What is Digg?44 Comments
- mark1372, on 10/12/2007, -3/+86Digg itself is based on one of Leonardo da Vinci's designs. He was the first to add comments to stories on his tech inventions, but was far ahead of his time.
In fact, ancient manuscripts have been unveiled showing how advanced his concept was. The first was a headline that read, "Best grimy chapel ceiling you will ever see!! (WITH PICS!!!!!!!!)", which was written backwards and in mirror-image.
Another fragment reveals what historians believe to be one of the first user comments, which reads, "im sick of hearing all these da vinci stories from all you vatican fanboys!!!!!!!!! stop sucking the pope's dick and get a real painter!! Raphael rulez....michaelangelo and da Vinci r total fagz!!! mod me down"
Though greatly misunderstood at the time, da Vinci's foresight led to the invention of the internet, generally attributed to Al Gore. - foshaug, on 10/12/2007, -6/+53When does the movie come out?
- RyeBrye, on 10/12/2007, -6/+42That sounds like the greatest cover up in art history!
- jmack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16lol the correlation between this and the da vinci code is laughable. This is old news, only brought back to light to catch the sails of the movie's hype.
- _skin_, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15I would have liked to see the images. Not just a 1inch by 1inch box of the drawing.
- cedrick, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15well, if you don't care, don't click the link, and moreover, DON'T COMMENT. some of us appreciate DaVinci's genius.
- netwookiee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I'm still waiting for the headline:
"Newly Revealed Da Vinci Invention, A Car that Gets 100 MPG!" - madmack, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14quick, hide it before Opus Dei and the Church find out !
- kaiser79, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Where's the part about "Hidden by Monks for 500 years?!"
Oh, I get it -- because the monks didn't like Da Vinci's composition and hired someone else to complete the work, they are now guilty of covering up Da Vinci's earth-shattering revelations?
100% BS.
BTW, the article itself is totally respectable. The headline belongs in a sensationalist fiction 'news' rag right next to Goat Boy. Blame the editor. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10And foshaug catches onto the marketing ploy. Good job.
- Nitro2985, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8His name is not "Da Vinci" that's a refrence to a place.
Imagine that I called you "of Detroit" or "of New York" and used no other descriptive words. These phrases aren't even meaningful. - ratbear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Da Vinci is not his surname, it literally means "of Vinci", his home town in Italy.
- twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Philistines!
- threemagic, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Just in time for a sequel.. good for them. Those monks sure are smart...
- cedrick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7very, VERY interesting. i've known Adorationof the Magi to come under critical speculation, people saying something didn't "fell right". well, i guess they were right, 'cuz lookie here!!! i wonder how many other paintings this happened to.
- chesterjosiah, on 10/12/2007, -7/+13Screw Dan Brown! We need another Google contest!
- skaughtm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5that's not the interesting part, the interesting part is that those wacky monks were hidding them in their painting-safes.
- ddales, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Hey, I heard the source code for Windows was discovered under Rodin's "The Thinker" but was easily found centuries ago because the toilet was too obvious a hiding place!
- tilleyrw, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The elephant is common in India, where Jesus spent those 12 years that are missing from the "canonical" Bible.
- moisie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5There was a very interesting and rather in depth show about this on Channel 4 here in the UK about a week ago.
- Bradl3y, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5quick get some lemon juice and a blow dryer
- twinklyJesus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Al Gore collaborated on the Ipod with Hillary Rodham, while inventing the internet with his other hand, backwards and in mirror image.
- basselope, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Next thing ya' know they'll be saying he designed the I-pod!
- joeydoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I watched that on channel 4. (It isn't on florence tv) That was a really good program.
I HAVE to know if The Battle of Anghiari is behind that wall. THAT will be the greatest discovery of the 21 century. Can you imagine. That thing might well be perfect, walled up since 1563, no sun damage or people breathing on it.
Amazing stuff.
http://www.physorg.com/news4596.html
http://www.channel4.com/culture/microsites/D/da_vinci_detective/index.html - lunarship, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3There was a programme on this on TV in the UK about a month ago that went into a lot more detail, so how come The Times are printing it now I don't know (perhaps News International hacks only watch Sky... [edit: see joeydoo's comment above as well])
As far as I recall, the theory Seracini put forward was that the monks didn't like it and parted company with Leonardo (whether they paid him off or just told him to sod off isn't known). Then later on, when the Borgias realised that Leonardo's work was valuable, they got the painting from storage. It had been stored face down for several years underneath a leaky roof, and was naturally in need of some touching up, as well as finishing. A somewhat less talented artist (i.e. compared to most, not just to Leonardo) finished off the painting and the Borgias cashed in. Whether the money went to the Borgia family or to the monastery which had a Borgia at its head I can't remember.
My own supposition is that while they may not have liked it at first, any work that the below-par artist did was probably designed to sell the painting, rather than finish it. Therefore, any complex work (e.g. a battle scene) had to be ignored in favour of a pastiche of Leonardo's style. Whoever was finishing the picture was probably working under time pressure and under oath of secrecy, so it's likely that they would have wanted to take shortcuts. - Yoda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4While technically accurate, the notion of "of Vinci" has long been lost as a reference to a location and in 2006 fewer people would be confused by the Coke or McDonald's logo than would misinterpret what was meant by a "Da Vinci" reference.
Cut us some slack. - gr8edchz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I think the show, or one like it, is at http://www.florence.tv/
really interesting show. - JackCampbell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3He's the main character from 'The Da Vinci Code'
- Yoda, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The canonical bible also didn't prophesy that Jesus would appear in a tortilla (http://www.jesusoftheweek.com/jesii/358/index.html), or be reincarnated as Jim Jones (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones cross referenced here for those who don't trust Wikipedia: http://www.conncoll.edu/academics/departments/relstudies/290/newage/jimjones.html).
Point is, many of the sayings/events/stories/etc. attributed to historical figures, particularly Jesus, are mutually exclusive - to quote Dire Straits, "Two men say they're Jesus, one of them must be wrong" (http://www.lyricsfreak.com/d/dire+straits/industrial+disease_20040724.html). Which is to say that cross referencing and consistency are more trustworthy than one-off legends and stories (or tortillas). Dan Brown's story is entertaining, but not consistent with most historical documents. The Nag Hammadi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nag_Hammadi) has some interesting ideas too, but is inconsistent with documents written hundreds of years earlier. Which, if either, is right? That usually depends on what you believe... it's funny how "facts" can be influenced by what you believe. - Kupotek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Da Vinci was a genius there's no doubt about that. I've seen his sketches firsthand and they're remarkable. Not to mention he drew a helicopter 400 years before it was invented. Hidden sketches doesnt mean anything though I believe he was just paintintg over a used canvas.
- fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7"If Dan Brown wrote a book about a secret soceity(sic) of Aliens from Mars, would people believe it?"
Well, a bunch of primitives wrote a pile of fanciful fiction claiming some may-have-lived guy named "Jesus" being the "son of God", and 83% of US citizens believe it, not to mention a good chunk of the rest of the world... why should Dan Brown get less credit? At least he's consistent from chapter to chapter. In the bible, contradictions such as the number of generations between this character and that character abound. Dan Brown's work is at least self-consistent.
Of course, as to those that are part of the 83%, perhaps they don't have the reading skills to finish his fiction. But then again... I guess that's why a movie was made of it of it. You have to give props to America: We take care of our gullible citizens. :) - skaughtm, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1to the guy that made a joke about dan brown writing the book about a secret alien society: we already have someone for that, David Icke.
- dbug, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Looks like we will have to re-write history!!
- DigitalBrian, on 10/12/2007, -7/+4My God I swear that people are a bunch of dimvits, If Dan Brown wrote a book about a secret soceity of Aliens from Mars, would people believe it? and the guy that calls Dan Brown a crummy writer, what right does he have? this guy has the entire world fooled and religions shaken in the process, a crummy writer can NOT do that.
PS. I really dont care what kind of hair doo Tom Hanks is sporting in the movie, it is irrelevant to the entire story, oh and notice as a sane person I use the word STORY instead of "history" - Burgerman851, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2"Al Gore collaborated on the Ipod with Hillary Rodham, while inventing the internet with his other hand, backwards and in mirror image."
I'm not the biggest Gore or Hillary fan, but is that necessary? - cazabam, on 10/12/2007, -9/+4In other news, artists found to use initial sketches as basis for paintings. More at eleven.
- joeydoo, on 10/12/2007, -7/+2What the hell has this got to do with Dan Brown. NOTHING!
When ever Da Vinci is even mentioned near an American for the next 10 years all your going to hear is Dan Brown, Dan Brown, Dan Brown. No one with half a ***** brain give a ***** about him or his tie in movie.
Next American's are going to think that Da Vinci was invented by Dan ***** Brown.
This is NEWS because it's an interesting artist discovery.
The people on here who decide to throw in Dan Brown related "in" joke are morons.
"The of Vinci Code" doesn't even make ***** sense. Let it die. - Burgerman851, on 10/12/2007, -7/+1"In the bible, contradictions such as the number of generations between this character and that character abound."
That's what you get for reading someone else's mail. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -18/+9We need Robert Langdon for this! (Dan Brown can keep his crappy writing at home though)
- arapro, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2who's robert langdon ?
- en3r0, on 10/12/2007, -11/+1Only reason people care is because of that lame movie based off someones funny fantasy. If that movie didn't exist, this wouldn't be on that front page. Did you see those sketches? Nothing impressive.
- Somnolent, on 10/12/2007, -15/+0Mispost
- Terjon, on 10/12/2007, -24/+6Stop, both of you. We know this is silly, but we just have to put up with it. Next week we'll probably hear that Leonardo liked chewing gum, 400 YEARS BEFORE IT WAS INVENTED!!! Yeah, it's getting old.
- snurfle, on 10/12/2007, -19/+0I believe the phrase that came to mind immediately after reading this was...
"Man I don't care!"
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is