Da Vinci Code Artwork Collection
The artwork of Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code plays an important role in the book and movie.
We have collected the five most important pieces of Leonardo da Vinci’s art from Da Vinci Code into one place here. They are:
- Leonardo da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man
- Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa
- Leonardo da Vinci’s Virgin of the Rocks (or Madonna of the Rocks)
- Leonardo da Vinci’s The Last Supper
- Leonardo da Vinci’s Adoration of the Magi
If you’re like me, you read the story and wanted to see the artwork too. We hope this is a simple service for you.
Enjoy the art!
15 Responses to “Da Vinci Code Artwork Collection”
Leave a Reply
Start a Conversation
Media
Do you crave destiny? (Part 2)
Destiny? Is this really me? Was I really born for great things?
>Watch
Copyright © 2010 Power to Change Ministries. All Rights Reserved
[...] There is a collection of all the Da Vinci Code artwork all linked in one spot. [...]
Thanks Rob! Definitely enjoy the art!
Hey Rob, sorry to bug you again…
There are MAJOR differences between “Madonna of the Rocks” and “Virgin of the Rocks”.
MADONNA of the Rocks:
http://www.abc-people.com/data/leonardov/021.jpg
VIRGIN of the Rocks:
http://www.aiwaz.net/modules/coppermine/albums/leonardo/normal_14 – rocks2.jpg
Thanks! Bye.
Sarah, I’m intrigued. But your second link didn’t work. Could you re-post it? When we were researching it (and I just tried it again using Google), I’m finding a lot of sites saying that although they are different, it’s slight and that the titles are used interchangeably. For example, Wikipedia says:
The Virgin of the Rocks and Madonna of the Rocks are terms used to describe both of two different paintings with almost identical compositions.
I’d love to see a good comparison so could you repost that link?
[...] [...]
Sure thing, the link was broken by spaces in my last post.
VIRGIN of the rocks:
http://www.aiwaz.net/modules/coppermine/albums/leonardo/normal_14 – rocks2.jpg
Let’s see if this one works…
Okay, that one didn’t work… Again…
So here’s a larger one:
http://www.fotos.org/galeria/data/522/3Leonardo-Da-Vinci-Virgin-of-the-Rocks—London.jpg
The differences from Madonna are as follows:
- Uriel’s hand is lowered from the threatening gesture
- Mary’s fingers aren’t like “talons gripping an invisible head”
- 3 of them have halos
Basically, Leonardo just “watered-down” the painting to please the Catholic Church.
It’s important to remember though that we’re not talking about two paintings, one called Madonna of the Rocks and the other Virgin of the Rocks, we’re talking about two paintings BOTH of which are know by both names. As it stated in DVC and is also recorded in history da Vinci painted the first painting on commission, but the patrons were not happy with it so he painted a second version of the painting. This is why there are differences between the two works, but the title for both is traditionally the same. One is housed in Paris, the other in London.
check out art historian Timothy Verdon’s work on Leonardo’s Madonna of the Rocks. ( The DaVinci Code book is ridiculous and cannot be viewed as anything other than poorly written fiction.) Clearly Dan Brown missed Survery of Wester Art I in college. All he needed to do was read the description of the painting. but instead he thinks the figure of the Christ Child is John the Baptist! and visa versa. He has confused the central figures, so of course his interpretation of the painting is ridiculous!
How dare he claim the historical ascpects of his book are correct. He is ignorant.
[...] The question was about one of Leonardo Da Vinci's paintings mentioned in The Da Vinci Code, The Last Supper. The motivation of bringing the comment here is becuase I thought it interesting to look at the four Gospel accounts of this event in the context of this famous painting. I was addressing the question of who the guy with the dagger is in the painting. I believe that is indeed Peter for a couple of reasons. Since Leonardo da Vinci was not present for the Last Supper, let's look at the documents we KNOW he had (and I encourage you to go to these same texts with me for this and read them in context to get a better feel for it). [...]
I have a question, with reference to the last supper. It is a query as to whether it is mary or john next to jesus. However i have an idea in relation to this, if the person on the picture is to be a woman and i do believe it fit the visual of a woman rather than that of a man. What about the person to the other side of jesus who we believe to be phillip. I believe this man could also be a woman after studying the painting in detail. If you look closely all the other people in the picture can easily be seen to be male other than that of john and phillip. They have no facial hair or beards like the others in the painting and phillips stance is different to that of a man and more femine like. the figure would be stood like this if he had breasts and would be slighly bent forward because of the weight of these.
Gaz, I’m no art historian, but when I look at the painting, i don’t see women. I see men painted in such a way that they look kinda feminine. Of course I think a lot of dudes look like ladies in Renaissance paintings.
But my take on what I see there I commented earlier. I think Jesus has John on one side, Judas on the other.
Of course what we’re talking about is a painters interpretation or artistic depiction of what he wanted to communicate. What’s more important is what actually happened. That’s the context I used to come up with my interpretation of Leonardo’s artwork.
i have alot of questions about the davinci code…but first, i have to say something. when i read this i made a conscience decision to realize that it is a FICTION story witht he opinions of an obviously well-educated conspiracy LOVER! the history i learned from the book was intriguing, but a little too biased for me. i was amazed at the subtle clues that davinci DID leave in his paintings…but i don’t think that there is any great significance in them. davinci may have been a genious, but there is a fine line between genious and crazy. even if he did hint towards all the things the davinci code advocates, who’s to say that davinci’s opinion is downright, honest history? i’m a hardcore christian and i thoroughly enjoyed it… there were a few aspects of the book that were actually plausible. i for one believe that it’s completely possible that mary magdaline and jesus christ were married. i mean, the purpose of us being here on earth is to create a family withen the bonds of marriage and raise them righteously. would it be a sin if the son of God married and had kids? wouldn’t that only be another example of the rightoues way to live our life? bringing children into the world is one God-like power given to us to be used withen the bonds of marriage…i believe that it would be in no way defaming for the son of God be an example of the right way to use our God-like powers…
anyways, those are just my thoughts on this whole thing. i love discussing others opinions as well
can you please tell me the differences between the two paintings (virgin of the rocks and modonna of the rocks) thx!
hey have a look at this completly different looking drawing is this ‘virgin of the rocks’??
http://gallery.euroweb.hu/art/b/bacchiac/madonna.jpg