Leonardo da Vinci is Archimedes like

How Genuine is Leonardo? by Damien F. Mackey “Over 1500 years before Leonardo Da Vinci became the Renaissance Man, antiquity had its own in the form of Archimedes, one of the most famous Ancient Greeks”. Charles River Editors If Leonardo da Vinci has been modelled to some degree upon a possibly fictitious Archimedes, then how much of what we have about Leonardo is truly reliable? Or, to put it another way, we might ask: What is the real Da Vinci Code? The two names, Archimedes and Leonardo, are constantly found mentioned together. For instance, there is this article, “Archimedes and Leonardo Da Vinci: The Greatest Geniuses of Antiquity and the Renaissance”: https://www.createspace.com/4430132 Authored by Charles River Editors …. “Give me a place to stand, and I shall move the world.’"– Archimedes “Iron rusts from disuse; stagnant water loses its purity and in cold weather becomes frozen; even so does inaction sap the vigor of the mind.” – Leonardo Over 1500 years before Leonardo Da Vinci became the Renaissance Man, antiquity had its own in the form of Archimedes, one of the most famous Ancient Greeks. An engineer, mathematician, physicist, scientist and astronomer all rolled into one, Archimedes has been credited for making groundbreaking discoveries, some of which are undoubtedly fact and others that are almost certainly myth. Regardless, he’s considered the first man to determine a way to measure an object’s mass, and also the first man to realize that refracting the Sun’s light could burn something, theorizing the existence of lasers over two millennia before they existed. People still use the design of the Archimedes screw in water pumps today, and modern scholars have tried to link him to the recently discovered Antikythera mechanism, an ancient “computer” of sorts that used mechanics to accurately chart astronomical data depending on the date it was set to. Mackey’s comment: Ah, but these water pumps were actually used by Sennacherib in Assyria in c. 700 BC, well before the Greeks. See Dr. Stephanie Dalley’s book: The article continues: It has long been difficult to separate fact from legend in the story of Archimedes’ life, from his death to his legendary discovery of how to differentiate gold from fool’s gold, but many of his works survived antiquity, and many others were quoted by other ancient writers. As a result, even while his life and death remain topics of debate, his writings and measurements are factually established and well known, and they range on everything from measuring an object’s density to measuring circles and parabolas. The Renaissance spawned the use of the label “Renaissance Man” to describe a person who is extremely talented in multiple fields, and no discussion of the Renaissance is complete without the original “Renaissance Man”, Leonardo da Vinci. Indeed, if 100 people are asked to describe Leonardo in one word, they might give 100 answers. As the world’s most famous polymath and genius, Leonardo found time to be a painter, sculptor, architect, musician, scientist, mathematician, engineer, inventor, anatomist, geologist, cartographer, botanist, and writer. It would be hard to determine which field Leonardo had the greatest influence in. His “Mona Lisa” and “The Last Supper” are among the most famous paintings of all time, standing up against even Michelangelo’s work. But even if he was not the age’s greatest artist, Leonardo may have conducted his most influential work was done in other fields. His emphasis on the importance of Nature would influence Enlightened philosophers centuries later, and he sketched speculative designs for gadgets like helicopters that would take another 4 centuries to create. Leonardo’s vision and philosophy were made possible by his astounding work as a mathematician, engineer and scientist. At a time when much of science was dictated by Church teachings, Leonardo studied geology and anatomy long before they truly even became scientific fields, and he used his incredible artistic abilities to sketch the famous Vitruvian Man, linking art and science together. …. [End of quote] Then there is this one by D. L. Simms, “Archimedes' Weapons of War and Leonardo” (BJHS, 1988, 21, pp. 195-210): https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0007087400024766 INTRODUCTION Leonardo's fascination with Archimedes as well as with his mathematics is well known. There are three fairly extensive and eccentric comments in the surviving notebooks: on his military inventions; on his part in an Anglo-Spanish conflict and on his activities, death and burial at the siege of Syracuse. Reti has examined the first of the three, that about the Architronito or steam cannon, mainly considering the origin of the idea for the cannon and its attribution to Archimedes, but with comments on the later influence of Leonardo's ideas. Marshall Clagett has produced the most comprehensive attempt to try to identify Leonardo's sources for the third. …. Reti's analysis can be supplemented and extended in the light of more recent comments and Sakas' experimental demonstration of a miniature working model, and Clagett's proposed sources modified. The origins of the other reference, Leonardo's belief that Archimedes played a part in an Anglo-Spanish war, can also be rendered slightly less baffling. Any conclusions must necessarily be tentative given the generally accepted opinion that much less than half of Leonardo's manuscripts survive. …. ARCHITRONITO Leonardo's earliest surviving mention (late 1480s-1490) of Archimedes' weapons of war is perhaps the most startling (Ms.B 33r): …. Architronito. Gunsight. Ensure that the rod en is placed over the centre of the table fixed beneath so that the water can fall with a single shot on to this table. The Architronito is a machine of fine copper, an invention of Archimedes, and it throws iron balls with great noise and violence. It is used in this manner:—the third part of the instrument stands within a great quantity of burning coals and when it has been brought to white heat you turn the screw d, which is above the cistern of water abc, at the same time that you turn the screw below the cistern and all the water it contains will descend into the white hot part of the barrel. There it will instantly become transformed into so much steam that it will seem astonishing, and especially when one notes with what force and hears the roar that it will produce. This machine has driven a ball weighing one talent six stadia. …. Origins of the attribution Reti demonstrated that Leonardo's source of the idea for this weapon was the drawings of cannons in De Re Militari by Valturius, who stated that the cannon had been invented—ut putatur—by Archimedes. …. [End of quote] And here is another one, with a most interesting question posed at the end of it: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/159447 In 1499 Leonardo di Vinci is hired by Cesare Borgia as a military engineer. He begins to work on a steam canon that had originally been an idea of Archimedes 1500 years earlier. Leonardo tells Cesare the story of Archimedes and how he made many discoveries in mathematics and science. Archimedes visits Alexandria and falls in love with Princess Helena, and in spite of their age difference, they marry and return to Syracuse. Soon Helena gives birth to their only child, a daughter they name Arsinoe. For nearly fifty years of peace, Syracuse is drawn into the war between Rome and Carthage. Archimedes must use all his vast knowledge to defend Syracuse and his very family. Cesare offers to purchase the chest of ideas from Leonardo but he declines the offer. Who knows which of Leonardo de Vinci’s inventions were really the brainchild of Archimedes of Syracuse? [End of quote] Mackey’s comment: Ah, Cesare Borgia! He, too, may be under a bit of a credibility cloud. As I wrote in my article: Achitophel and Machiavelli (4) Achitophel and Machiavelli | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu In Bringing the Hidden to Light: The Process of Interpretation (edited by Kathryn F. Kravitz, Diane M. Sharon), we find the requisite (if Achitophel is Machiavelli) comparison now between Absalom and the Prince, Cesare Borgia (p. 181): …. As Melamed pointed out, although Luzzatto's interpretation followed the literal the literal meaning of the text and traditional Jewish commentators such as Kimḥi and Abrabanel, nevertheless he expressed it in the sprit and vocabulary of Machiavelli and the tradition of raison d’état; in Melamed's most felicitous formulation, “the House of Borgia in the ancient ... land of Israel”, Ahitophel plays Machiavelli to Absalom – his Cesare Borgia”. …. However, it should be observed that Luzzatto was not endorsing the behaviour of Absalom but only indicating, in the context of his refutation of the allegation of Tacitus that the Jews were sexually immoral, how in the spirit of Machiavelli and raison d’état, a prince might acquire power. …. “The House of Borgia in the ancient land of Israel …”. Hmmmm. [End of quotes] Understanding the Priory of Sion Andrew Gough shows the Priory of Sion to be quite a modern invention: https://andrewgough.co.uk/articles_sulpice/ SAINT SULPICE AND THE SYMBOLISM OF THE PRIORY OF SION By ANDREW GOUGH March 2016 What if some of the most haunting symbolism of the twentieth century was the invention of a shadowy figure who pirated innocuous images from a famous church in order to construct the mythos of a secret society? On a recent trip to Paris, France, I discovered that this supposition just might be true, and could help explain the origins of the infamous Priory of Sion. First, a Rant Despite some rather weighty evidence to the contrary, belief in the Priory of Sion remains inexplicably stout. The notion that the Priory of Sion is a secret, members-only club which has propagated and protected the holy bloodline of Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene for nearly two thousand years remains a popular topic in esoteric discussion forums. The smart money has always been on the belief that the Priory of Sion was the invention of Pierre Plantard, an ambitious Frenchman who cobbled the essence of the story together in 1956. Although Plantard had political aspirations, there is always the possibility that it all came down to his personal amusement. The truth is, his motivation probably included both. Plantard claimed to be the Grand Master of the Priory of Sion, before recanting it all under oath. Funny how the threat of prison will do that to a man. Thus, believers insist that he had to lie in order to protect the integrity of the order, and that the Priory of Sion is an ancient society that grew out of L’Ordre de Sion (The Order of Sion), as founded in 1090 by Godefroy de Bouillon (the medieval Frankish knight who was one of the leaders of the First Crusade), and that it has been fronted by an illustrious list of Grand Masters: thought leaders such as Nicolas Flamel, Leonardo da Vinci, Isaac Newton, Charles Radclyffe, Claude Debussy, Jean Cocteau, and hordes of others. Clearly, these are accomplished individuals of great renown. However, it remains to be seen if any was the grand master of anything other than his own discipline. Given the character of those who claim to hold the position of Grand Master today (men of absolutely no notoriety or accomplishment – individuals who live in shadows and who have never contributed to society in any discernable way), it is hard to believe they are part of the impressive list of thought leaders who challenged the religious, scientific and artistic dogma of their day. In fact, it strongly suggests that the entire tradition is dubious at best. The men who claim to hold the office of Grand Master today appear to suffer from delusions of grandeur. If the Priory of Sion were real, should not its recent Grand Masters include the likes of Stephen Hawking, and not Gino Sandri and Nicolas Haywood? Who? That is exactly my point. Actually, the same goes for Pierre Plantard. Alas, I have drifted from my thesis. It is not my desire to conduct character assassinations or disparage people with ambition, as delusional as it may be. Nevertheless, let me be clear: I believe the Priory of Sion, as recounted by Plantard, is a modern-day creation which has artificially manipulated its charter, and history, and to that end I will attempt to show that its evocative symbolism is not ancient, and that it came from one place, Saint Sulpice church in Paris, France. So, who was the person who drew upon the symbolism of Saint Sulpice and incorporated it into the Priory of Sion? The answer will not surprise enthusiasts of the subject one bit. However, I will refrain from revealing their name a little longer. The official emblem of the Priory of Sion is partly based on the fleur-de-lis, which is found throughout Saint Sulpice and represents a bee, and the tradition of long-haired kings of France known as the Merovingian dynasty, including Childeric, who was found with 300 gold bees in his tomb …. [End of quote] Read this most informative article. See also my article: Chilperic a Nero, Herod wife Fredegund, Jezebel (4) Chilperic a Nero, Herod wife Fredegund, Jezebel | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu