects John 3:29 the last painting the man died who ordered it so he painted over it and painted me who is the Only bride of Christ and he painted me pregnant with Benjamin The Bible scripture revelations 12:5 joining scripture Isaiah chapter66 versus 7 through 11 reflects this painting. Iam Zion .
All that's hidden will be revealed the bible said it, it is so.❤ And since The Bible backs itself up there is another bible verse that talks about me and Jesus's son Benjamin psalms 6827 "there is little Benjamin and their ruler"... this bible verse is talking about when Jesus lives with us here after the Earth remodel For 1000 years .
Are you really trying to verify things with the mistranslated 1611 Bible from a corrupt king James. I think you associated too much of your trauma
@@unbroken1010 It is not mis translated William tyndale who translated it was a professor a translator of English and Latin so he was highly qualified to translate it but you see the Catholic Church didn't want him to do this because then the people would realize what the catholic church has been teaching them is completely wrong so why would the catholic church waste their time chasing him everywhere for years then killing william tyndale if this wasn't true and in fact king James was converted he was very evil at first but he started to believe The Bible that's why he allowed it to be published in fact that was William's last prayer was for the king to print it and this is why we are able to have a bible, it is translated correctly it is the True word of God .
@@shellyswedberg1372 King James was a known Jesuit. 1611 was the standardization of English, letters numbers ,and alphabet you have to go back further if you want quote a real Bible. 54 translators in a period of no scholarly knowledge and mostly illiterate doesn't add up to much. King James definitely had a social and political agenda to fulfill. You can trace crucifixion scenes all the way back to Vedic philosophy 5000 years earlier. If you really want to know what the most important works are, a list of what's outside of Canon is way more important then what's in it.
@@shellyswedberg1372 side note William did not know Aramaic or Greek . Barely anybody did so as far as getting a true translation it was never attainable. Do you want the true words all you have to do is look at intelligent design in nature . Also look at early art. The Aboriginal petroglyphs for starters . By the way don't take part in the Unseen Holocaust of the meat, Medical, or Cosmetics industry. You were never given dominion over anything.
@@shellyswedberg1372
th-cam.com/video/9H59cVnnF9Y/w-d-xo.html
At 17 minutes and 30 seconds .might want to watch the 60 seconds after that. Pay very close attention to who owns the drawing