See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/294376469

Rethinking Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper

Article · January 2007

CITATIONS READS

2 209

1 author:

Jack Wasserman
Temple University
14 PUBLICATIONS 26 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Church of San Lorenzo in Florence View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jack Wasserman on 08 April 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Rethinking Leonardo da Vinci's "Last Supper"
Author(s): Jack Wasserman
Source: Artibus et Historiae , 2007, Vol. 28, No. 55, In This Issue Special Articles in
Memory of William R. Rearick (1930-2004). Part 1 (2007), pp. 23-35
Published by: IRSA s.c.

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20067137

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

IRSA s.c. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Artibus et
Historiae

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
JACK WASSERMAN
Rethinking Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper
A generation or so ago, in a monograph on Leonardo da
Vinci, I wrote that he conjoined in his Last Supper of
1495-1497 the two main and successive moments of the
Passover meal as it is described in Matthew 26:21-28 [Fig. 1].1
The initial moment is when Christ announces to the apostles
that one among them will betray him, and when asked for the
identity of the traitor answers, "The one who has dipped his
hand into the bowl with me will betray me". The subsequent
moment is the institution of the sacrament of the Eucharist,
when Christ blesses the bread and says, "Take, eat this is my
body", then takes up the cup and says, "Drink from it, all of
you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out
for many for the forgiveness of sins". The painting's sacra
mental iconography is established with the left hand of Christ
indicating the eucharistie bread and the right hand reaching
for a glass containing the eucharistie wine, as Johann
Antoniewicz noted a century ago [Fig. 2]. I further proposed
that Christ's right hand reaches simultaneously toward the
wine glass and (together with Judas' left hand) toward the
incriminating dish in front of St. John thereby linking the two
moments inexorably. Leo Steinberg, it turns out, had anticipat
ed my interpretation of the dual role of Christ's right hand in an
article he published on the Last Supper in 1973. However, it
appeared in print too late for me to cite it except in the append
This content downloaded from
155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
ed bibliography.2 He reaffirms this interpretation in his recent
book on the mural.3 I no longer hold to it. To be sure, I still
think that the painting represents the narrative and mystical
themes as integrated into a single pictorial moment, but by
other means than with Christ's right hand.4
Observing the right hand, it is clear that it does not reach
for the dish. As Antoniewicz argued, Christ's entire right arm
forms a rigorous line that leads the eye of the beholder
through the hand directly and exclusively to the wine glass,
which, in turn, blocks the hand from having access to the dish.
As further evidence for his thesis Antoniewicz observed that
Christ's gaze is averted from the right hand and the dish to the
left hand indicating the bread. Steinberg disagrees, writing
that, "If, in his [Antoniewcz's] reasoning, the dish between
Judas and Christ is disqualified as an object of Christ's atten
tion because Christ's gaze is averted, then that gaze is averted
as well from the wineglass".5 True, but as an objection to
Antoniewicz's reasoning it carries no weight, because Christ's
gaze is, after all, directed at the second of the two eucharistie
elements. Antoniewicz's comments seem to me appropriate
and I would bolster them by pointing out that on the rare occa
sion when Christ reaches for a dish in Last Supper paintings
the utensil is situated in front of him and is larger than the oth
ers on the table to be recognized as especially relevant to the
23
JACK WASSERMAN

1) Leonardo da Vinci, ?Last Supper?, 1495-1497, refectory, Milan, Santa Maria delle Grazie.

portentous events that are to follow. A notable example is Giot
to's Last Supper in the Arena Chapel in Padua.6 Therefore, if
Christ in the mural were identifying the betrayer in Matthew's
terms one would expect his target to be the large dish
between his hands, but it is not. For that reason, I concur with
Antoniewicz that both hands of Christ should be read together
as integral parts of an arresting triangle that endows Christ
with iconic presence and Eucharist intent [Fig. 2].7
To be sure, the idea that there is a sacramental component
in the Last Supper has its staunch opponents, in particular
Creighton Gilbert, whose astute criticism needs to be
addressed before we can confirm that the themes of the
Eucharist and the betrayal are co-dependent.8 Gilbert articu
lates two objections. The more serious is that the elements
necessary to the Eucharist's visualization are not present in
paintings intended for refectories, being unsanctified spaces.9
The notion that such a proscription, overt or covert, existed in
the fifteenth century would seem to be confirmed by two Last
Suppers by Cosimo Rosselli. Rosselli's fresco of 1481 in the
sanctified Sistine Chapel represents Christ blessing the chai
ice and wafer.10 By contrast, his fresco in the refectory of the
convent of San Giorgio alia Costa, Florence, of about 1487,
omits the chalice and wafer altogether and conforms instead
to contemporary Florentine refectory Last Suppers, all of them
non-eucharistic.11
Still, I would make the case that Leonardo thought up the
treatment of Christ's hands as extending toward the wineglass
and the bread, instead of blessing the chalice and wafer, for
the exact purpose of making a eucharistie statement accept
able in a refectory setting.12 I am persuaded that this is so in
spite of Gilbert's second argument that only by implication
may Christ's pointing hands (as he describes them) be per
ceived as engaged in an act of consecration.13 To my mind,
there has to be more to it than that, even if the right hand is
somewhat troublesome: it is shaped, improbably, to take up
the glass from the top and bottom, rather than from around its
body (nor, indeed, can it be perceived as shaped to insert
itself in a dish).14 Nevertheless, Christ's arm, as Antoniewicz
made abundantly clear, is directed with such intent toward the
wineglass as to project onto the wine it contains a significance

24

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

2) Leonardo da Vinci, ?Last Supper? (detail).
that transcends accident. However, the left hand is the imme
diate carrier of the sacramental message, but not merely by
implication as Gilbert contends, any more than Judas extend
ing his hand toward the incriminating dish implies, rather than
demonstrates, his culpability. (I will argue further on that Judas
does not actually reach for the dish). In any case, a triangle
that results from the diagonal reach of Christ's arms, as in
Leonardo's painting, whether in pure or approximate form, is
essential to a representation of Christ centered among or
between his apostles and offering them Communion. I cite as
examples an Ottonian illumination representing a Last Supper
(which, of course, Leonardo would not have known) and
a medieval Florentine painting of the Supper of Emmaus on
the apron of a Crucifix in the Uffizi (which possibly he did
know) [Fig. 3].15
All the same, to interpret the gesture of Christ's left hand
as sacramental it is important to distinguish between its point
ing to (as Gilbert terms it) and its indicating the bread (as
Antoniewicz terms it). In an article on the Last Supper I pub
lished in 1983, I defined pointing at an object as calling atten
This content downloaded from
155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
RETHINKING LEONARDO DA VINCI'S LAST SUPPER
tion to it as such, whereas indicating an object calls attention
to a principle that inheres in it.16 An example of the latter is
a young man in Donatello's Feast of Herod (Baptistery, Siena)
who indicates aggressively with his hand, palm up, the sev
ered head of St. John, surely not to bring to the king's atten
tion a horrible sight of which he is already aware, but to
emphasize the import of the saint's martyrdom for which the
king is responsible.17 There is also an interesting literary
source with which we can attribute such significance to
Christ's extended left hand. It consists of a seventeenth-centu
ry English manual of hand gestures compiled by John Bulwer,
some of them, I would imagine, already known in Italy in
Leonardo's day.18 On page 193, item H, Bulwer illustrates the
hand extended in a manner of Christ's left hand and labels it
"Rationes profert" [Fig. 4]. The gesture is described on page
177 as "Brings forth some hidden matter to make the argu
ment in hand more rhetorically apparent". Applied to Christ's
left hand in the context of a Last Supper, it "brings forth" the
bread's eucharistie essence. The fact that the bread is of
a commonplace variety, not the wafer as in Sassetta's sacra
mental Last Supper in Siena, should not be used to discredit
its having a spiritual connotation: in the aforementioned
medieval Supper at Emmaus Christ distributes ordinary
breads to the apostles [Fig. 3].19 So does the Christ in Pontor
mo's Supper at Emmaus of 1525 in the Uffizi: he takes hold of
a loaf of bread, typically shaped as a bun, with the left hand
and blesses it with the right hand.20 Like Pontormo and the
anonymous author of the medieval painting, Leonardo depicts
Christ's involvement with the bread in naturalistic terms turn
ing transcendental, consistent with the Gospel accounts. This
way he eased the proscription against including a eucharistie
iconography in Last Suppers intended for refectories, as we
surmise from three sixteenth-century refectory paintings that
emulate Leonardo's mural. Alessandro Araldi's Last Supper in
San Paolo, Parma, of about 1514 [Fig. 5] and Giovan Paolo
Lomazzo's Last Supper of 1561 in Santa Maria della Pace,
Milan (destroyed), show Christ about to take up a bread-loaf
with the right hand.21 The easing of the proscription is still
more pronounced in Tomasso Aleni's Last Supper of 1508
(San Sigismondo, Cremona), which features Christ indicating
a wine glass with the right hand and holding the Host in his left
hand.22
Christ's total immersion in the sacramental dimension of
Leonardo's painting is, I think, incontrovertible. As such, it is
proper to perceive Judas as sustaining the theme of betrayal
without Christ's physical collaboration, but not - let me
emphasize, but not - by reaching for the small dish in front of
John [Fig. 6]. Certainly, one can make a case for associating
the dish with Judas' hand, because they occupy a common
25
JACK WASSERMAN_
^%'-%mvres^09Kin<|MnR^^
^amsBssameBsmss^ :,

3) Anonymous, ?Supper at Emmaus?, from a Crucifix, about 1300; Florence, Uffizi. Photo: Soprintendenza per I Beni Artistici
e Storici, Gabinetto Fotogr?fico, Florence.

horizontal plane. But I do not think that the case is sustainable Normally, Judas extends his hand to a dish with the palm
in view of the fact that Judas traditionally reaches for the same turned down, and, in the few examples in which he retrieves
large dish as does Christ.23 That he does not in the Milan the dipped bread from the dish, he does so with two fingers.24
mural may be explained in one of two ways. Leonardo used In the Milan mural, instead, Judas turns his hand slightly away
the devise of the small dish because he had placed the betray from the dish and, it seems to me, readies to pick up a nearby
er at an unreachable distance from the large one. Or, he may loaf of bread whose domical shape corresponds to the curve
have chosen a different method entirely with which to depict of the palm and fingers.25 This is better seen with the dish
Judas as the betrayer. The latter I take to be the proper choice. removed, as in figure 7. I am aware that the motif of Judas tak

26

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

A*M
n
im*0*m+?m**m-?9
A^?xm?t ?rtftrt
r<4mmr~y?m~*mr*mmmEm
fm,M %?**
3w.,
4) From John Bulwer, Chirologia, page 193.
ing up an incriminating bread-loaf is foreign to the biblical
accounts of the event, as it is to fifteenth-century Last Suppers
anywhere in Italy (although often enough he holds up a sop
with two fingers, notably in Andrea del Castagno's Last Sup
per of around 1447 in Sant'Apollonia, Florence).26 Conversely,
the motif of Judas literally picking up a loaf of bread from the
table does occur in four Last Suppers that are dependent on
the Milan mural. The earliest is the famous print by Giovanni
This content downloaded from
155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
_RETHINKING LEONARDO DA VINCI'S LAST SUPPER
5) Alessandro Araldi, copy after Leonardos ?Last Supper?
(detail), about 1514, refectory, Parma, San Paolo. Photo:
Soprintendenza per I Beni Culturali e Ambientali, Istituto
Centrale per il Catalogo e la Documentazione.
Pietro Birago of about 1500, in which Judas' comparably
arched hand obviously reaches for the bread in the absence
altogether of the dish [Fig. 8]. The second, a more exact repli
ca of the painting, is by Araldi (San Paolo, Parma) [Fig. 5]. This
time Judas' arched hand hovers over a bread-loaf with the
dish no longer within its range.27 The third is a free copy by
Franciabigio in the refectory of San Giovanni della Calza in
Florence, also of 1514: here Judas places his hand directly on
the bread, though Christ's platter is within easy reach [Fig. 9].
Finally, Aleni in his Last Supper in Cremona depicts Judas with
a full hand placed on a sop.28
If it is true, as I contend (and as was seemingly believed by
the artists whose paintings I just discussed) that Leonardo
meant to substitute the bread for the dish, then both Judas and
Christ are immediately concerned with breads, and in scanning
the Last Supper from left to right with the help of figure 10 the
eye is led from bread to bread through John's interlaced fin
gers,29 Christ's right hand shaped in a variation of Judas' hand,
and the large dish. The two breads are paired also by the cir
27
JACK WASSERMAN_

6) Leonardo da Vinci, ?Last Supper? (detail).

cumstance that they are approximately equidistant from their

respective ends of the table and, consequently, nearly compo
sitionally centered [Fig. 1]. I would, therefore, construe as
basic to the iconography of Leonardo's painting the contrast,
yet interdependence, of the unsanctified bread (near Judas left
hand) as an augury of the forthcoming betrayal, and the sancti
fied bread (near Christ's left hand) as presaging the crucifixion
and, as its consequence, redemption. Aleni may have under
stood this to be Leonardo's objective, because in his own Last
Supper he substitutes the two breads with the sop and the 7) Leonardo da Vinci, ?Last Supper? (detail).
Host.30 In a sense, Araldi gives the idea of the interdependence
of the two breads greater urgency by bringing them close
together, with the matching hands of Judas and Christ readying
to pick them up [Fig. 5]. As such, the breads, with the antago
nists reaching for them in Leonardo's mural, act together to - betrayal or sacramental - the disciples inhabit. It is my hope
constitute one aspect of the uninterrupted linkage we are seek that what I wrote some paragraphs earlier successfully
ing between the two themes. It is as if Leonardo were speculat demonstrates that Christ is engaged with his left hand in
ing on the pre-ordained place of the historical betrayal in explicitly indicating the eucharistie bread, toward which he
redemption, by way of the crucifixion.31 looks and, indeed, tilts his entire body. But he is not yet initiat
Another inseparable link between the two themes is the ing the sacrament of the Eucharist; rather, he calls attention to
exact contemporaneity of the actions of Christ and the apos the bread a moment before he will take it up, bless it, comment
tles. To clarify this thought requires that we look more closely explicitly on its significance, and pass it on to the apostles.32 If
at Christ's performance and also ponder which two moments my interpretation is correct that Christ is, if by very little, at

28

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

8) Giovanni Pietro Birago, copy after Leonardo's ?Last
Supper? (detail), early 16th century; Vienna, Albertina.
a stage preliminary to speech and bestowing on an average
piece of bread its transubstantiating core, then it follows that
Leonardo devised a role for Christ that is at once naturalistic
and symbolic and that goes beyond "alluding to the eucharis
tie reference with subtle hints" (as Gilbert says) to the thresh
old of Communion. In effect, Christ is in a transitional stage:
he subsists between the two moments for which he is himself
responsible - the ominous accusation fading out, and Com
munion phasing in.
As regards the apostles, I adhere to the familiar interpre
tation that they react to Christ having just communicated to
them his forthcoming immolation.33 Antoniewicz and Stein
berg think otherwise, that only the conduct of the six apostles
on the left side of Christ can be so construed. For the apos
tles on the right side they improvise roles appropriate to
a Eucharist iconography - that they are enlivened by Christ
speaking mystically of his body and blood. For his part,
Antoniewicz assumes that James the Major (to Christ's left)
with outspread arms stares at the bread toward which
Matthew (the third from the right) points.34 This idea is not
sustained by the hypothetical lines formed by James' sight
and Matthew's hands, which are directed elsewhere. Stein
berg has a more complex, but also, to my mind, unpersua
sive, way of explaining the eucharistie behavior of the apos
tles on the right. He fashions it in two stages, intramural and
extramural. In the first stage, at least three of the apostles by
This content downloaded from
155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
_RETHINKING LEONARDO DA VINCI'S LAST SUPPER
the nature of their hand gestures team up with the left-side
apostles in expressing their concern over Christ's statement
that one of them conspires against him. Steinberg, I think,
should have left it at that. Instead, he goes on to propose that
these same gestures - unbeknownst to the apostles but rec
ognized by the observer - are converting into ceremonial
modes. I will cite the example of Simon (at the short end of
the table on the right) about whom Steinberg writes: "as
a dramatis persona he need not be conscious of what his
action foreshadows; he is after all engaged in talk with his
neighbor [...]. But for the beholder familiar with the ceremony,
or with iconographie tradition, Simon is shaping a cultic form
in its nascency".35 That is to say, Simon's hands are to con
vert from a gesture with palms facing up as he speaks to his
neighbor (which the observer actually sees) to palms facing
each other to receive Communion from Christ (which the
observer assumes will happen).36
It seems to me of little help to our understanding of
Leonardo's own intentions to impugn to Simon's gesture
whatever it is the beholder might feel stimulated to imagine.
And if Simon already listens to Christ instilling into the bread
and wine their Eucharist content, as Steinberg seems to sug
gest, why then did Leonardo depict the disciple in a state of
delayed reaction, instead of giving him an appropriate cere
monial posture? I am tempted to apply to Steinberg's way of
manipulating the apostles on the right the same criticism he
lodges against historians who agree that Leonardo's Last
Supper has a Eucharist iconography, yet claim that the twelve
apostles respond only to Christ's no-longer-audible words of
betrayal. He writes that it is as if "anxiety over the betrayal
announcement has darkened their [the apostles'] wits".37
I am satisfied that the six apostles on the right, like the six on
the left, remain clear-headed in expressing their anxiety over
the betrayal announcement. At this point, they are nuanced
into states of doubt recognizable by their individual behaviors
and by Judas' act of overturning the saltcellar with his right
wrist and spilling the salt in contains on the table [Figs. 1 and
5]. What the behaviors of the apostles literally convey, the
spilled salt symbolizes, a thought I introduced in an earlier
article I published in this journal. I repeat here its closing
remarks:38
"I propose, therefore, that Leonardo conceived the
spilling of the salt as a symbol of discord, the breach of the
new-testament rule of fellowship. The symbol becomes literal
in the painting in the clamorous, anguished, and intense
behavior of the apostles [...]. The mid-seventeenth-century
cleric Mario Mazzolari, in his description of a replica of Leonar
do's Last Supper [...] hinted at the connection between the
spilled salt and the apostles as divided among themselves.
29
JACK WASSERMAN

9) Francesco di Cristofano Bigi, called Franciabigio, copy after Leonardo's ?Last Supper? (detail), 1514, refectory, Florence,
San Giovanni della Calza.

30

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 _RETHINKING LEONARDO DA VINCI'S LAST SUPPER

10) Leonardo da Vinci, ?Last Supper? (detail).

11) Leonardo da Vinci, ?Last Supper? (detail).

He wrote, 'with the right [hand] he [Judas] knocks over the
saltcellar as if he shattered and broke the peace of the celes
tial congregation'. So, more recently (1922), has Giovanni
Cairo, who writes in his dictionary of symbols that overturning
the saltcellar is a 'sign of future discord'. Leonardo, for his
part, may have intended the overturned saltcellar to convey
the thought that the salt Christ commanded the apostles to
have within themselves momentarily loses its 'saltness'". It is
when Christ instructs his disciples on moral principles (the
Beatitudes) that he refers to them as the "salt of the earth",
signifying that they are his worthy apostles. The "saltness",
the fellowship, they have lost, because they have become
suspicious of each other, when regained - Leonardo seems
to say - will testify that the apostles are indeed the true emis
saries of Christ.
I cannot resist, in conclusion, taking the occasion to talk
about the role of Thomas in the Last Supper, because Stein
berg takes me to task for interpreting the saint's upward point
ing index finger as raised in doubt [Fig. 11].39 Determined to
separate functionally the apostles on the two sides of Christ,
Steinberg argues that Thomas' raised finger is "a sign of tran
scendence" with no prior narrative function. He is persuaded
that the finger (indeed the whole hand) is severed from the
rest of Thomas' body and even "from the man's head" (see his
figure 35) so that, presumably, it is independent of whatever
Thomas may be thinking,40 which, judging from his facial
expression, must be about a serious matter. Thus "sundered",
Steinberg continues, the finger forms a cross with the extend
ed arm of James, and with its base Christ's upturned palm
indicating the sacramental bread. Here is how Steinberg
develops his thought: "To my eye, the complex formed by
Christ's founding gesture intercrossed by another's arm and
culminant in Thomas' finger expresses a mystery - the
eucharist expounded as in a rebus: 'This is the bread which
comes down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof and not
die (John 6:50)'".41 Steinberg asserts, furthermore, that
a "steeple finger [...] is Leonardo's trusted sign of transcen
dence".42 So, he concludes, must it be also for Thomas' finger
with which he verified the Resurrection by placing it, actually
the entire hand, in Christ's wound.

31

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
JACK WASSERMAN

How, we may ask, can Christ's gesture be "intercrossed"

with James' arm in the absence of the trunk of a cross? And
why is not Thomas' finger aligned with Christ's palm in a sin
gle axis if they are two parts of a single cross? Indeed,
James' extended arm physically prevents Thomas' finger
from being axially aligned with Christ's palm lying across the
table. And would we not be justified to doubt that an artist of
the Renaissance would sever a body as Steinberg suggests,
so that an arm, a hand, and a foot operate entirely independ
ently? Such seeming fragmentation of the human form is, in
fact, a pictorial device painters of the Renaissance at times
used for compositional and expressive purposes. Michelan
gelo did this in the Doni Tondo, about which I wrote else
where that "the arms of St. Joseph disappear behind the Vir
gin [...] and his right leg is so far extended to the foreground
as to seem detached from the body",43 as, incidentally, does
also his squashed-in left leg. I will cite another example of
such fragmentation: the Mary on the left in Pontormo's Depo
sition in the Capponi Chapel in Santa Felicita in Florence of
12) Anonymous, ?Savonarola Preaching?, woodcut from
1526. Note that her entire figure is hidden behind the youth
Savonarola's Compendio di Rivelazione, 1496, Florence,
ful Christ-bearer, except for her head, right arm, and the left Bibliotheca Nazionale.
arm reaching peculiarly across her unseen body to take
Christ's hand into hers. Surely, neither Michelangelo nor
Pontormo expected the limbs to be perceived as severed
from their trunks. Nor did Leonardo Thomas' hand and fin
ger. They are to be recognized as one with the body, which is adamant about what one doubts. To be sure, there is a similar
necessarily hidden behind St. James in accordance with ity between the two raised fingers, but it is only apparent. The
Leonardo's desire to compress the figures behind the table monk's finger is raised higher than Thomas' for two purposes,
in order to avoid the single-file Florentine type of composi I think. One is declamatory; the other to allude to God, about
tion.44 I think, moreover, that the finger and hand are to be whom he is no doubt discoursing and whose support he is
seen as dependent upon Thomas' body choreography and requisitioning for what he is preaching to his audience with.
facial expression, which are depicted energetically, even Thomas, on the other hand, inserts his finger at the level of,
aggressively, to reflect the "motions of the mind", Leonardo and between, his and Christ's head, and thus uses it exclu
would say. That is what I had in mind when I wrote that sively as a speaking gesture to accompany his verbal resist
Thomas' "finger is raised in doubt",45 to which Steinberg ance to what his Lord has just told the group.49 That is to say,
responds in a gently mocking tone: "Since doubt is what Thomas is performing a narrative role with his raised index fin
doubting Thomas is best at, what else would the finger be ger, not the mystical one Steinberg attributes to him.50
raised in"?46 Well, yes, quite right. Thomas doubts, or My interpretation of Thomas' performance is consistent
objects to, Christ's accusation that he and the other apostles with Steinberg's own vivid assessment of the saint's character.
could possibly behave treacherously, which he underscores He writes: "But more especially St. Thomas is remembered for
rhetorically with his finger, just as Simon's hands reinforce his incredulity when the other apostles announced Christ's
rhetorically his verbal exchange with Thaddeus and Matthew. Resurrection to him: 'Except I shall see in his hands the point
To be fair to Steinberg's position, he invokes a print that of the nails and put my finger into the place of the nails, and
represents Savonarola in a pulpit preaching with his index fin put my hand into his side, I will not believe (John 20:25)'".51 In
ger raised [Fig. 12], concluding that "An index so hoist and this passage, Thomas' doubting mood is certainly assertive.
haught spells inflexible certitude".47 Steinberg implies that my Many days later Thomas has the opportunity to inspect the
interpretation of Thomas's finger as expressing doubt drains it wound on the side of the Resurrected Christ, as described in
of the requisite "certitude".48 Not so. Doubting, after all, is not John 20:27 and familiar in Renaissance iconography as the
necessarily a negative attitude - one can doubt and yet be Incredulity of Thomas. But in Leonardo's Last Supper events

32

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 _RETHINKING LEONARDO DA VINCI'S LAST SUPPER

have a great distance to go before Thomas can perform his
experiment, whatever a beholder of the painting may choose
to imagine.
I repeat: all twelve apostles are to be perceived as acting
in unison in response to what Christ had just finished saying
about his imminent death, and without a minimum lapse of
time he begins to communicate his message of the Eucharist.
The two themes are thus engaged temporally and linearly, so
that Leonardo in his Last Supper encapsulates the two essen
tial parts of the biblical Last Supper in a single, seamless, pic
torial moment to produce a painting that is replete with drama
and ritual - betrayal, sacrifice, and salvation.52

1 J. Wasserman, Leonardo da Vinci, New York, 1975, pp. fifteenth-century examples, see D. Rigaux, A la table du Seigneur.
126-127. I developed the idea further in an article "Reflections on the
LEucharistie chez les Primitifs italiens, Paris, 1989, figs. 108 and 109.
Last Supper of Leonardo da Vinci", Arte Lombarda, no. 66, 1983, pp. 7 Johann Antoniewicz's statement is quoted in Steinberg, op.
15-34. cit., pp. 202-203 (pages 210-208 encompass Antoniewicz's entire arti
2 L. Steinberg, "Leonardo's Last Supper", Art Quarterly, 36, no. cle in the original German and in an English translation).
4, 1973, pp. 297-410. 8 C. Gilbert, "Last Suppers and their Refectories", in The Pursuit
3 L. Steinberg, Leonardo's Incessant Last Supper, New York, of Holiness in Late Medieval and Renaissance Religion, Ch. Trinkaus
2001, pp. 51-52. All future reference to Steinberg will be to the book. and H. O. Oberman, eds., Leiden, 1974, pp. 371-407.
In this publication, Steinberg summarizes my previous comments on 9 Ibid., p. 394. Actually, an anonymous thirteenth-century fresco
the painting in three chronological steps. I am very flattered by his in the refectory of the ex-convent of Santa Giuliana in Perugia depicts
extended attention to what I wrote and give him now a fourth step he Christ facing fully frontal and holding a wafer in his left hand. The
may want to ponder. painting was published by Rigaux, op. cit., p. 195, fig. 78, and p. 75, n.
4 To be sure, in an anonymous medieval Last Supper in the 50.
Chiesa Rossa, Arbedo, Christ is involved simultaneously in two 10 For an illustration, see L. Vertova, / cenacoli fiorentini,
actions, one narrative and the other Eucharist. He raises the Host with Florence, 1965, fig. 23.
his left hand and with the right hand feeds the sop to Judas. However, 11 For an illustration, see ibid., fig. 22.
Christ's double action in the Arbedo painting is performed with two 12 I had suggested in my 1983 article on the Last Supper (op. cit.,
hands, not one, as I assumed was the case in Leonardo's Last Supper. p. 29) that Leonardo's introduction of the eucharistie reference in the
For an illustration of the Arbedo fresco, see Wasserman, Arte Lombar painting had something to do with the death of II Moro's wife in 1497.
da, p. 32, fig. 24. This idea has not been particularly well received.
5 Steinberg, op. cit., p. 203. 13 Gilbert, op. cit., p. 393.
6 For an illustration, see G. Basile, ed., Giotto. Gli affreschi della 14 H. von Einem, "Das Abendmahl des Leonardo da Vinci", in
Cappella degli Scrovegni a Padova, Milan, 2002, pp. 285 and 286. For Arbeitsgemeinschaft f?r Forschung des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen,

33

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
JACK WASSERMAN_
99,1961, p. 66, also had a problem with Christ's right hand. He writes:
accounts of the Last Supper (Fig. 1). We know about Judas, Peter and
John conform to Evangelist John's record of their behavior
"Christ's left hand points distinctly to the bread. His right however
(13:21-25). Peter leans forward and asks the somnolent beloved of
makes a gesture whose significance must remain unintelligible, and
which has caused interpreters much trouble. There is a cup in front of to inquire of him the name of the betrayer, and John no longer
Christ
the right hand which indicates the wine". asleep on the table or on Christ's breast, drowsily leaning back to lis
15 For an illustration of the Ottonian illumination, see Wasser ten to what Peter has to say. The likely visual source for the relation
man, "Reflections...", p. 33, fig. 27. The triangular motif also appears ship
in between the two apostles is a detail in a painting by Andrea Man
Orcagna's Enthroned Christ of 1354 in the Strozzi Chapel, Sta. Maria tegna, the Family and Court of Ludovico Gonzaga of 1465-1474
Novella, Florence, in which Christ extends the book to St. Thomas (Camera degli Sposi in the Palazzo Ducale, Mantua), in which Ludovi
Aquinas with one hand and the keys to Peter with the other (for co ansits leaning back to hear the another's counsel (for an illustration,
see M. Cordaro, ed., Mantegna. La Camera degli Sposi, Milan, 1992,
illustration, see F. Hartt, History of Italian Renaissance Art, New York,
1979, colorplate 15). p. 74). Leonardo's objective in pairing Peter and John in this unique
16 Wasserman, "Reflections...", p. 27. manner, in addition to conforming the John's Gospel, is to free Christ
17 /b/d.,p. 27 and fig. 17. from any encumbrance that might dilute his iconic presence and
18 J. Bulwer, Chirologia or the Natural Language of the Hand, and sacramental function. Equally innovative is his incorporating Judas
Chironomia or the Art of Manuel Rhetoric, ed. J. W. Cleary, Carbon with Peter and John into a close-knit grouping, thereby depicting
dale, 1974. simultaneously the question and the answer.
19 For an illustration of Sassetta's Last Supper, see Rigaux, op. 34 Quoted in Steinberg, op. cit., p. 207.
cit., fig. 30. 35 Ibid., p. 82. Of Thaddeus, Simon's immediate neighbor, Stein
20 For an illustration, see L. Berti, Pontormo e il suo tempo, berg writes (p. 86) that also he is "unwittingly aware that he, too, is
Florence, 1993, p. 237. anticipating receiving communion". Hence, he will lower his raised
21 For an illustration of Lomazzo's painting, see Steinberg, op. hand "to be cupped" into the left hand resting on the table to take the
c/'f., fig. 158. Host (p. 85). The Communion gesture Steinberg refers to was com
22 For an illustration, see ibid., fig. 142. mon to Byzantine art (see his figures 42, left, and 44). Of Matthew
23 For illustrations, see Rigaux, op. cit., figs. 53, 94,115, and 118. Steinberg writes (p. 24): "One need only look at, say, Matthew, third
24 See, for example, Taddeo Gaddi's Last Supper in Santa Croce, from the right, to see him respond to something other than Christ's ini
Florence (illustrated in Hartt, op. cit., fig. 91). tial address". Philip's gesture (one hand on his chest and the other
25 I wrote as recently as three years ago that Judas is seen reach slipping into his jacket) Steinberg (p. 88) interprets as a generically
ing for the plate, which I no longer believe to be true (see J. Wasserman, devotional gesture, and though his arms "are not yet crossed at the
"Leonardo da Vinci's Last Supper: the Case of the Overturned Saltcel chest [...] he readies his body for obligation". James, Steinberg thinks
lar", Artibus et Historiae, no. 48, 2003, p. 69). Steinberg, op. cit., p. 90, (p. 87), may be reacting emphatically to the initial moment with arms
believes that Judas pushes aside a loaf of bread with his right elbow to stretched out, but they are in reality the horizontal bar of a cross he
show that his transgression makes him unworthy of receiving commun forms with Thomas' raised finger.
ion. The action escapes me, but the concept is right, if applied to my 36 Steinberg illustrates the ceremonial gesture with a medieval
interpretation of Judas as reaching for the bread with his left hand. Byzantine wall painting in ibid., fig. 42, left. We may ask, would the
26 For an illustration of Castagno's painting, see ibid., fig. 86. observer feel stimulated to convert the same gesture employed by an
27 Another example in a close copy after Leonardo's mural is an apostle at the short end of the table on the right in Castagno's non
early sixteenth-century Last Supper by Cesare Magni in the Brera, eucharistic Last Supper in Sant'Appolinare, Florence, and by two fig
Milan {ibid., fig. 150). ures (right end of table and to Christ's left) in Gaddi's non-eucharistic
28 For an illustration, see ibid., fig. 142. Last Supper in Santa Croce, Florence? For illustrations, see respec
29 For the meaning of John's gesture, see Bulwer, op. cit., pp. tively, ibid., figs. 86 and 30.
115 and 39, where it is described as "I show mental anguish" and has Steinberg (ibid., p. 82) attempts to demonstrate with two prints
the following comment: "To hold the fingers inserted between each that Rubens and his school recognized the convertibility of Simon's
other across is their sluggish expression who are fallen into melan gesture. One is by Pieter Soutman, whose engraved copy after
choly muse". For Steinberg (op. cit., p. 90) the gesture means "the Leonardo's Last Supper was "made from a painstaking study of [the
agony of compassion", because he reads it not as is but as he thinks original] ensemble" by Rubens "with its eucharistie legends applied to
it will become when converted to the gesture John has at the crucifix the whole, Simon included". The legends transcribe the relevant texts
ion (fingers interlaced and hands turned up). from Matthew (26:26-28), Marc (14:22:24), Luke (22:14:20), and 1
30 For an illustration of Aleni's painting, see ibid., fig. 142. Corinthians (11:23-25). They describe the institution of the sacrament
31 It would seem that the betrayal theme is central to most Last of the Eucharist and are spread across the entire lower margin of the
Supper paintings throughout Italy, both before and after Leonardo print, approximately under each of the four groups of apostles. There
executed his mural. These paintings possibly intend to feature the fore, it seems to me unhelpful for Steinberg to single out Simon with
importance of the betrayal to redemption, because without the betray whom to associate the legends. Nothing else in the print suggests that
al there could be no crucifixion or resurrection. Consider the fact that, Soutman knew that Leonardo presumably intended to distinguish the
for example, in Castagno's Last Supper, Judas literally steals the show apostles on the right from those on the left.
(see ibid., f\g. 86). More relevant to Steinberg's argument is an epitome print from
32 According to Antoniewicz, "Christ will slowly retract his left the Rubens' workshop. It is composed of two figures, Christ and
hand and turn his head to the right", that is, toward the hand poised to Simon, extracted from Leonardo's Last Supper bufwith the addition of
grasp the glass. Quoted in ibid., p. 207. a chalice and wafer. Christ is shown extending his arms on either side
33 I might point out that only three apostles are represented as of the eucharistie elements, as Simon, according to Steinberg,
reacting to Christ's ominous words pretty much as in the Gospel "extends both hands as celebrant". Yet Simon's talking hands remain

34

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 _RETHINKING LEONARDO DA VINCI'S LAST SUPPER
unchanged, as, incidentally, does his argumentative facial expression.
medieval and fifteenth-century Last Supper representations. For illus
Are we to believe, then, that also Rubens required the beholdertrations,
to see Rigaux, op. cit., figs. 31, 47, 102, 108, 111, and the Last
imagine the conversion of the gesture from conversational to ceremo Supper relief in the marble triptych, formerly in the Certosa di Pavia, in
nial? It seems to me that it would have been easy for Rubens to turn which figures are arranged in groups of three (for an illustration, see
Simon's palms toward each other and to change his facial expression Embriachi il trittico di Pavia, introduction by G. A. Dell'Acqua, Milan,
consistent with a "ritual performance", if that is indeed the role he was
1982. Leonardo was surely familiar with the Pavia relief.
assigning to him. As I mentioned earlier in this note, Simon's talking 45 Wasserman, Leonardo, 1975, p. 31.
gesture appeared centuries before, twice in Taddeo Gaddi's Last Sup 46 Steinberg, op. cit., p. 67.
per in Santa Croce and once in Castagno's Last Supper, although nei 47 Ibid., p. 69 and fig. 32.
ther painting has eucharistie content. Moreover, since in Soutman's 48 Steinberg (ibid., p. 70) writes that it is a "mistaken assump
copy and in the epitome print Christ's extended arms and hands are tion" to "perceive this St. Thomas [...] as though he were a dramatis
as they are in the original painting, he does not distribute the eucharis
persona in an interpersonal situation, a live human being, whose
tie elements, nor, consequently, can Simon be perceived as receiving, behavior, like an actor's, should be transparent to fellow men".
or about to receive, communion. From the shape of the apostle's 49 In Bulwer there are two illustrations of raised index fingers (op.
hands and his facial expression, he might be questioning Christ on cit.,
the p. 213, N and O). "N" is described on page 202 (Canon XX) as
transubstantiating character of his body and blood. "The index erected from a fist doth crave and expect attention, and, if
37 Ibid., p. 45. moved, it doth threaten and denounce". "O" is also described on page
38 Wasserman, op. cit., p. 70. 202 as Canon XXI as "The index advanced from the fist, and inclined
39 Quoted in Steinberg, op. cit., p. 72. See my Leonardo, 1975, p.
respective to the shoulder, hath a great faulty to confirm, collect, and
31 ; on p. 130 I identify the Doubting Thomas by his raised finger. refute".
40 Steinberg, op. cit., p. 70. 50 Steinberg (ibid., p. 71) notes that in Leonardo's Adoration of
41 Steinberg, op. cit., p. 72 the Magi, Virgin and St. Anne Cartoon, and the late St. John the Baptist
42 Ibid., p. 71. What did Franciabigio have in mind when in his figures "invariably point to heaven" and thus can be characterized as
Last Supper he has St. Peter instead of St. Thomas point upward with transcendental. This is an accurate interpretation of the fingers in the
his index finger [Fig. 9]? St. Peter is seated to Christ's left and looks
three paintings: their owners face away from their fingers and alert
directly at him, somewhat in the manner of Leonardo's Thomas, but whom they are addressing (us, in the case of St. John the Baptist) of
with no interference from St. James. the place of a higher power in the event (Adoration) or devotional
43 For an illustration, see J. Wasserman, Michelangelo's Florence compositions (St. Anne Cartoon and Si. John) in which they partici
pate.
Piet?, Princeton, 2003, pi. 25, and pages 44-46, for a discussion of this
aspect of painting in relation to the Florence Piet?. 51 Ibid., p. 218.
44 It is frequently noted that the table seems too small to accom 52 I am grateful to Jane van Nimmen for her excellent editing of
modate all the apostles, which is not an uncommon feature inthis paper.

35

This content downloaded from

155.247.166.234 on Sun, 20 Sep 2020 19:04:45 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

View publication stats