Talk:The Last Supper (Leonardo)

message: I propose a change in the part: Subject.
no it doesnt ied by their names, using a manuscript[11][12] found in the 19th century."
The identity of the individual apostles in The Last Supper is not confirmed by The Notebooks of Leonardo Da Vinci. It is rather based on Giuseppe Bossi’s  discovery of the name labelled copy of Leonardo’s Cenacolo in the parish church of Ponte Capriasca. This fresco is of uncertain origin. (Leo Steinberg: Leonardo’s Incessant Last Supper; 2001). 
So I propose a new form:
"The Last Supper portrays the reaction given by each apostle when Jesus said one of them would betray him. All twelve apostles have different reactions to the news, with various degrees of anger and shock. The apostles were identified by their names, using an unsigned, mid-sixteenth-century fresco copy of Leonardo's Cenacolo[xyz]."
[xyz] Steinberg 2001; p. 75.
      (Leo Steinberg: Leonardo’s Incessant Last Supper; Chapter IV - The Twelve; 2001)
People should have possibility to discuss and move further, to interpret master Leonardo's Last Supper based on his manuscript as the primary source.
(For example I have already tried, to put it very simple: Simon the Zealot is clearly interchanged - I expect with Jude Thaddeus. And also James the Alphaeus might be interchanged with Philip, as James the Less, being the first bishop of Jerusalem, would be “the tallest” figure in the picture. And the gesture of Philip stays “asking one” - in the Study contacting Matthew and in the final contacting Andrew and Peter by referencing to: “Philip went and gave word of it to Andrew; and Andrew went with Philip to Jesus.” –  John 12:22.) Leonars (talk) 12:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I boldfaced the text that it appears you want to change. Are you suggesting removal of the existing [11][12]] citations? They are not used anywhere else and it would be nice to retain them. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

text: Until there is a special paragraph on its own, I feel the best place for these citations would be in the History section by complementing the study for The Last Supper description as follows: A study for The Last Supper[b] from Leonardo's notebooks[12] shows twelve apostles, nine of which are identified by names written above their heads.[13] Leonars (talk) 05:52, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  If these two citations are kept as proposed, I can agree with the boldfaced selection in this form for the change. Regarding the [11] citation: its link works slower, but credits a proper author of the text as in https://www.hellomilano.it/hm/sights/the-last-supper/ webpage. Leonars (talk) 06:47, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  . I have made the change as you originally suggested, added an ISBN to the book you cited, moved the orphaned citation to the image caption as you suggested later, and reformatted the appendices according to Wikipedia's layout guidelines. I am not sure what to do with that last link you provided. In any case, one you have 10 edits (you have three so far), you will be able to overcome the article protection and make changes yourself. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2021 

message: Just out of curiosity why is the Da Vinci Code not mentioned at all? Yes it was a movie so why is it not mentioned under Films? tom950  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom950 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Da Vinci Code 

message: This is a nice piece of art, but it is a false representation of the true last supper.  The art shows a rectangular table with Jesus and the Disciples seated in chairs at the table.  It has probably has been brought to your attention, but the scene is not true Jewish culture.  When Jews ate, it was at a round table about a few inches above the ground level and the participants were lying down on their side with their head toward the table and feet pointed away and Honoree was at the designated position with participants lying in order of seniority from the Honoree's left circling around the table from left to right. 
Frmr248 (talk) 22:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  False representation 

message: Leonardo has placed James and John (brothers and sons of Zeberdee) in the places of honour at the right and left hand side of Jesus. This seems to be a reference to Mark 10:35-45
'35 Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. “Teacher,” they said, “we want you to do for us whatever we ask.”
36 “What do you want me to do for you?” he asked.
37 They replied, “Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory.'
The request also appears in Matthew (although their mother makes it):
Matthew 20:20-21 NLT
Then the mother of James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Jesus with her sons. She knelt respectfully to ask a favor. “What is your request?” he asked. She replied, “In your Kingdom, please let my two sons sit in places of honor next to you, one on your right and the other on your left.”
Interestingly Jesus denies their request in both gospels, but Leonardo has granted it. No other disciples makes this request.
I think it would be interesting to note this in the article. Mascot1234 (talk) 17:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  James and John in places of honour 

message: I was really shocked when I discovered there are no chalices in the painting (Mandela Effect?). I'm a Roman Catholic and The Last Supper is inconceivable to me without at least one chalice of wine, and bread (just look it up in the Catholic Bible). The painting contains neither. Shouldn't the Church back in the day have opposed the painting as heretic? This is really weirding me out. 2003:C8:BF06:7D18:C59A:98F5:C8E:81BD (talk) 15:44, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Chalices?