This one’s more contemporary than my other posts, even if I am a little slow on the draw. It involves a recent claim by a guy who is variously described as a “computer analyst”, “amateur scholar” and “information technologist” (aka “a librarian”). Whatever he is, he’s called Slavisa Pesci, and he says that Da Vinci has hidden imagery within the painting, though he’s being deliberately coy about exactly what. Why do all that work yourself when there’s a world full of credulous loons to fill in the blanks for you? The story has been widely reported and, like all Da Vinci/Christ related claims, has attracted a lot of attention. Several of the websites set up to host the manipulated images he’s put together exceeded their bandwith which in turn led to further media coverage. His specific claims are:
1. On the extreme left and right of the painting, red-robed figures described as “knights”.
2. Mid-left, a female figure holding a baby, implied (if not stated) to be Jesus’ alleged squeeze and bearer of the holy bloodline, Mary Magdalene.
3. In front of the man himself, a goblet, presumably the grail itself (although perhaps not, as all recent speculative “historians” tell us that there was no actual cup).
Perhaps the most obvious problem here is that Da Vinci’s painting was made ooh, about 1500 years after Christ’s lifetime, and is therefore no more an accurate representation of the Last Supper than say, this. Another hitch with this theory is that the painting is, frankly, knackered. Da Vinci could not possibly have predicted how and to what extent his painting would fade and deteriorate. Possibly this has only made the alleged figures harder to make out, or, more likely in my view, it has allowed them to be imagined. You also have to ask why any 15th Century artist would hide these characters such that they would be undetectable by any known technology. Unless Nostradamus got him a very pre-release copy of Photoshop 0.0 I suppose. Not only has he flipped the image and superimposed it on top of the original, he’s had to make both copies semi-transparent to achieve the desired effect (which is still pretty unconvincing in my humble opinion). This makes “The Da Vinci Code” look like “History Today”. Thankfully, amongst the credulous and spinelessly neutral coverage, there is a goodly amount of scepticism (and naughty cynicism) out there – from expert soundbites and the good folk at howstuffworks.com, to outright parody. Cheeringly, many of the “have your say” sections are full of weary punters calling “BS” on this one. Has Da Vinci-mania finally jumped the shark? Let’s hope so.
Now normally, with these cases of pareidolia, I can at least see where the claimant is coming from, particularly assuming an acute case of Believeritis. But this time, it’s just not happening. It seems to me that you could read pretty much anything into the blurred mess resulting from Pesci’s photo-manipulation, and the things he’s “seen” wouldn’t be at the top of my personal list. The red “figures” look more like cardinals to me, or even these guys. This is why “analysis” like this is completely useless; there is no way to verify or corroborate these subjective claims. Have I strayed so far down the path of rationality and scepticism that I can no longer “see” with woo-tinted spectacles? Or this is actually an elaborate piece of viral marketing for a new wave of Magic Eye products? Who can say. See if you can still channel the spirit of Dan Brown by gazing at the images below until your eyes bleed:
Your recipe for guaranteed media coverage (not to mention potential book sales) is as follows:

1. Take one JPEG of “The Last Supper” by Leonardo, save a second copy.

2. Flip the copy horizontally.

3. Overlay the copy on the original, and adjust transparency.

4. Fire up the ol’ over-active imagination…

5. Con. cen. trate…open your mind…let your brain wash over you…
Nope, sorry, still absolutely sod all. Methinks there’s something fishy about this Pesci bloke. Answers on a postcard to BSHistorian.wordpress.com…
Tags: da vinci code, last supper, magdalene
August 6, 2007 at 6:21 am |
Hi,
Here’s an alternative you might enjoy:
http://altreligion.about.com/libr
ary/davinci/bl_differentdvc.htm
August 6, 2007 at 12:28 pm |
Thanks for that Karen – it really is amazing how people can explain away the problems with their pet theories, isn’t it? Of course there’s no evidence! It’s *secret*! And you have to be one of the select to be able to see it.
Yeesh.
August 11, 2007 at 1:15 pm |
This is my little article…
http://voip-tech.blogspot.com/2007/07/da-pesci-code.html
August 12, 2007 at 6:18 pm |
Thank you Luke – I do like your other examples!
November 11, 2007 at 4:44 pm |
[...] technician” (this time also a musician) has combined August’s claim of a hidden image in da Vinci’s Last Supper with the concept of hidden music as claimed at Rosslyn Chapel. In [...]
May 24, 2008 at 1:48 am |
Because we all know Leonaro DV had photoshop…
June 8, 2008 at 11:28 am |
that is really smart..good thinking there
August 6, 2008 at 6:48 am |
can noone else see two figures of death on the back wall???!
December 10, 2009 at 9:39 pm |
yes
i can c them too
August 6, 2008 at 7:56 pm |
Nope, it’s just you.
August 9, 2008 at 5:34 pm |
on jesus’ right hand side is mary magdelene….she is alsp next to peter who is gesturing with his hand that he is cutting her throat and then next to his right is a floating arm with a dagger……………its crazy but mary magdelene is the holy grail who was going to oversee jesus’ church after he was gone!!!!
August 21, 2008 at 12:44 am |
no, seriously, bhistorian, they are there, and you can even see the arch of their back coming from the wall, and linking with the ceiling. shadows dont do that.
now dont get me wrong, i am no comspiracy theorist, i believe this to be fake, but the fact is, they are there, one on the last, one on the right, in the classic black robes, with skeleton faces.
August 21, 2008 at 12:48 am |
there is also the outline of a sad looking jesus wearing the crown of thorns on the back wall. trust me it is there, and though i believe this to be fake, it is a fact, along with the two figures of death, they are there. i saw this years ago, in my university.
August 21, 2008 at 12:48 am |
ps are you from hartlepool. i am ,just the monkey hangers term got me.
August 22, 2008 at 1:21 am |
the figures of death are there, as is an outline of jeus, sad, wearing the crown of thornes, in between the figures if death on the back wall. however, though i believe this whole thing to be fake, what i see still true, weather it was made by sa vinci, or you, a feellow hatlepoodlia the point still stands. what i see is there.
August 26, 2008 at 2:16 pm |
i am a professor at a university in hartlepool, and i have seen this many times before. yes, there are two figures of death on the walls at the back, along with a childish drawing of a sad jesus, wearing the crown of thorns.
whether this is fake or not, the things you pointed out, danny, are there.
August 26, 2008 at 2:17 pm |
also, kev, i have too read the da vinci code, and there is much more fact in it than many think.
August 31, 2008 at 10:54 pm |
kev.
there is no proof that it is mary magdalen, it could just be the Apostle John.
just because all the things you are saying were in a FICTIONAL book doesnt mean there are true. and wot floating arm with a dagger????
September 1, 2008 at 4:54 am |
its very interesting…..
September 3, 2008 at 5:19 pm |
he may not have had photoshop but he did a lot of his notes backwards so why not his paintings. shiz he IS photoshop
September 3, 2008 at 5:30 pm |
also look in the lower right (or left if u flip it) there is a skull with one hand reaching up under the table
September 6, 2008 at 12:52 pm |
Oh really? Look at this high resolution version and tell me you see the same things.
http://www.haltadefinizione.com/en/cenacolo/look.asp
There is no spoon. I mean skull.
September 24, 2008 at 4:37 pm |
Please stop “Mr.” Pesci… he’s just a moron.. , I ASSURE you all, by my personal experience with him.
[Sorry Luke - I had to snip the rest of your criticism of Pesci. I don't doubt your experience, but whilst insults are fine legally, specific accusations online risk unwanted legal attention. Anyway, thanks for your support - BSH]
October 6, 2008 at 9:28 pm |
I agree with a lot of what you’ve said. Anyone can take two images, flip em, slap them on top of eachother and make it seem like there’s alternate things happening.
AND
in order for anyone to know this, Leonardo himself, would have had to make two exact replicas and made them somehow transparent to achieve this affect.
It’s a load of bullocks.
Good Job
October 11, 2008 at 4:59 pm |
The book is really amazing.
And There is no reason to believe that the novel was quite imaginative.
The book, i feel, depend on facts, and that too, with proofs.
Dan Brown has done a great thing. A Great realization.
November 8, 2008 at 5:04 am |
Da Vinci was not present at the last supper so this is just a painting of what it COULD had looked like. It is absurd to say things based on a made up painting.
November 28, 2008 at 2:16 am |
tnxsa u…………………………………………..lke k lst supper mo…………………..
December 22, 2008 at 1:45 am |
it would not be right to jump to comclusions without having adequate facts to base this theory on, i think this has been blown out of proportion.
January 7, 2009 at 9:27 am |
It is very amazing, i believe still there are many hidden things in it remaining undiscovered. Da Vinci code is simply not the sufficient.
January 8, 2009 at 9:10 am |
Can all Da Vinci’s portrait has a map or a sign that might give a direction
or map to reveal the greatest secret of all time?
January 24, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
have you noticed the WOMAN sitting on the right-hand side of jesus????
who could that be i wonder???
March 2, 2009 at 11:20 am |
nonsense! the painting is not clear…how can you proof that?go read bible la…the truth are all inside…
March 2, 2009 at 8:24 pm |
What is a “bible la”? Otherwise, yes, I quite agree. It’s not me making the claim though, old chap.
March 8, 2009 at 10:49 pm |
Hi
I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t concentrate to much on the baby and the man in red robes. What caught my eye is after all the emphasis put on the picture after every copy, behind Jesus there are two figures that appear. They’re clear in the first copy but as the pictures go down it becomes more obvious. Look above and behind Jesus.
March 10, 2009 at 8:34 am |
maknuson
March 29, 2009 at 1:29 pm |
I THINK THIS IS NOT TRUE .BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROOF FOR THIS .AT CAN BE GOOD IMAGINATION…..
April 12, 2009 at 9:32 am |
Hey, Jesus has rams horns. Cool!
April 15, 2009 at 7:59 pm |
Jesus is real and you cant change that He changed me from a second time felone to a peacful man i was gangbangin for 10 years and now i dont hate know one but love all becouse of what God has done for me now if you all belive in a stupid movie ” Didnt your mom tell you movies were fake all hollywood” all i got to say is repent for the kindom of heaven is at hand
April 29, 2009 at 10:17 pm |
Lol! Jesus does have rams horns! And somebody asked about the disembodied hand holding a dagger. It is to the right of the third dude from the left. It is hoovering right above the table. It is just really hard to see in this copy. And this hand can not physically belong to anyone. It is anatomically impossible.
May 27, 2009 at 5:25 am |
well done im impress of the discovery but if you`ll look directly to the real
fresco done by da vinci himself there is hint of a clue and its very noticable jesus clothes are red shirt and blue robe right and the one sitting on right side of jesus w/c known to be magdalene the holy grail the holy vessel of jesus bloodline the fussion of two royal blood for as long as i know magdalene is from the house of benjamin and jesus is a descendent of david and solomon has the same color except it is the interval like
male and female ,yin and yang balance
and also the mona lisa my colleuges said once shes on ugly chick
but its in appropriate to call her a female because she`s not
she`s only a figment of da vinci`s imagination have you not notice
the diffrence of the right side from the left it resembles significance
on the back ground the horizon the leftside is larger than the right
and the name MONA LISA w/c litteraly means something its derrived from the egyptian masculine fertilitygod name AMON and his counterpart is the female egyptian fertility god name ISIS but her ancient pictogram is L`ISA
Da Vinci is one hell of an artist
May 28, 2009 at 2:19 am |
Oh SNAP!, there are two skulls on the back wall! you are right dan!
July 15, 2009 at 12:03 pm |
is mama mary there? I thing she is.But why did she put her head on the other apostles?
but not why in god?
I THINK AND my batch think its fake only… we think that the true pictures is mam mary is leaning in god’S shoulder?
am we are rigth?
July 30, 2009 at 4:45 am |
You stated “Has Da Vinci-mania finally jumped the shark? Let’s hope so“.
That came from a episode of the TV show Happy Days which Ron Howard stared in who also directed The Da Vinci Code. Odd how you used that fraise in your statement.
July 30, 2009 at 5:43 pm |
Not really. It’s a popular phrase used to describe anything that’s overstayed its welcome in popular culture. It’s odd that you would know of the phrase but not this popularity, frankly.
October 25, 2009 at 6:25 pm |
you guys are dumasses for thinking this but just wait till the day comes of his seound coming and everyone would want to go with him but youll see most of you would not go for mis beliving in him
October 25, 2009 at 11:11 pm |
Religion is religion no matter how you slice it but fact and pure scripture can tell you the truth and for all of you who actually think that Christ our lord was married and had children, You did not read the scripture and know nothing about jesus at all. THE DA VINCI CODE WAS AND IS A FICTIONAL BOOK WRITTEN BY A FICTIONAL WRITER. THE GOSPEL, Old And new testament is a set of scriptures written by Prophets of god and deciples and the ACTUAL EVIDENCE and SCRIPTURE comes from Papyrus that was written on and validated to be the actual scripture of the apostles whom followed Christ. In what book in any bible does it say jesus married and had children? How can you take, Jesus blessing a prostitute as jesus being married and having had children? Jesus is GOD and god has children. Every one of us. This notion that jesus had a wife and was portrayed as being married in a PAINTING is absolutely absurd. The last supper was painted 1500 YEARS AFTER JESUS’ DEATH. DaVINCI painted according to not only jesus’ time but his own time making the person on his left look a little feminine. So does the charactor to his right looking almost the same, maybe TWO WOMEN THAN HUH? WE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT JESUS’ YOUNGER LIFE BECAUSE WE WERE TO FOCUS ON THE WORD OF CHRIST. It was our job to pass the word. Jesus did not want his disciples distracted with women. The word of god was the most important and when we disguise gods word with fake fiction we fail to do what was asked of us in the first place. The bible says it very clear, Do not add to the words of this book or take away from the words of this book or that will be added or taken away from you. Saying jesus was married and had kids is doing just that because NOWHERE IN THE GOSPEL does it make that claim. Its only a fictional story that makes believers VERY scared when they see how we are trying to destroy god instead of praise him. I believe those who follow this notion of lies only commits sin out of ignorance rather than accidental. Christ is GOD and our FATHER, and the SON and the holy spirit; He didnt need a wife and bloodline to keep it going when ALL teaching was based on faith.
October 27, 2009 at 8:10 pm |
it’s pretty well known too that this stuff was painted in layers -details covered up, inproved, covered over etc –of course there are “hidden images” –are they hidden meanings; take a reality pill
November 9, 2009 at 7:20 pm |
i agree..
good job
November 15, 2009 at 3:49 am |
i have a weeping last supper since last year. i can forward the photos from last year and this year and today’s photo.
thanks,
marissa maulsby
2825 west thornton avenue
tampa, florida 33611
813-8107335
December 15, 2009 at 1:06 pm |
ohhhhhhhhhhh………
computers are so great!