הקרבות האבודים של לאונרדו ומיכלאנג'לו

by Jonathan Jones

Michelangelo and Leonardo lived five centuries ago, but their works still obsess our culture, with a popular and universal quality that nothing else matches.
     They have been equally revered and famous since their lifetimes, but our admiration for them exists mostly in isolation of each other. But in 1504 they competed with each other directly, to paint the walls of a room in Florence's Palazzo Vecchio. It is remarkable enough that the same city had produced two such geniuses in the same century—let alone that they met and exhibited together. But this competition, perhaps the most important event in the history of Renaissance art, the moment at which individual style came to command its own value, has been largely forgotten because the rival works did not survive.
    This great artistic clash, Jonathan Jones argues in this riveting account, marks the true beginning of the High Renaissance. Re-creating sixteenth-century Florence with astonishing verve and aplomb, The Lost Battles not only sheds new light on the making of the modern world but, in its portrait of two cultural titans going toe to toe, rewires our understanding of the personalities of the Renaissance's greatest icons.

Genres: History, Art, Nonfiction, Biography, Renaissance, Art History, Italy

383 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 2010

About the author

JONATHAN JONES is art critic for The Guardian and writes for numerous art magazines. He appears regularly on the BBC and gives talks at the Tate Modern.

Reviews

[Patrick · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wow. Very disappointed. Interesting history ruined by three things:

1. The tangent-style organization allowing the author to "impress" the reader with every obscure connection, real or imagined, he can make between Leonardo and Michelangelo and every good art thing ever. The over attribution is similar to another book I disliked, How Shakespeare Changed Everything, though this is much better researched. I don't think the author manages to defend his title "defined the Renaissance" even with his hyperbole. Two paintings that were never finished, but had some parts copied by other artists, but still have not been heard of my most people, did not "define" the Renaissance.

2. Making up the thoughts and words of Michelangelo and Leonardo constantly. This is not a piece of historical fiction creating a context to understand the character; this is heavily researched non-fiction that constantly says things like "Michelangelo surely thought" and "Leonardo seemed to be thinking." Interpreting the intentions of an artist I guess necessitates some of this, but it seemed largely to me to be the author justifying his own interpretations with speculation.

3. The over-the-top language describing paintings, people, and the impacts of ideas. I am just not cut out to be an art major, and really, literature commentary often suffers from the same issues. I'll share some examples of this stuff at the end of the review.

The sad thing is there's a very interesting central story here of how both Leonardo and Michelangelo were trained to fight evil by Master Splinter were commissioned to paint large murals of glorious war scenes in the same important council room in Florence.

I learned a lot about the back-and-forth history of Florence and other Italian city-states during the 14 and 1500's. The Medici's ruled a "republic" in name only, but were than overthrown and a true republic was instituted. Medici's took back over after a while, but then the people kicked them out again and there was a second version of the republic. Then two Medici's became pope and led huge forces in a brutal siege and crushed Florence. Leonardo helped with some vague plans for offensive fortifications against another city during the first republic (and the author then extrapolates lots of "influence" from some possible plans he could only infer even even happened, let alone change the world), and Michelangelo actually planned and supervised the construction of the fortifications against the pope for the second republic, only escaping execution by forced labor sculpting for the pope's fancy tomb. It's pretty crazy. Unfortunately, the author doesn't approach the story chronologically and never lays the story out as clearly as I just did. He meanders and sidetracks and speculates everywhere.

The art influences back and forth are pretty interesting, who influenced Leonardo and Michelangelo and who they influenced, but the same long-windedness and tangents everywhere afflicted this aspect of the story too.

I don't really like Leonardo much. I don't think I would have liked Michelangelo in person either, but he still has a much more consistent and trustworthy character than Leonardo seems to.

Now some quotations:
Pg. 40 speaking of the Mona Lisa:
"She is both mortal and goddess, lover and mother, smiling archaic personage and merchant's wife. Her pose has an eternal inevitability, as if she contained within her a serpentine column, revolving heavenward in a perfectly calibrated spiral: this effect of torsion means that she is in energetic motion even as she sits still in her chair. The relief of shadow on her strong features gives her feminine beauty a masculine counter-life. She is a hall of mirrors, a shrine of paradox."

Pg. 103-104 speaking of The Last Supper:
"Leonardo painted a scene to divert and chasten the monks at their meals, and his eye-fooling space is part of the serious joke. The room painted on the upper part of the wall that leads to the kitchens is as real as this one, yet it is a place where the carnal is transfigured. The grace of Leonardo's composition makes flesh and pain equally ethereal. In that room, the horror of life is elevated into tragedy. As the disciples raise their hands and cry out, voiceless, pain is held and contemplated. It is a philosophical painting; it distils chaos and frenzy of existence into measured intervals, visual music. The figures are essences of figures, their passions at once universal and abstract."

Pg. 202-203 speaking of his interpretation of the surviving drawings of Leonardo's lost uncompleted painting, The Battle of Anghiari:
"Dream images seem to well up in Leonardo's sketches for his battle painting. In his drawings of horses rearing, galloping, raging, there's something else: a visionary journey into the world of animals, perhaps--anyway, a rapturous quality as the riders in bloody red chalk are dwarfed by the might and power of their mounts. They blend with the horses as if sharing the same thought. They are faceless, passive, sucked along in the horses' momentum, even appearing sexually aroused by the ecstatic speed."

I could quote dozens and dozens of similar passages. So despite the interesting things I learned, the amazingly confident interpretations and language wrapped in a confusing story that jumps between places, times, and characters, means I have to give this one star.

[Chris · Rating 5 out of 5]

I bought this book in the only decent bookshop I could find in Hoi An Vietnam. (To digress a little: there are a couple of shops that sell heaps of illegal reprints that are badly printed and poorly bound). Back to the Lost Battles.

I initially thought this was just about the battle between da Vinci and Michelangelo. However, the plot thickens and we find it more significantly relates to the loss of perhaps the two greatest works of art ever. The loss of those two great works is complex and amazing when one considers that it was the politics of the day that had such devastating impact on these and many other works of art. (The current impact of ISIS on middle eastern archaeological treasures is certainly not unique to that organisation. History is full of these tragic acts of criminal vandalism).The story is beautifully written in a racy and consistent style throughout- no dull moments in this work at all. For history enthusiasts this is just about as good as history books get. There were a number of incidental issues raised of great interest and particularly how the other Renaissance artists related to these two greats. It seems that each man (da Vinci and Michelangelo) had there fans and more importantly followers who were great artists in their own right such as Raphael. The story puts perspective on these relationships. I had always wondered why the Mona Lisa ended up in the Louvre- now I know.

[Castles · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book should've been called something else. Since we have almost no clue of how the paintings of Michelangelo and Leonardo actually looked like, the author based this book on a couple of sketches and hints, going around and around what is only a guess, and talk about everything else involved in what he guesses is the process of the paintings (horses, wars, Florentine politics, etc).

He portrays da Vinci as a pacifist and somewhat an atheist, and Michelangelo as gladly religious and patriotic, and he doesn’t hide his favor for da Vinci. How much of it is true? I don’t know, but every book about those two giants will give you a different taste. I wonder though about a comment made by Cellini mentioned in the book, if Michelangelo work was really superior to his one at the Sistine Chapel.

I’ve found the book to be a little hard, the language a bit overcomplicated, repetitive, and not so flowing. The only reason I gave this book three stars instead of two is because I did actually learn a lot and I’m always happy to read about art and the Renaissance.

[Lisa · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting story from a pompous writer. I would swear Dr Frasier Crane wrote this book.....

[Cassandra Kay Silva · Rating 4 out of 5]

The title to this book is slightly misleading. Although it does in some ways start to cover the myriad relationship that existed between Leonardo and Michelangelo its skips many of their greatest works,and rivalries highlighting a few and touching on other artists to get straight to the point of the creation of likely the two greatest drawings ever completed Leonardo's The Battle of Anghiari, and Michelangelo's Battle of Cascina. This is the reason for the title the "Lost Battles". These two great works were adored and hailed by every student of art, every critic, and every eye that was lucky enough to behold either of these treasures, though never brought to life in paint the wonder that these two works achieved was an accumulation of a great rivalry between two of the renaissances chiefest master artists. The story alone is wonderful if you have never heard it before. I think in some ways it is better captured by Irving Stone or even by Vasari himself, but if you don't know this story it may be really fascinating to you and is definantly a story worth reading about in one form or another as these works shaped the minds of the next generation of artists after them which has in turn been passed down and influences much of our current thoughts about Art and its interpretation.

[Myles · Rating 5 out of 5]

Willfully salacious, propulsive, and erudite enough without putting me to sleep. This is a history written forced through a mold in order to please low attention span audiences (like me), and I loved it. Whether or not Michelangelo and Leonardo really resembled Jones’s interpretations of their personalities, I enjoyed seeing them spar and go off on their own, reinventing themselves under the pressure of Florentine creative competition. A rich companion to the show on both at the Royal Academy this January.

[Caroline Manley · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a huge art history buff I really loved this book; in my opinion it's one of the few books I've read that talks about these two artists (especialy Leonardo) in a very real, human way. It was interesting to read and, though I'm incredibly biased towards Leonardo, I learned a lot about Michelangelo and have come to appreciate his work more.

To give some criticism of this book: the author tries much too hard to make connections between every one of Leonardo's and Michelangelo's pieces. Comparing their work and seeing how it differed or contrasted is one thing, but making the claim that every piece that each of them made was meant to directly attack the other's work is far-fetched. The author also makes assumptions about the two artists' lives, which could be confusing at times, but I managed to look past it.

I can see why some people are not a fan of this book because of the author's sort of..... authoritative writing style, like he has all the answers. I still definitely recommend it if you have any interest in art history, especially in the Renaissance period.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

An engaging piece of popular history. The narrative focuses on the two great artists, but we are, in fact, treated to an exploration of one of the crucial moments in Western history and culture. Jones gives us enough of the history of art, politics, science and technology, as well as philosophy and religion to help us understand that the two rival geniuses (not to mention their rivalry) must be understood both within the context that produced them and in terms of their profound influence on succeeding generations. Still, although each artist was inextricably a part of Florence at the turn of the sixteenth century, they were the first great artists whose work was deeply-felt individual expression. Jones’s prose is very readable – he avoids the worst excesses of “artspeak,” and he even creates a bit of suspense around the eponymous battle paintings.

[Ben · Rating 5 out of 5]

For anyone with an interest in art, let alone Great, Timeless Art, let alone the Renaissance in general, in my opinion this is THE book to read. It's ostensibly about the 'competition' (between Leonardo and Michelangelo) of the Great Council Hall paintings commissioned by Florence's government at the time, but uses this basis to sum up the artworks of Da Vinci and Michelangelo (and loads of others for that matter) both before and after this competition, and all within the context of the basic narrative. Seriously I've been to Florence twice but about every second page of this made me want to go back and see things again, or see more obscure things for the first time. Personally I don't see how anyone with an interest in great art or Renaissance can not like this book!

[Poncho · Rating 3 out of 5]

Although the time period is one of the most fascinating in history and the story surrounds De Vinci and Michelangelo the author goes to great pains and lengths to go on and on about how smart he is. So much so that the story gets lost. Also, these two geniuses get a lost in the authors endless talk of what he sees in renaissance art and leaves the story to the back ground too much. Cannot complain that the book was not extremely well researched.

[Stephanie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Technical, but worthwhile. Listened to review on Diane Rehm show and the author was a scattered speaker. After reading a few chapters I can hear his voice in my head and realized his head is filled with facts, as the writing is filled with facts, but once you get used to his style it is easy to follow. Wonderful insight into Renaissance daily life.

[David Shlingbaum · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extremely interesting book about Leonardo da vinci, michelangelo, renaissance, art and war.
Interesting for art lovers, history fans and people interested in Leonardo.
Written in an flowing language, full of details and places you would want to visit later.

[Kerry · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well-written art history is a far cry from the stuffy survey classes of my undergraduate days, and Leonardo and Michelangelo have both been written about so frequently it might be difficult to offer something new in a treatment of their work. But here you have a writer who both reveres the work he is dealing with and understands the driving forces of the very human artists that created it, delving into the individuality that their work expresses and imparting insight into small changes in technique or focus.

The descriptions of the work, though sometimes a bit repetitive, are nonetheless art history erotica, with scenes and imagery depicted in words to the point where you almost don't need to look up the referenced works, but doing so while reading offers even further enjoyment of the pieces discussed. Part of the work of art historians is to allow the reader to learn--hopefully something new--about the artists and teach them how to see beyond the surface of the art. I certainly began to see both artists' work with more nuance, the already emotional-psychological fundamental monuments to Western culture made even more complex when placed in the context of the "battle" between the two artists.

Reading about art history is sometimes even better than looking at washed-out reproductions of the work in books or on a screen; it comes, to my mind, the closest to seeing the work in person. And, if you're lucky enough to have both read about the work and seen it for yourself, you're duly enriched by the benefit of knowledge and personal experience, which in turn is made more potent by that knowledge.

[Gordon Eldridge · Rating 4 out of 5]

Jonathan Jones weaves together details of the lives and art works of Leonardo and Michelangelo to create a highly readable narrative which really captures much of the spirit of the Renaissance. The reader can really sense the spirit of rivalry and feel the emerging sense of individualism that defined the era. In creating such a readable account however, Jones often strays into overuse of emotive, hyperbolic language. He also tends to ascribe specific motivations and states of mind to his two protagonists that are based on very tenuous inferences. If you can overlook this, the book is a very enjoyable read. If that kind of thing annoys you, steer clear.

[Kelsey Heavener · Rating 3 out of 5]

i started this awhile ago and got around to finishing it recently. i learned a lot and enjoyed the interpretations of leonardo and michelangelo’s rivalry within the context or florentine history. the descriptions and interpretations of their paintings, sculptures, architecture, combat designs, and scientific studies were all fun to read. the writing itself and the timelines were somewhat clunky and confusing but overall i liked it

[Kathi Johnson · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is a very readable account of the competition between da Vinci and Michelangelo. Lots of background history about the Renaissance and the Italian city states which nurtured these two remarkable men.

[Darren Lewis · Rating 3 out of 5]

The subtitle should be: A Salvo On the Nude, which one drew more and more accurately. Most pieces of art come back to their relationship to nudes or the sexualization of every piece of art. Oh, and it's so filled with mundane detail that, at times, it is very boring.

[Subodh · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is about the two greatest figures of the Italian Renaissance – Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci – and how the rivalry between them shaped the renaissance.

Leonardo was the senior artist, Michelangelo the young prodigy. Leonardo was known better for his paintings and drawings, Michelangelo excelled in sculpture. In 1503 Leonardo was commissioned by the City of Florence to paint a mural in the Great Council Hall of Palazzo Vecchio on the battle of Anghieri. A year later Michelangelo got the commission to paint another mural on the battle of Cascina on another wall in the same hall. The book is full of interesting details about how two of the greatest artists of all time approached these commissions and on the way gives us a grand tour into their lives and times.

Chapter one begins with an inventory of Leonardo’s wardrobe. He was fond of satin and velvet, preferably in pink, crimson and similar colours. It goes on to describe a scrap between the two when Michelangelo threw an insult at Leonardo for failing to complete an earlier commission for a horse to be cast in bronze.

This is a very promising beginning for a book, and the author does not disappoint. The book is full of interesting glimpses into the lives of the two great men and of the other persons – including Machiavelli and a succession of Popes – who impacted their life and work. However, the author seems to take the reader on a fox-trot – going round and round the same things without a clear movement in any direction. Another analogy could be of a tourist. There are those who like well structured guided tours covering all the highlights of the place in a reasonable time. Then there are those who prefer getting lost in the lanes and streets of a place and let serendipity take over. Florence is an ideal city to get lost, and that’s what the reader ends up doing with Jonathan Jones as the guide.

Both the paintings are lost. There are, however, copies and fragments of studies leading to them. It is not clear from the book if Leonardo ever completed the work entrusted to him. He was notorious for not completing things, and the book describes meetings between him and Machiavelli in which the latter impressed upon him to deliver on his commission.

Both artists had clear homoerotic tendencies. Michelangelo was more comfortable with it than Leonardo, and it showed in his art. While Leonardo’s preparatory drawings for his battle scene focus on movement of horses and riders and the fury of battle, Michelangelo’s drawing shows a group of nude soldiers bathing in a river who are taken by surprise by the arrival of the enemy and scramble to get ready for battle.

There are numerous references to other works by Michelangelo and Leonardo, and by other contemporary artists. I had to frequently interrupt my reading to look up these works on the internet. What struck me most as a saw them was the absence of energy in the earlier works. Battle scenes before these two geniuses look static – they are more like depiction of soldiers arrayed for battle than actual action. The drawings of both Michelangelo and Leonardo are full of energy and movement. Leonardo’s drawing, in particular, powerfully depicts the agony and desperation of battle. It has been suggested in the book that Leonardo in a way undermined his commission. Instead of celebrating the triumph of Florence in the battle he created a scene highlighting the futility of battle.

The book also digresses into contribution other than art by the two. Leonardo was a gifted engineer and scientist. He had worked on improving the design of defenses of cities in the age of the cannon. He also seems to have been commissioned for a project to divert the flow of Arno as an offensive maneuver against Pisa. There is no mention, however, of any of his plans actually being used.

Michelangelo, however, did something concrete for the defense of the Florentine Republic against the attack by the Medici descendents to regain control of the city. On the whole Michelangelo emerges as the more sincere of the two who would complete all his commissions, while Leonardo comes out as the dreamer who would take up several novel ideas but pursue few of them to their logical conclusion.

The concluding part of the book is about the impact of these two murals on other contemporary and later artists. Raphael was one major artist who drew inspiration from both of them. There are interesting examples of themes from these works being used in other works of art. One part of the Sistine Chapel ceiling painted by Michelangelo borrows from his work for the Florence city council.

Overall, the book is full of interesting anecdotes, details and sidelights from the life and times of these two great artists. It, however, does not do a very good job of coherently developing the key thesis that the rivalry between the two - particularly their commissions for the Florence City Council – was a major element in the subsequent development of the Renaissance.

[Craig Masten · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a present artist and former graduate student of history who is about to visit Italy for the first time, I found this book to be well timed and useful reading.
The artist part of me loved the rich and often surprising information about Leonardo and Michelangelo, as well as how they influenced and were influenced by each other. The author made surprising well-documented connections--as one might expect from an art historian--and spiced with anecdotal incident to keep the narrative lively.
The historian part of me wondered about the speculative aspects of his analysis of the meanings of the paintings and sculptures. I'm no expert in art history, but as an artist I know something about art talk practiced by art critics. Soeculations about how the artworks might have related to the lives of the artists seemed overly elaborate and strained at times, though often intriguing.
Last but hardly least, the part of me about to go to Italy had a tremendous benefit from this book. This author certainly relates a tremendous amount of detail about people and places of The Renaissance, but at the same time somehow manages to present the events of those times more understandably than I've ever before experienced. The myriad of city states with their multiplicity of wars, shifting alliances and leaders is usually overwhelming. I could actually make some sense out of the political morass of those complex times. The author also gives an interested reader the significant places to visit in order to follow in the footsteps of the great artists and other important figures. I won't be wandering aimlessly among so many palaces and piazzas and acres of art. I'll be able to focus on those of significance to me, and have a real sense of their meaning. A truly great job at a literally monumental task. Highly recommended as an art lover's guidebook.

[Glen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this book to be a strange mixture of excellent writing and frustrating analysis. Jones' writing style is very appealing and I learned a lot about Renaissance art. Having read about Leonardo, I was much more familiar with his life than that of Michelangelo so it was a good learning curve for me. The premise of the book held my attention throughout and helped piece together an part of history where I was not well informed.

On the negative side, what was consistently frustrating was the reoccurring efforts of Jones to psychoanalyze the two artists. Repeated references to Freudian types were a huge distraction particularly in regards to Michelangelo. Another aspect of the book that appeared to be an intellectual stretch for me was the way in which Jones used various artistic nuances in the respective works to make sweeping assumptions about the artists' mindsets at the time. I admit to being less familiar with art critique than with historical studies, so what I would prefer is better corroborating evidence before making strong judgments.

One strong point of the book is the way it fosters reflection on the intersection between human personality, social dynamics and artistic expression. On that note I would recommend reading this work.

[Lisa · Rating 2 out of 5]

An impulse read from the local library's "New Books" shelf. I wish I'd grabbed the book next to it instead. What promised to be an interesting read about the rivalry between Leonardo and Michelangelo turned into a dull plod through pages of college arts essay style tangents padding out what ought to have been a much leaner, more focused effort. Jones' lack of focus undermines the title thesis that the duel between the two great artists defined the Renaissance and makes it difficult to discern the outline of the narrative. (In between the waffle there is a fair bit of historical information and detail, just very poorly organized.) A lot of the author's 'insights' are simply what he believes the artists were thinking, but he offers little or no basis for his pronouncements. The amount that Jones is able to read into the slightest detail of a painting or sketch is mind-boggling- but hardly authoritative, as it could just as easily be interpreted some other way. By the end, I felt like a cranky child in the backseat on a multi-hour car trip wondering when it was finally going to end.

[bkwurm · Rating 3 out of 5]

The title refers to the 2 frescoes that were to have been painted by Leonardo and Michelangelo on the walls of Florence's council chamber. Respectively, the battle of Anghiari and the battle of Cascina, both artists' rough cartoon sketches were, when exhibited, a sensation. Unfortunately, politics and other factors contrived to prevent both frescoes from being completed or even started.

The tracing of the influence both artists' concepts had on subsequent painters was fascinating. I would liked more illustrations to show the similarities the author refers to.

Some of the claims made about the antipathy the two artists had for each other's work seems a little far fetched. While they certainly did not like each other, it seems improbable that their every work was intended as a riposte to the other's work.

But it was still a good read although "the feud that sparked the Renaissance" between Ghiberti and Bramante has, I think, a better claim to being the start of the Renaissance.

[Sarah · Rating 5 out of 5]

"You don't need to chip away at Vasari's frescoes to see The Battle of Anghiari. It's shadows are eternal, it's truth as old and as new as human folly. Switch off the latest barbarisms on the television news, close your eyes and it will come to you." -
This book contains very little of the actual paintings themselves and much more background. However, in all the books I have read about Leonardo, never have I read one that is able to encapsulate the relationship between Da Vinci and Michelangelo so wonderfully. Jones is able to give them emotions and depth and make them so much more than two historical figures that didn't really like each other. He adds shadows and context and although I picked this book up expecting a narrative of the paintings in the Great Hall, I was met with something quite different.

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

A little disappointing. It provided some very fascinating information, but the author rather lost some credibility when he maintained that virtually every piece of art by either Michelangelo or DaVinci created after the David was in response to the others work. For example, many of M's "tondo" paintings and carvings were a direct response to the style of DaVinci? Some of DV's efforts were solely created to show is own interpretation of works by M???

While it's well known they had a personal distaste, I scarcely think those claims were true.

However, the book was relatively interesting (if you can ignore the occasional rhetorical flourishes the author engages in), although he does spend more time discussing DaVinci than the better artist, Michelangelo

[Socraticgadfly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting take on "battles" Leonardo and Michelangelo had, especially a duel where both were commissioned to paint murals for the Great Hall of Florence, inspiring citizens of the Republic to more martial devotion to the city.

I do think Jones may overstate the case about how much enmity the two felt toward each other, but I'm not sure. I do think that, in general, he reads himself into the history a lot. (Though I did find the sections on Machiavelli interesting.)

That said, while it's arguable (though by no means certain, I actually think not) that Michelangelo was the better artist, or artisan, this book reaffirmed that, for me, there's no question who the deeper thinker was.

[Celia Montgomery · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a convincing portrait of the two greats. Who knows if they really felt so much animosity towards one another, but it sure is entertaining to consider the possibility. The book also contains some small enjoyable revelations. I loved reading Leonardo's packing lists (lots of pink), and I was surprised to learn of Michelangelo's risky loyalty to Republican Florence. This would be a great book to read before traveling to Florence (which is, of course, my plan!)

[Martha · Rating 4 out of 5]

I am no art historian so cannot take exception to any of Jonathan Jones' theories about the relationship between Da Vinci and Michelangelo. This may be the reason - one of the reasons - I liked this book so well. It never plods. It is full of interesting facts as well as enthusiastic speculations. The pages pop with Jones' passion for his subject. Believe me, my highest compliment is to say I would love to attend one of his lectures.

[Pierre Sabourin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Très recherché et détaillé, couvre beaucoup plus que la période 1503-1506. Bibliographie et annexes forts utiles. Plusieurs spéculations et théories, par moments intéressantes mais souvent douteuses. Lecture parfois égarée dans les détails et faits connexes. Une certaine fatigue s’établit avec les chapitres sur l’approche quasi obsessionnelle d’interprétation continue sur la supposée « concurrence » entre da Vinci et MichelAnge.

[Daniel Kukwa · Rating 3 out of 5]

It starts out very well, but it quickly becomes too caught up in trying to cover FAR too much in such a short span of pages. A bit more coherence, organization, and some judicious editing would turn a great read into a fantastic one. By the end, the point becomes rather lost, amongst the multitude of biographic threads.

[Lucas · Rating 3 out of 5]

I very much enjoyed the premise of the book, and won't hesitate to admit that the author clearly knows his stuff. That being said, his constant need to stop the flow of his writing to add his own opinions and (often gauch) descriptions of the works of art being discussed made it a bit of a slog to get through. I is finish it though, so that's something...(10 points for Gryffindor, I suppose)