THE BICYCLE OF LEONARDO DA VINCI: - “… a man who was at once an artist, an inventor, a scientist - and who saw no contradiction between these diverse realms. In his unceasing quest for truth, Leonardo explored every branch of
sciences known to his age and proved to be far ahead in many respects in his precise observations, his striving for sound methodology and measurement, and value he placed on empirical proof. 'No human investigation', he wrote, 'can be called true science without going through mathematical tests… sciences which begin and end in mind cannot be considered to contain truth, because such discourses lack experience, without which nothing reveals itself with certainty." (57)
This quote is from a semi-whitewash of a life full of conflict, especially with church. They should emphasize oppressive control over thought and creativity church of Leonardo's day had over all sciences. In fact there was only one science - philosophy which in actual fact was just theology. So Leonardo's words take on a different meaning than they suggest. It is even more important than you might imagine because Leonardo was head or ‘Nautonnier’ of Priory of Sion. The authors are from Catholic Universities mostly, so we must forgive them when they claim to have fostered Leonardo's genius when in fact they did opposite and it isn't till near end of book they note he was charged with being homosexual by these Inquisitorial suppressors of soul and thought.
There is a whole specialty of study devoted to Da Vinci's work but little truth and a lot of propaganda. Few are they who admit both he and his mentor were alchemists and horrors of a life hidden behind lies and half-truths that resulted from fear of being found out. It is a theme of many of great scientists and their lives, and little credit is given to courageous men and women who toiled to understand and truth they shared is available. Why? Do we still fear others might do what they did or think? Think for themselves and question authority which seeks to credit their approach to knowing.
The Scientific Method of observation and conclusion is said to have been discovered by Bacon. There is some truth to that, but which Bacon? Some say Francis and there is no truth in that even though he pretended to be an alchemist in his Rosicrucian or Masonic circles including John Dee and Ashmolean types. The better scholars attribute it to Roger Bacon who actually was an alchemist and spent a great deal of his life in dungeons after having ferreted himself away in church as a monk for a long time. Metaphysics and independent thought can be a dangerous business and there are many current authors whose work is relegated to obscurity unless they learn how to appease 'normative' or oppressive mindset. The sad part is that there is no benefit to anyone by such oppression. Not only is there abundance and creativity but those who know soul will not NEED to clothe it in grandiose raiment. They will gladly work for joy of utilizing their potential for benefit of mankind rather than seeking to destroy others and life in general.
It is interesting that Napoleon (a Merovingian/Mason) made sure to get all of Da Vinci's work that was around when he conquered Milan, but I there is some of it that wasn't discovered until after that and it is most interesting. Da Vinci was a Johannite like Newton (another alchemist, whose Principiae Mathematica had a brief comment at its' start - 'This is much more than I should say; and much less than there is!'). Johannites believe true prophet in Biblical times was John Baptist and we are continuing to seek other Benjaminite and Masonic connections with him despite a sense that both Jesus and John Baptist were operating from same source. Would Napoleon have destroyed any Johannite writings if Merovingian House of David and Judah or family of Jesus were concerned about Da Vinci's fame and credibility or writings? We cannot say such a thing and we aren't sure John wasn't a favourite of theirs as well.
The troubling thing about this book is presentation of Da Vinci as a semi-competent who needed a Franciscan monk’s help. We like Francis of Assisi and don't doubt church was watching over Leonardo just as they did all artists who were producing God's work. Yes, church claimed all creative work was their property! They also controlled education just as they have in many places until this very day. Most likely Luca Pacioli (Franciscan) was under directions to keep Da Vinci in line and to make such things as we will see, remain hidden from public. Da Vinci was before Galileo and you can be sure he would have met usual gruesome heretical stake or fire after a few parts were titillated or cut along way.
These are words of Catholic University academic which give a little insight to conflict Da Vinci faced during these oppressive times when thought was even less well managed than today. "Leonardo and Luca Pacioli worked together for many years, and as we have seen, intervention of Master Luca was decisive. Nevertheless there existed between two categories a social and hierarchical conflict, even if no one had ever placed in doubt supremacy of liberal arts as only depositories of true science. And one who rose up resolutely against exclusion of mechanical arts from sphere of science {Such deceit to call what church allowed people to think of, as science.}, or as it was then known, 'philosophy' was Leonardo." (58)
