Leonardo da Vinci_ A Psychosexual Study of an Infantile Reminiscence Sigmund Freud 1392 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Leonardo da Vinci: A
Psychosexual Study of an Infantile Reminiscence
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the
Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.

Title: Leonardo da Vinci: A Psychosexual Study of an Infantile
Reminiscence

Author: Sigmund Freud

Translator: A. A. Brill

Release date: November 12, 2010 [eBook #34300]

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34300

Credits: Produced by Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This book was
produced from scanned images of public domain material
from the Google Print project.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LEONARDO DA
VINCI: A PSYCHOSEXUAL STUDY OF AN INFANTILE
REMINISCENCE ***

LEONARDO DA VINCI

Leonardo da Vinci
A PSYCHOSEXUAL STUDY OF AN
INFANTILE REMINISCENCE
BY
PROFESSOR DR. SIGMUND FREUD, LL.D.

(UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA)

TRANSLATED BY
A. A. BRILL, PH.B., M.D.
Lecturer in Psychoanalysis and Abnormal
Psychology, New York University

NEW YORK
MOFFAT, YARD & COMPANY
1916
Copyright, 1916, by
MOFFAT, YARD & COMPANY

ILLUSTRATIONS

Leonardo Da Vinci Frontispiece
FACING
PAGE

Mona Lisa 78
Saint Anne 86
John the Baptist 94

LEONARDO DA VINCI

Chapters: I, II, III, IV, V, VI

I

WHEN psychoanalytic investigation, which usually contents itself with frail
human material, approaches the great personages of humanity, it is not
impelled to it by motives which are often attributed to it by laymen. It does
not strive "to blacken the radiant and to drag the sublime into the mire"; it
finds no satisfaction in diminishing the distance between the perfection of
the great and the inadequacy of the ordinary objects. But it cannot help
finding that everything is worthy of understanding that can be perceived
through those prototypes, and it also believes that none is so big as to be
ashamed of being subject to the laws which control the normal and morbid
actions with the same strictness.
Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519) was admired even by his contemporaries
as one of the greatest men of the Italian Renaissance, still even then he
appeared as mysterious to them as he now appears to us. An all-sided
genius, "whose form can only be divined but never deeply fathomed,"[1] he
exerted the most decisive influence on his time as an artist; and it remained
to us to recognize his greatness as a naturalist which was united in him with
the artist. Although he left masterpieces of the art of painting, while his
scientific discoveries remained unpublished and unused, the investigator in
him has never quite left the artist, often it has severely injured the artist and
in the end it has perhaps suppressed the artist altogether. According to
Vasari, Leonardo reproached himself during the last hour of his life for
having insulted God and men because he has not done his duty to his art.[2]
And even if Vasari's story lacks all probability and belongs to those legends
which began to be woven about the mystic master while he was still living,
it nevertheless retains indisputable value as a testimonial of the judgment of
those people and of those times.

What was it that removed the personality of Leonardo from the
understanding of his contemporaries? Certainly not the many sidedness of
his capacities and knowledge, which allowed him to install himself as a
player of the lyre on an instrument invented by himself, in the court of
Lodovico Sforza, nicknamed Il Moro, the Duke of Milan, or which allowed
him to write to the same person that remarkable letter in which he boasts of
his abilities as a civil and military engineer. For the combination of
manifold talents in the same person was not unusual in the times of the
Renaissance; to be sure Leonardo himself furnished one of the most
splendid examples of such persons. Nor did he belong to that type of genial
persons who are outwardly poorly endowed by nature, and who on their side
place no value on the outer forms of life, and in the painful gloominess of
their feelings fly from human relations. On the contrary he was tall and
symmetrically built, of consummate beauty of countenance and of unusual
physical strength, he was charming in his manner, a master of speech, and
jovial and affectionate to everybody. He loved beauty in the objects of his
surroundings, he was fond of wearing magnificent garments and appreciated
every refinement of conduct. In his treatise[3] on the art of painting he
compares in a significant passage the art of painting with its sister arts and
thus discusses the difficulties of the sculptor: "Now his face is entirely
smeared and powdered with marble dust, so that he looks like a baker, he is
covered with small marble splinters, so that it seems as if it snowed on his
back, and his house is full of stone splinters, and dust. The case of the
painter is quite different from that; for the painter is well dressed and sits
with great comfort before his work, he gently and very lightly brushes in the
beautiful colors. He wears as decorative clothes as he likes, and his house is
filled with beautiful paintings and is spotlessly clean. He often enjoys
company, music, or some one may read for him various nice works, and all
this can be listened to with great pleasure, undisturbed by any pounding
from the hammer and other noises."
It is quite possible that the conception of a beaming jovial and happy
Leonardo was true only for the first and longer period of the master's life.
From now on, when the downfall of the rule of Lodovico Moro forced him
to leave Milan, his sphere of action and his assured position, to lead an
unsteady and unsuccessful life until his last asylum in France, it is possible
that the luster of his disposition became pale and some odd features of his

character became more prominent. The turning of his interest from his art to
science which increased with age must have also been responsible for
widening the gap between himself and his contemporaries. All his efforts
with which, according to their opinion, he wasted his time instead of
diligently filling orders and becoming rich as perhaps his former classmate
Perugino, seemed to his contemporaries as capricious playing, or even
caused them to suspect him of being in the service of the "black art." We
who know him from his sketches understand him better. In a time in which
the authority of the church began to be substituted by that of antiquity and
in which only theoretical investigation existed, he the forerunner, or better
the worthy competitor of Bacon and Copernicus, was necessarily isolated.
When he dissected cadavers of horses and human beings, and built flying
apparatus, or when he studied the nourishment of plants and their behavior
towards poisons, he naturally deviated much from the commentators of
Aristotle and came nearer the despised alchemists, in whose laboratories the
experimental investigations found some refuge during these unfavorable
times.
The effect that this had on his paintings was that he disliked to handle the
brush, he painted less and what was more often the case, the things he began
were mostly left unfinished; he cared less and less for the future fate of his
works. It was this mode of working that was held up to him as a reproach
from his contemporaries to whom his behavior to his art remained a riddle.
Many of Leonardo's later admirers have attempted to wipe off the stain of
unsteadiness from his character. They maintained that what is blamed in
Leonardo is a general characteristic of great artists. They said that even the
energetic Michelangelo who was absorbed in his work left many
incompleted works, which was as little due to his fault as to Leonardo's in
the same case. Besides some pictures were not as unfinished as he claimed,
and what the layman would call a masterpiece may still appear to the creator
of the work of art as an unsatisfied embodiment of his intentions; he has a
faint notion of a perfection which he despairs of reproducing in likeness.
Least of all should the artist be held responsible for the fate which befalls
his works.
As plausible as some of these excuses may sound they nevertheless do not
explain the whole state of affairs which we find in Leonardo. The painful

struggle with the work, the final flight from it and the indifference to its
future fate may be seen in many other artists, but this behavior is shown in
Leonardo to highest degree. Edm. Solmi[4] cites (p. 12) the expression of
one of his pupils: "Pareva, che ad ogni ora tremasse, quando si poneva a
dipingere, e però no diede mai fine ad alcuna cosa cominciata, considerando
la grandezza dell'arte, tal che egli scorgeva errori in quelle cose, che ad altri
parevano miracoli." His last pictures, Leda, the Madonna di Saint Onofrio,
Bacchus and St. John the Baptist, remained unfinished "come quasi
intervenne di tutte le cose sue." Lomazzo,[5] who finished a copy of The
Holy Supper, refers in a sonnet to the familiar inability of Leonardo to finish
his works:
"Protogen che il penel di sue pitture
Non levava, agguaglio il Vinci Divo,
Di cui opra non è finita pure."
The slowness with which Leonardo worked was proverbial. After the most
thorough preliminary studies he painted The Holy Supper for three years in
the cloister of Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan. One of his
contemporaries, Matteo Bandelli, the writer of novels, who was then a
young monk in the cloister, relates that Leonardo often ascended the
scaffold very early in the morning and did not leave the brush out of his
hand until twilight, never thinking of eating or drinking. Then days passed
without putting his hand on it, sometimes he remained for hours before the
painting and derived satisfaction from studying it by himself. At other times
he came directly to the cloister from the palace of the Milanese Castle
where he formed the model of the equestrian statue for Francesco Sforza, in
order to add a few strokes with the brush to one of the figures and then
stopped immediately.[6] According to Vasari he worked for years on the
portrait of Monna Lisa, the wife of the Florentine de Gioconda, without
being able to bring it to completion. This circumstance may also account for
the fact that it was never delivered to the one who ordered it but remained
with Leonardo who took it with him to France.[7] Having been procured by
King Francis I, it now forms one of the greatest treasures of the Louvre.
When one compares these reports about Leonardo's way of working with
the evidence of the extraordinary amount of sketches and studies left by
him, one is bound altogether to reject the idea that traits of flightiness and

unsteadiness exerted the slightest influence on Leonardo's relation to his art.
On the contrary one notices a very extraordinary absorption in work, a
richness in possibilities in which a decision could be reached only
hestitatingly, claims which could hardly be satisfied, and an inhibition in the
execution which could not even be explained by the inevitable
backwardness of the artist behind his ideal purpose. The slowness which
was striking in Leonardo's works from the very beginning proved to be a
symptom of his inhibition, a forerunner of his turning away from painting
which manifested itself later.[8] It was this slowness which decided the not
undeserving fate of The Holy Supper. Leonardo could not take kindly to the
art of fresco painting which demands quick work while the background is
still moist, it was for this reason that he chose oil colors, the drying of which
permitted him to complete the picture according to his mood and leisure.
But these colors separated themselves from the background upon which
they were painted and which isolated them from the brick wall; the
blemishes of this wall and the vicissitudes to which the room was subjected
seemingly contributed to the inevitable deterioration of the picture.[9]
The picture of the cavalry battle of Anghiari, which in competition with
Michelangelo he began to paint later on a wall of the Sala de Consiglio in
Florence and which he also left in an unfinished state, seemed to have
perished through the failure of a similar technical process. It seems here as
if a peculiar interest, that of the experimenter, at first reënforced the artistic,
only later to damage the art production.
The character of the man Leonardo evinces still some other unusual traits
and apparent contradictions. Thus a certain inactivity and indifference
seemed very evident in him. At a time when every individual sought to gain
the widest latitude for his activity, which could not take place without the
development of energetic aggression towards others, he surprised every one
through his quiet peacefulness, his shunning of all competition and
controversies. He was mild and kind to all, he was said to have rejected a
meat diet because he did not consider it just to rob animals of their lives,
and one of his special pleasures was to buy caged birds in the market and set
them free.[10] He condemned war and bloodshed and designated man not so
much as the king of the animal world, but rather as the worst of the wild
beasts.[11] But this effeminate delicacy of feeling did not prevent him from
accompanying condemned criminals on their way to execution in order to

study and sketch in his notebook their features, distorted by fear, nor did it
prevent him from inventing the most cruel offensive weapons, and from
entering the service of Cesare Borgia as chief military engineer. Often he
seemed to be indifferent to good and evil, or he had to be measured with a
special standard. He held a high position in Cesare's campaign which gained
for this most inconsiderate and most faithless of foes the possession of the
Romagna. Not a single line of Leonardo's sketches betrays any criticism or
sympathy of the events of those days. The comparison with Goethe during
the French campaign cannot here be altogether rejected.
If a biographical effort really endeavors to penetrate the understanding of
the psychic life of its hero it must not, as happens in most biographies
through discretion or prudery, pass over in silence the sexual activity or the
sex peculiarity of the one examined. What we know about it in Leonardo is
very little but full of significance. In a period where there was a constant
struggle between riotous licentiousness and gloomy asceticism, Leonardo
presented an example of cool sexual rejection which one would not expect
in an artist and a portrayer of feminine beauty. Solmi[12] cites the following
sentence from Leonardo showing his frigidity: "The act of procreation and
everything that has any relation to it is so disgusting that human beings
would soon die out if it were not a traditional custom and if there were no
pretty faces and sensuous dispositions." His posthumous works which not
only treat of the greatest scientific problems but also comprise the most
guileless objects which to us do not seem worthy of so great a mind (an
allegorical natural history, animal fables, witticisms, prophecies),[13] are
chaste to a degree—one might say abstinent—that in a work of belle lettres
would excite wonder even to-day. They evade everything sexual so
thoroughly, as if Eros alone who preserves everything living was no worthy
material for the scientific impulse of the investigator.[14] It is known how
frequently great artists found pleasure in giving vent to their phantasies in
erotic and even grossly obscene representations; in contradistinction to this
Leonardo left only some anatomical drawings of the woman's internal
genitals, the position of the child in the womb, etc.
It is doubtful whether Leonardo ever embraced a woman in love, nor is it
known that he ever entertained an intimate spiritual relation with a woman
as in the case of Michelangelo and Vittoria Colonna. While he still lived as
an apprentice in the house of his master Verrocchio, he with other young

men were accused of forbidden homosexual relations which ended in his
acquittal. It seems that he came into this suspicion because he employed as
a model a boy of evil repute.[15] When he was a master he surrounded
himself with handsome boys and youths whom he took as pupils. The last of
these pupils Francesco Melzi, accompanied him to France, remained with
him until his death, and was named by him as his heir. Without sharing the
certainty of his modern biographers, who naturally reject the possibility of a
sexual relation between himself and his pupils as a baseless insult to this
great man, it may be thought by far more probable that the affectionate
relationships of Leonardo to the young men did not result in sexual activity.
Nor should one attribute to him a high measure of sexual activity.
The peculiarity of this emotional and sexual life viewed in connection with
Leonardo's double nature as an artist and investigator can be grasped only in
one way. Of the biographers to whom psychological viewpoints are often
very foreign, only one, Edm. Solmi, has to my knowledge approached the
solution of the riddle. But a writer, Dimitri Sergewitsch Merejkowski, who
selected Leonardo as the hero of a great historical novel has based his
delineation on such an understanding of this unusual man, and if not in dry
words he gave unmistakable utterance in plastic expression in the manner of
a poet.[16] Solmi judges Leonardo as follows: "But the unrequited desire to
understand everything surrounding him, and with cold reflection to discover
the deepest secret of everything that is perfect, has condemned Leonardo's
works to remain forever unfinished."[17] In an essay of the Conferenze
Fiorentine the utterances of Leonardo are cited, which show his confession
of faith and furnish the key to his character.
"Nessuna cosa si può amare nè odiare, se
prima no si ha cognition di quella."[18]
That is: One has no right to love or to hate anything if one has not
acquired a thorough knowledge of its nature. And the same is repeated by
Leonardo in a passage of the Treaties on the Art of Painting where he seems
to defend himself against the accusation of irreligiousness:
"But such censurers might better remain silent. For that action is the
manner of showing the workmaster so many wonderful things, and this is
the way to love so great a discoverer. For, verily great love springs from

great knowledge of the beloved object, and if you little know it you will be
able to love it only little or not at all."[19]
The value of these utterances of Leonardo cannot be found in that they
impart to us an important psychological fact, for what they maintain is
obviously false, and Leonardo must have known this as well as we do. It is
not true that people refrain from loving or hating until they have studied and
became familiar with the nature of the object to whom they wish to give
these affects, on the contrary they love impulsively and are guided by
emotional motives which have nothing to do with cognition and whose
affects are weakened, if anything, by thought and reflection. Leonardo only
could have implied that the love practiced by people is not of the proper and
unobjectionable kind, one should so love as to hold back the affect and to
subject it to mental elaboration, and only after it has stood the test of the
intellect should free play be given to it. And we thereby understand that he
wishes to tell us that this was the case with himself and that it would be
worth the effort of everybody else to treat love and hatred as he himself
does.
And it seems that in his case it was really so. His affects were controlled
and subjected to the investigation impulse, he neither loved nor hated, but
questioned himself whence does that arise, which he was to love or hate,
and what does it signify, and thus he was at first forced to appear indifferent
to good and evil, to beauty and ugliness. During this work of investigation
love and hatred threw off their designs and uniformly changed into
intellectual interest. As a matter of fact Leonardo was not dispassionate, he
did not lack the divine spark which is the mediate or immediate motive
power—il primo motore—of all human activity. He only transmuted his
passion into inquisitiveness. He then applied himself to study with that
persistence, steadiness, and profundity which comes from passion, and on
the height of the psychic work, after the cognition was won, he allowed the
long checked affect to break loose and to flow off freely like a branch of a
stream, after it has accomplished its work. At the height of his cognition
when he could examine a big part of the whole he was seized with a feeling
of pathos, and in ecstatic words he praised the grandeur of that part of
creation which he studied, or—in religious cloak—the greatness of the
creator. Solmi has correctly divined this process of transformation in
Leonardo. According to the quotation of such a passage, in which Leonardo

celebrated the higher impulse of nature ("O mirabile necessita ... ") he said:
"Tale trasfigurazione della scienza della natura in emozione, quasi direi,
religiosa, è uno dei tratti caratteristici de manoscritti vinciani, e si trova
cento e cento volte espressa...."[20]
Leonardo was called the Italian Faust on account of his insatiable and
indefatigable desire for investigation. But even if we disregard the fact that
it is the possible retransformation of the desire for investigation into the joys
of life which is presupposed in the Faust tragedy, one might venture to
remark that Leonardo's system recalls Spinoza's mode of thinking.
The transformation of psychic motive power into the different forms of
activity is perhaps as little convertible without loss, as in the case of
physical powers. Leonardo's example teaches how many other things one
must follow up in these processes. Not to love before one gains full
knowledge of the thing loved presupposes a delay which is harmful. When
one finally reaches cognition he neither loves nor hates properly; one
remains beyond love and hatred. One has investigated instead of having
loved. It is perhaps for this reason that Leonardo's life was so much poorer
in love than those of other great men and great artists. The storming
passions of the soul-stirring and consuming kind, in which others
experience the best part of their lives, seem to have missed him.
There are still other consequences when one follows Leonardo's dictum.
Instead of acting and producing one just investigates. He who begins to
divine the grandeur of the universe and its needs readily forgets his own
insignificant self. When one is struck with admiration and becomes truly
humble he easily forgets that he himself is a part of that living force, and
that according to the measure of his own personality he has the right to
make an effort to change that destined course of the world, the world in
which the insignificant is no less wonderful and important than the great.
Solmi thinks that Leonardo's investigations started with his art,[21] he tried
to investigate the attributes and laws of light, of color, of shades and of
perspective so as to be sure of becoming a master in the imitation of nature
and to be able to show the way to others. It is probable that already at that
time he overestimated the value of this knowledge for the artist. Following
the guide-rope of the painter's need, he was then driven further and further
to investigate the objects of the art of painting, such as animals and plants,

and the proportions of the human body, and to follow the path from their
exterior to their interior structure and biological functions, which really also
express themselves in their appearance and should be depicted in art. And
finally he was pulled along by this overwhelming desire until the connection
was torn from the demands of his art, so that he discovered the general laws
of mechanics and divined the history of the stratification and fossilization of
the Arno-valley, until he could enter in his book with capital letters the
cognition: Il sole non si move (The sun does not move). His investigations
were thus extended over almost all realms of natural science, in every one
of which he was a discoverer or at least a prophet or forerunner.[22]
However, his curiosity continued to be directed to the outer world,
something kept him away from the investigation of the psychic life of men;
there was little room for psychology in the "Academia Vinciana," for which
he drew very artistic and very complicated emblems.
When he later made the effort to return from his investigations to the art
from which he started he felt that he was disturbed by the new paths of his
interest and by the changed nature of his psychic work. In the picture he was
interested above all in a problem, and behind this one he saw emerging
numerous other problems just as he was accustomed in the endless and
indeterminable investigations of natural history. He was no longer able to
limit his demands, to isolate the work of art, and to tear it out from that
great connection of which he knew it formed part. After the most exhausting
efforts to bring to expression all that was in him, all that was connected with
it in his thoughts, he was forced to leave it unfinished, or to declare it
incomplete.
The artist had once taken into his service the investigator to assist him,
now the servant was stronger and suppressed his master.
When we find in the portrait of a person one single impulse very forcibly
developed, as curiosity in the case of Leonardo, we look for the explanation
in a special constitution, concerning its probable organic determination
hardly anything is known. Our psychoanalytic studies of nervous people
lead us to look for two other expectations which we would like to find
verified in every case. We consider it probable that this very forcible
impulse was already active in the earliest childhood of the person, and that
its supreme sway was fixed by infantile impressions; and we further assume

that originally it drew upon sexual motive powers for its reënforcement so
that it later can take the place of a part of the sexual life. Such person would
then, e.g., investigate with that passionate devotion which another would
give to his love, and he could investigate instead of loving. We would
venture the conclusion of a sexual reënforcement not only in the impulse to
investigate, but also in most other cases of special intensity of an impulse.
Observation of daily life shows us that most persons have the capacity to
direct a very tangible part of their sexual motive powers to their
professional or business activities. The sexual impulse is particularly suited
to yield such contributions because it is endowed with the capacity of
sublimation, i.e., it has the power to exchange its nearest aim for others of
higher value which are not sexual. We consider this process as proved, if the
history of childhood or the psychic developmental history of a person shows
that in childhood this powerful impulse was in the service of the sexual
interest. We consider it a further corroboration if this is substantiated by a
striking stunting in the sexual life of mature years, as if a part of the sexual
activity had now been replaced by the activity of the predominant impulse.
The application of these assumptions to the case of the predominant
investigation-impulse seems to be subject to special difficulties, as one is
unwilling to admit that this serious impulse exists in children or that
children show any noteworthy sexual interest. However, these difficulties
are easily obviated. The untiring pleasure in questioning as seen in little
children demonstrates their curiosity, which is puzzling to the grown-up, as
long as he does not understand that all these questions are only
circumlocutions, and that they cannot come to an end because they replace
only one question which the child does not put. When the child becomes
older and gains more understanding this manifestation of curiosity suddenly
disappears. But psychoanalytic investigation gives us a full explanation in
that it teaches us that many, perhaps most children, at least the most gifted
ones, go through a period beginning with the third year, which may be
designated as the period of infantile sexual investigation. As far as we know,
the curiosity is not awakened spontaneously in children of this age, but is
aroused through the impression of an important experience, through the
birth of a little brother or sister, or through fear of the same endangered by
some outward experience, wherein the child sees a danger to his egotistic
interests. The investigation directs itself to the question whence children

come, as if the child were looking for means to guard against such
undesired event. We were astonished to find that the child refuses to give
credence to the information imparted to it, e.g., it energetically rejects the
mythological and so ingenious stork-fable, we were astonished to find that
its psychic independence dates from this act of disbelief, that it often feels
itself at serious variance with the grown-ups, and never forgives them for
having been deceived of the truth on this occasion. It investigates in its own
way, it divines that the child is in the mother's womb, and guided by the
feelings of its own sexuality, it formulates for itself theories about the origin
of children from food, about being born through the bowels, about the rôle
of the father which is difficult to fathom, and even at that time it has a vague
conception of the sexual act which appears to the child as something hostile,
as something violent. But as its own sexual constitution is not yet equal to
the task of producing children, his investigation whence come children must
also run aground and must be left in the lurch as unfinished. The impression
of this failure at the first attempt of intellectual independence seems to be of
a persevering and profoundly depressing nature.[23]
If the period of infantile sexual investigation comes to an end through an
impetus of energetic sexual repression, the early association with sexual
interest may result in three different possibilities for the future fate of the
investigation impulse. The investigation either shares the fate of the
sexuality, the curiosity henceforth remains inhibited and the free activity of
intelligence may become narrowed for life; this is especially made possible
by the powerful religious inhibition of thought, which is brought about
shortly hereafter through education. This is the type of neurotic inhibition.
We know well that the so acquired mental weakness furnishes effective
support for the outbreak of a neurotic disease. In a second type the
intellectual development is sufficiently strong to withstand the sexual
repression pulling at it. Sometimes after the disappearance of the infantile
sexual investigation, it offers its support to the old association in order to
elude the sexual repression, and the suppressed sexual investigation comes
back from the unconscious as compulsive reasoning, it is naturally distorted
and not free, but forceful enough to sexualize even thought itself and to
accentuate the intellectual operations with the pleasure and fear of the actual
sexual processes. Here the investigation becomes sexual activity and often
exclusively so, the feeling of settling the problem and of explaining things

in the mind is put in place of sexual gratification. But the indeterminate
character of the infantile investigation repeats itself also in the fact that this
reasoning never ends, and that the desired intellectual feeling of the solution
constantly recedes into the distance. By virtue of a special disposition the
third, which is the most rare and most perfect type, escapes the inhibition of
thought and the compulsive reasoning. Also here sexual repression takes
place, it is unable, however, to direct a partial impulse of the sexual pleasure
into the unconscious, but the libido withdraws from the fate of the
repression by being sublimated from the beginning into curiosity, and by
reënforcing the powerful investigation impulse. Here, too, the investigation
becomes more or less compulsive and a substitute of the sexual activity, but
owing to the absolute difference of the psychic process behind it
(sublimation in place of the emergence from the unconscious) the character
of the neurosis does not manifest itself, the subjection to the original
complexes of the infantile sexual investigation disappears, and the impulse
can freely put itself in the service of the intellectual interest. It takes account
of the sexual repression which made it so strong in contributing to it
sublimated libido, by avoiding all occupation with sexual themes.
In mentioning the concurrence in Leonardo of the powerful investigation
impulse with the stunting of his sexual life which was limited to the so-
called ideal homosexuality, we feel inclined to consider him as a model
example of our third type. The most essential point of his character and the
secret of it seems to lie in the fact, that after utilizing the infantile activity of
curiosity in the service of sexual interest he was able to sublimate the
greater part of his libido into the impulse of investigation. But to be sure the
proof of this conception is not easy to produce. To do this we would have to
have an insight into the psychic development of his first childhood years,
and it seems foolish to hope for such material when the reports concerning
his life are so meager and so uncertain; and moreover, when we deal with
information which even persons of our own generation withdraw from the
attention of the observer.
We know very little concerning Leonardo's youth. He was born in 1452 in
the little city of Vinci between Florence and Empoli; he was an illegitimate
child which was surely not considered a great popular stain in that time. His
father was Ser Piero da Vinci, a notary and descendant of notaries and
farmers, who took their name from the place Vinci; his mother, a certain

Caterina, probably a peasant girl, who later married another native of Vinci.
Nothing else about his mother appears in the life history of Leonardo, only
the writer Merejkowski believed to have found some traces of her. The only
definite information about Leonardo's childhood is furnished by a legal
document from the year 1457, a register of assessment in which Vinci
Leonardo is mentioned among the members of the family as a five-year-old
illegitimate child of Ser Piero.[24] As the marriage of Ser Piero with Donna
Albiera remained childless the little Leonardo could be brought up in his
father's house. He did not leave this house until he entered as apprentice—it
is not known what year—in the studio of Andrea del Verrocchio. In 1472
Leonardo's name could already be found in the register of the members of
the "Compagnia dei Pittori." That is all.

II

As far as I know Leonardo only once interspersed in his scientific
descriptions a communication from his childhood. In a passage where he
speaks about the flight of the vulture, he suddenly interrupts himself in
order to follow up a memory from very early years which came to his mind.
"It seems that it had been destined before that I should occupy myself so
thoroughly with the vulture, for it comes to my mind as a very early memory,
when I was still in the cradle, a vulture came down to me, he opened my
mouth with his tail and struck me a few times with his tail against my lips."
[25]

We have here an infantile memory and to be sure of the strangest sort. It is
strange on account of its content and account of the time of life in which it
was fixed. That a person could retain a memory of the nursing period is
perhaps not impossible, but it can in no way be taken as certain. But what
this memory of Leonardo states, namely, that a vulture opened the child's
mouth with its tail, sounds so improbable, so fabulous, that another
conception which puts an end to the two difficulties with one stroke appeals
much more to our judgment. The scene of the vulture is not a memory of
Leonardo, but a phantasy which he formed later, and transferred into his

childhood. The childhood memories of persons often have no different
origin, as a matter of fact, they are not fixated from an experience like the
conscious memories from the time of maturity and then repeated, but they
are not produced until a later period when childhood is already past, they
are then changed and disguised and put in the service of later tendencies, so
that in general they cannot be strictly differentiated from phantasies. Their
nature will perhaps be best understood by recalling the manner in which
history writing originated among ancient nations. As long as the nation was
small and weak it gave no thought to the writing of its history, it tilled the
soil of its land, defended its existence against its neighbors by seeking to
wrest land from them and endeavored to become rich. It was a heroic but
unhistoric time. Then came another age, a period of self-realization in which
one felt rich and powerful, and it was then that one experienced the need to
discover whence one originated and how one developed. The history-
writing which then continues to register the present events throws also its
backward glance to the past, it gathers traditions and legends, it interprets
what survived from olden times into customs and uses, and thus creates a
history of past ages. It is quite natural that this history of the past ages is
more the expressions of opinions and desires of the present than a faithful
picture of the past, for many a thing escaped the people's memory, other
things became distorted, some trace of the past was misunderstood and
interpreted in the sense of the present; and besides one does not write
history through motives of objective curiosity, but because one desires to
impress his contemporaries, to stimulate and extol them, or to hold the
mirror before them. The conscious memory of a person concerning the
experiences of his maturity may now be fully compared to that of history
writing, and his infantile memories, as far as their origin and reliability are
concerned will actually correspond to the history of the primitive period of a
people which was compiled later with purposive intent.
Now one may think that if Leonardo's story of the vulture which visited
him in his cradle is only a phantasy of later birth, it is hardly worth while
giving more time to it. One could easily explain it by his openly avowed
inclination to occupy himself with the problem of the flight of the bird
which would lend to this phantasy an air of predetermined fate. But with
this depreciation one commits as great an injustice as if one would simply
ignore the material of legends, traditions, and interpretations in the primitive
history of a people. Notwithstanding all distortions and misunderstandings

to the contrary they still represent the reality of the past; they represent what
the people formed out of the experiences of its past age under the
domination of once powerful and to-day still effective motives, and if these
distortions could be unraveled through the knowledge of all effective forces,
one would surely discover the historic truth under this legendary material.
The same holds true for the infantile reminiscences or for the phantasies of
individuals. What a person thinks he recalls from his childhood, is not of an
indifferent nature. As a rule the memory remnants, which he himself does
not understand, conceal invaluable evidences of the most important features
of his psychic development. As the psychoanalytic technique affords us
excellent means for bringing to light this concealed material, we shall
venture the attempt to fill the gaps in the history of Leonardo's life through
the analysis of his infantile phantasy. And if we should not attain a
satisfactory degree of certainty, we will have to console ourselves with the
fact that so many other investigations about this great and mysterious man
have met no better fate.
When we examine Leonardo's vulture-phantasy with the eyes of a
psychoanalyst then it does not seem strange very long; we recall that we
have often found similar structures in dreams, so that we may venture to
translate this phantasy from its strange language into words that are
universally understood. The translation then follows an erotic direction.
Tail, "coda," is one of the most familiar symbols, as well as a substitutive
designation of the male member which is no less true in Italian than in other
languages. The situation contained in the phantasy, that a vulture opened the
mouth of the child and forcefully belabored it with its tail, corresponds to
the idea of fellatio, a sexual act in which the member is placed into the
mouth of the other person. Strangely enough this phantasy is altogether of a
passive character; it resembles certain dreams and phantasies of women and
of passive homosexuals who play the feminine part in sexual relations.
Let the reader be patient for a while and not flare up with indignation and
refuse to follow psychoanalysis because in its very first applications it leads
to an unpardonable slander of the memory of a great and pure man. For it is
quite certain that this indignation will never solve for us the meaning of
Leonardo's childhood phantasy; on the other hand, Leonardo has
unequivocally acknowledged this phantasy, and we shall therefore not
relinquish the expectation—or if you prefer the preconception—that like

every psychic production such as dreams, visions and deliria this phantasy,
too, must have some meaning. Let us therefore lend our unprejudiced ears
for a while to psychoanalytic work which after all has not yet uttered the
last word.
The desire to take the male member into the mouth and suck it, which is
considered as one of the most disgusting of sexual perversions, is
nevertheless a frequent occurrence among the women of our time—and as
shown in old sculptures was the same in earlier times—and in the state of
being in love seems to lose entirely its disgusting character. The physician
encounters phantasies based on this desire, even in women who did not
come to the knowledge of the possibility of such sexual gratification by
reading V. Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis or through other
information. It seems that it is quite easy for the women themselves to
produce such wish-phantasies.[26] Investigation then teaches us that this
situation, so forcibly condemned by custom, may be traced to the most
harmless origin. It is nothing but the elaboration of another situation in
which we all once felt comfort, namely, when we were in the suckling-age
("when I was still in the cradle") and took the nipple of our mother's or wet-
nurse's breast into our mouth to suck it. The organic impression of this first
pleasure in our lives surely remains indelibly impregnated; when the child
later learns to know the udder of the cow, which in function is a breast-
nipple, but in shape and in position on the abdomen resembles the penis, it
obtains the primary basis for the later formation of that disgusting sexual
phantasy.
We now understand why Leonardo displaced the memory of the supposed
experience with the vulture to his nursing period. This phantasy conceals
nothing more or less than a reminiscence of nursing—or being nursed—at
the mother's breast, a scene both human and beautiful, which he as well as
other artists undertook to depict with the brush in the form of the mother of
God and her child. At all events, we also wish to maintain, something we do
not as yet understand, that this reminiscence, equally significant for both
sexes, was elaborated in the man Leonardo into a passive homosexual
phantasy. For the present we shall not take up the question as to what
connection there is between homosexuality and suckling at the mother's
breast, we merely wish to recall that tradition actually designates Leonardo
as a person of homosexual feelings. In considering this, it makes no

difference whether that accusation against the youth Leonardo was justified
or not. It is not the real activity but the nature of the feeling which causes us
to decide whether to attribute to some one the characteristic of
homosexuality.
Another incomprehensible feature of Leonardo's infantile phantasy next
claims our interest. We interpret the phantasy of being wet-nursed by the
mother and find that the mother is replaced by a vulture. Where does this
vulture originate and how does he come into this place?
A thought now obtrudes itself which seems so remote that one is tempted
to ignore it. In the sacred hieroglyphics of the old Egyptians the mother is
represented by the picture of the vulture.[27] These Egyptians also
worshiped a motherly deity, whose head was vulture like, or who had many
heads of which at least one or two was that of a vulture.[28] The name of this
goddess was pronounced Mut; we may question whether the sound
similarity to our word mother (Mutter) is only accidental? So the vulture
really has some connection with the mother, but of what help is that to us?
Have we a right to attribute this knowledge to Leonardo when François
Champollion first succeeded in reading hieroglyphics between 1790-1832?
[29]

It would also be interesting to discover in what way the old Egyptians
came to choose the vulture as a symbol of motherhood. As a matter of fact
the religion and culture of Egyptians were subjects of scientific interest even
to the Greeks and Romans, and long before we ourselves were able to read
the Egyptian monuments we had at our disposal some communications
about them from preserved works of classical antiquity. Some of these
writings belonged to familiar authors like Strabo, Plutarch, Aminianus
Marcellus, and some bear unfamiliar names and are uncertain as to origin
and time, like the hieroglyphica of Horapollo Nilus, and like the traditional
book of oriental priestly wisdom bearing the godly name Hermes
Trismegistos. From these sources we learn that the vulture was a symbol of
motherhood because it was thought that this species of birds had only
female vultures and no males.[30] The natural history of the ancients shows a
counterpart to this limitation among the scarebæus beetles which were
revered by the Egyptians as godly, no females were supposed to exist.[31]

But how does impregnation take place in vultures if only females exist?
This is fully answered in a passage of Horapollo.[32] At a certain time these
birds stop in the midst of their flight, open their vagina and are impregnated
by the wind.
Unexpectedly we have now reached a point where we can take something
as quite probable which only shortly before we had to reject as absurd. It is
quite possible that Leonardo was well acquainted with the scientific fable,
according to which the Egyptians represented the idea of mother with the
picture of the vulture. He was an omnivorous reader whose interest
comprised all spheres of literature and knowledge. In the Codex Atlanticus
we find an index of all books which he possessed at a certain time,[33] as
well as numerous notices about other books which he borrowed from
friends, and according to the excerpts which Fr. Richter[34] compiled from
his drawings we can hardly overestimate the extent of his reading. Among
these books there was no lack of older as well as contemporary works
treating of natural history. All these books were already in print at that time,
and it so happens that Milan was the principal place of the young art of
book printing in Italy.
When we proceed further we come upon a communication which may
raise to a certainty the probability that Leonardo knew the vulture fable. The
erudite editor and commentator of Horapollo remarked in connection with
the text (p. 172) cited before: Caeterum hanc fabulam de vulturibus cupide
amplexi sunt Patres Ecclesiastici, ut ita argumento ex rerum natura petito
refutarent eos, qui Virginis partum negabant; itaque apud omnes fere hujus
rei mentio occurit.
Hence the fable of the monosexuality and the conception of the vulture by
no means remained as an indifferent anecdote as in the case of the
analogous fable of the scarebæus beetles; that church fathers mastered it in
order to have it ready as an argument from natural history against those who
doubted the sacred history. If according the best information from antiquity
the vultures were directed to let themselves be impregnated by the wind,
why should the same thing not have happened even once in a human
female? On account of this use the church fathers were "almost all" in the
habit of relating this vulture fable, and now it can hardly remain doubtful
that it also became known to Leonardo through so powerful a source.

The origin of Leonardo's vulture phantasy can be conceived in the
following manner: While reading in the writings of a church father or in a
book on natural science that the vultures are all females and that they know
to procreate without the coöperation of a male, a memory emerged in him
which became transformed into that phantasy, but which meant to say that
he also had been such a vulture child, which had a mother but no father. An
echo of pleasure which he experienced at his mother's breast was added to
this in the manner as so old impressions alone can manifest themselves. The
allusion to the idea of the holy virgin with the child, formed by the authors,
which is so dear to every artist, must have contributed to it to make this
phantasy seem to him valuable and important. For this helped him to
identify himself with the Christ child, the comforter and savior of not alone
this one woman.
When we break up an infantile phantasy we strive to separate the real
memory content from the later motives which modify and distort the same.
In the case of Leonardo we now think that we know the real content of the
phantasy. The replacement of the mother by the vulture indicates that the
child missed the father and felt himself alone with his mother. The fact of
Leonardo's illegitimate birth fits in with his vulture phantasy; only on
account of it was he able to compare himself with a vulture child. But we
have discovered as the next definite fact from his youth that at the age of
five years he had already been received in his father's home; when this took
place, whether a few months following his birth, or a few weeks before the
taking of the assessment of taxes, is entirely unknown to us. The
interpretation of the vulture phantasy then steps in and wants to tell us that
Leonardo did not spend the first decisive years of his life with his father and
his step-mother but with his poor, forsaken, real mother, so that he had time
to miss his father. This still seems to be a rather meager and rather daring
result of the psychoanalytic effort, but on further reflection it will gain in
significance. Certainty will be promoted by mentioning the actual relations
in Leonardo's childhood. According to the reports, his father Ser Piero da
Vinci married the prominent Donna Albiera during the year of Leonardo's
birth; it was to the childlessness of this marriage that the boy owed his
legalized reception into his father's or rather grandfather's house during his
fifth year. However, it is not customary to offer an illegitimate offspring to a
young woman's care at the beginning of marriage when she is still expecting
to be blessed with children. Years of disappointment must have elapsed

before it was decided to adopt the probably handsomely developed
illegitimate child as a compensation for legitimate children who were vainly
hoped for. It harmonizes best with the interpretation of the vulture-phantasy,
if at least three years or perhaps five years of Leonardo's life had elapsed
before he changed from his lonely mother to his father's home. But then it
had already become too late. In the first three or four years of life
impressions are fixed and modes of reactions are formed towards the outer
world which can never be robbed of their importance by any later
experiences.
If it is true that the incomprehensible childhood reminiscences and the
person's phantasies based on them always bring out the most significant of
his psychic development, then the fact corroborated by the vulture phantasy,
that Leonardo passed the first years of his life alone with his mother must
have been a most decisive influence on the formation of his inner life.
Under the effect of this constellation it could not have been otherwise than
that the child which in his young life encountered one problem more than
other children, should have begun to ponder very passionately over this
riddle and thus should have become an investigator early in life. For he was
tortured by the great questions where do children come from and what has
the father to do with their origin. The vague knowledge of this connection
between his investigation and his childhood history has later drawn from
him the exclamation that it was destined that he should deeply occupy
himself with the problem of the bird's flight, for already in his cradle he had
been visited by a vulture. To trace the curiosity which is directed to the
flight of the bird to the infantile sexual investigation will be a later task
which will not be difficult to accomplish.

III

The element of the vulture represents to us the real memory content in
Leonardo's childhood phantasy; the association into which Leonardo
himself placed his phantasy threw a bright light on the importance of this
content for his later life. In continuing the work of interpretation we now

encounter the strange problem why this memory content was elaborated into
a homosexual situation. The mother who nursed the child, or rather from
whom the child suckled was transformed into a vulture which stuck its tail
into the child's mouth. We maintain that the "coda" (tail) of the vulture,
following the common substituting usages of language, cannot signify
anything else but a male genital or penis. But we do not understand how the
phantastic activity came to furnish precisely this maternal bird with the
mark of masculinity, and in view of this absurdity we become confused at
the possibility of reducing this phantastic structure to rational sense.
However, we must not despair. How many seemingly absurd dreams have
we not forced to give up their sense! Why should it become more difficult to
accomplish this in a childhood phantasy than in a dream!
Let us remember the fact that it is not good to find one isolated peculiarity,
and let us hasten to add another to it which is still more striking.
The vulture-headed goddess Mut of the Egyptians, a figure of altogether
impersonal character, as expressed by Drexel in Roscher's lexicon, was
often fused with other maternal deities of living individuality like Isis and
Hathor, but she retained besides her separate existence and reverence. It was
especially characteristic of the Egyptian pantheon that the individual gods
did not perish in this amalgamation. Besides the composition of deities the
simple divine image remained in her independence. In most representations
the vulture-headed maternal deity was formed by the Egyptians in a phallic
manner,[35] her body which was distinguished as feminine by its breasts also
bore the masculine member in a state of erection.
The goddess Mut thus evinced the same union of maternal and paternal
characteristics as in Leonardo's vulture phantasy. Should we explain this
concurrence by the assumption that Leonardo knew from studying his book
the androgynous nature of the maternal vulture? Such possibility is more
than questionable; it seems that the sources accessible to him contained
nothing of remarkable determination. It is more likely that here as there the
agreement is to be traced to a common, effective and unknown motive.
Mythology can teach us that the androgynous formation, the union of
masculine and feminine sex characteristics, did not belong to the goddess
Mut alone but also to other deities such as Isis and Hathor, but in the latter

perhaps only insofar as they possessed also a motherly nature and became
fused with the goddess Mut.[36] It teaches us further that other Egyptian
deities such as Neith of Sais out of whom the Greek Athene was later
formed, were originally conceived as androgynous or dihermaphroditic, and
that the same held true for many of the Greek gods, especially of the
Dionysian circle, as well as for Aphrodite who was later restricted to a
feminine love deity. Mythology may also offer the explanation that the
phallus which was added to the feminine body was meant to denote the
creative primitive force of nature, and that all these hermaphroditic deistic
formations express the idea that only a union of the masculine and feminine
elements can result in a worthy representation of divine perfection. But
none of these observations explain the psychological riddle, namely, that the
phantasy of men takes no offense at the fact that a figure which was to
embody the essence of the mother should be provided with the mark of the
masculine power which is the opposite of motherhood.
The explanation comes from the infantile sexual theories. There really was
a time in which the male genital was found to be compatible with the
representation of the mother. When the male child first directs his curiosity
to the riddle of the sexual life, he is dominated by the interest for his own
genitals. He finds this part of the body too valuable and too important to
believe that it would be missing in other persons to whom he feels such a
resemblance. As he cannot divine that there is still another equally valuable
type of genital formation he must grasp the assumption that all persons, also
women, possess such a member as he. This preconception is so firm in the
youthful investigator that it is not destroyed even by the first observation of
the genitals in little girls. His perception naturally tells him that there is
something different here than in him, but he is unable to admit to himself as
the content of this perception that he cannot find this member in girls. That
this member may be missing is to him a dismal and unbearable thought, and
he therefore seeks to reconcile it by deciding that it also exists in girls but it
is still very small and that it will grow later.[37] If this expectation does not
appear to be fulfilled on later observation he has at his disposal another way
of escape. The member also existed in the little girl but it was cut off and on
its place there remained a wound. This progress of the theory already makes
use of his own painful experience; he was threatened in the meantime that
this important organ will be taken away from him if it will form too much of

an interest for his occupation. Under the influence of this threat of castration
he now interprets his conception of the female genital, henceforth he will
tremble for his masculinity, but at the same time he will look with contempt
upon those unhappy creatures upon whom, in his opinion, this cruel
punishment had already been visited.
Before the child came under the domination of the castration complex, at
the time when he still held the woman at her full value, he began to manifest
an intensive desire to look as an erotic activity of his impulse. He wished to
see the genitals of other persons, originally probably because he wished to
compare them with his own. The erotic attraction which emanated from the
person of his mother soon reached its height in the longing to see her genital
which he believed to be a penis. With the cognition acquired only later that
the woman has no penis, this longing often becomes transformed into its
opposite and gives place to disgust, which in the years of puberty may
become the cause of psychic impotence, of misogyny and of lasting
homosexuality. But the fixation on the once so vividly desired object, the
penis of the woman, leaves ineradicable traces in the psychic life of the
child, which has gone through that fragment of infantile sexual investigation
with particular thoroughness. The fetich-like reverence for the feminine foot
and shoe seems to take the foot only as a substitutive symbol for the once
revered and since then missed member of the woman. The "braid-slashers"
without knowing it play the part of persons who perform the act of
castration on the female genital.
One will not gain any correct understanding of the activities of the
infantile sexuality and probably will consider these communications
unworthy of belief, as long as one does not relinquish the attitude of our
cultural depreciation of the genitals and of the sexual functions in general.
To understand the infantile psychic life one has to look to analogies from
primitive times. For a long series of generations we have been in the habit
of considering the genitals or pudenda as objects of shame, and in the case
of more successful sexual repression as objects of disgust. The majority of
those living to-day only reluctantly obey the laws of propagation, feeling
thereby that their human dignity is being offended and degraded. What
exists among us of the other conception of the sexual life is found only in
the uncultivated and in the lower social strata; among the higher and more
refined types it is concealed as culturally inferior, and its activity is ventured

only under the embittered admonition of a guilty conscience. It was quite
different in the primitive times of the human race. From the laborious
collections of students of civilization one gains the conviction that the
genitals were originally the pride and hope of living beings, they enjoyed
divine worship, and the divine nature of their functions was transported to
all newly acquired activities of mankind. Through sublimation of its
essential elements there arose innumerable god-figures, and at the time
when the relation of official religions with sexual activity was already
hidden from the general consciousness, secret cults labored to preserve it
alive among a number of the initiated. In the course of cultural development
it finally happened that so much godliness and holiness had been extracted
from sexuality that the exhausted remnant fell into contempt. But
considering the indestructibility which is in the nature of all psychic
impressions one need not wonder that even the most primitive forms of
genital worship could be demonstrated until quite recent times, and that
language, customs and superstitions of present day humanity contain the
remnants of all phases of this course of development.[38]
Important biological analogies have taught us that the psychic
development of the individual is a short repetition of the course of
development of the race, and we shall therefore not find improbable what
the psychoanalytic investigation of the child's psyche asserts concerning the
infantile estimation of the genitals. The infantile assumption of the maternal
penis is thus the common source of origin for the androgynous formation of
the maternal deities like the Egyptian goddess Mut and the vulture's "coda"
(tail) in Leonardo's childhood phantasy. As a matter of fact, it is only
through misunderstanding that these deistic representations are designated
hermaphroditic in the medical sense of the word. In none of them is there a
union of the true genitals of both sexes as they are united in some deformed
beings to the disgust of every human eye; but besides the breast as a mark of
motherhood there is also the male member, just as it existed in the first
imagination of the child about his mother's body. Mythology has retained
for the faithful this revered and very early fancied bodily formation of the
mother. The prominence given to the vulture-tail in Leonardo's phantasy we
can now translate as follows: At that time when I directed my tender
curiosity to my mother I still adjudged to her a genital like my own. A

further testimonial of Leonardo's precocious sexual investigation, which in
our opinion became decisive for his entire life.
A brief reflection now admonishes us that we should not be satisfied with
the explanation of the vulture-tail in Leonardo's childhood phantasy. It
seems as if it contained more than we as yet understand. For its more
striking feature really consisted in the fact that the nursing at the mother's
breast was transformed into being nursed, that is into a passive act which
thus gives the situation an undoubted homosexual character. Mindful of the
historical probability that Leonardo behaved in life as a homosexual in
feeling, the question obtrudes itself whether this phantasy does not point to
a causal connection between Leonardo's childhood relations to his mother
and the later manifest, if only ideal, homosexuality. We would not venture to
draw such conclusion from Leonardo's disfigured reminiscence were it not
for the fact that we know from our psychoanalytic investigation of
homosexual patients that such a relation exists, indeed it really is an
intimate and necessary relation.
Homosexual men who have started in our times an energetic action against
the legal limitations of their sexual activity are fond of representing
themselves through theoretical spokesmen as evincing a sexual variation,
which may be distinguished from the very beginning, as an intermediate
stage of sex or as "a third sex." In other words, they maintain that they are
men who are forced by organic determinants originating in the germ to find
that pleasure in the man which they cannot feel in the woman. As much as
one would wish to subscribe to their demands out of humane considerations,
one must nevertheless exercise reserve regarding their theories which were
formulated without regard for the psychic genesis of homosexuality.
Psychoanalysis offers the means to fill this gap and to put to test the
assertions of the homosexuals. It is true that psychoanalysis fulfilled this
task in only a small number of people, but all investigation thus far
undertaken brought the same surprising results.[39] In all our male
homosexuals there was a very intensive erotic attachment to a feminine
person, as a rule to the mother, which was manifest in the very first period
of childhood and later entirely forgotten by the individual. This attachment
was produced or favored by too much love from the mother herself, but was
also furthered by the retirement or absence of the father during the
childhood period. Sadger emphasizes the fact that the mothers of his

homosexual patients were often man-women, or women with energetic
traits of character who were able to crowd out the father from the place
allotted to him in the family. I have sometimes observed the same thing, but
I was more impressed by those cases in which the father was absent from
the beginning or disappeared early so that the boy was altogether under
feminine influence. It almost seems that the presence of a strong father
would assure for the son the proper decision in the selection of his object
from the opposite sex.
Following this primary stage, a transformation takes place whose
mechanisms we know but whose motive forces we have not yet grasped.
The love of the mother cannot continue to develop consciously so that it
merges into repression. The boy represses the love for the mother by putting
himself in her place, by identifying himself with her, and by taking his own
person as a model through the similarity of which he is guided in the
selection of his love object. He thus becomes homosexual; as a matter of
fact he returns to the stage of autoerotism, for the boys whom the growing
adult now loves are only substitutive persons or revivals of his own childish
person, whom he loves in the same way as his mother loved him. We say
that he finds his love object on the road to narcism, for the Greek legend
called a boy Narcissus to whom nothing was more pleasing than his own
mirrored image, and who became transformed into a beautiful flower of this
name.
Deeper psychological discussions justify the assertion that the person who
becomes homosexual in this manner remains fixed in his unconscious on the
memory picture or his mother, By repressing the love for his mother he
conserves the same in his unconscious and henceforth remains faithful to
her. When as a lover he seems to pursue boys, he really thus runs away from
women who could cause him to become faithless to his mother. Through
direct observation of individual cases we could demonstrate that he who is
seemingly receptive only of masculine stimuli is in reality influenced by the
charms emanating from women just like a normal person, but each and
every time he hastens to transfer the stimulus he received from the woman
to a male object and in this manner he repeats again and again the
mechanism through which he acquired his homosexuality.

It is far from us to exaggerate the importance of these explanations
concerning the psychic genesis of homosexuality. It is quite clear that they
are in crass opposition to the official theories of the homosexual spokesmen,
but we are aware that these explanations are not sufficiently comprehensive
to render possible a final explanation of the problem. What one calls
homosexual for practical purposes may have its origin in a variety of
psychosexual inhibiting processes, and the process recognized by us is
perhaps only one among many, and has reference only to one type of
"homosexuality." We must also admit, that the number of cases in our
homosexual type which shows the conditions required by us, exceeds by far
those cases in which the resulting effect really appears, so that even we
cannot reject the supposed coöperation of unknown constitutional factors
from which one was otherwise wont to deduce the whole of homosexuality.
As a matter of fact there would be no occasion for entering into the psychic
genesis of the form of homosexuality studied by us if there were not a
strong presumption that Leonardo, from whose vulture-phantasy we started,
really belonged to this one type of homosexuality.
As little as is known concerning the sexual behavior of the great artist and
investigator, we must still trust to the probability that the testimonies of his
contemporaries did not go far astray. In the light of this tradition he appears
to us as a man whose sexual need and activity were extraordinarily low, as if
a higher striving had raised him above the common animal need of
mankind. It may be open to doubt whether he ever sought direct sexual
gratification, and in what manner, or whether he could dispense with it
altogether. We are justified, however, to look also in him for those
emotional streams which imperatively force others to the sexual act, for we
cannot imagine a human psychic life in whose development the sexual
desire in the broadest sense, the libido, has not had its share, whether the
latter has withdrawn itself far from the original aim or whether it was
detained from being put into execution.
Anything but traces of unchanged sexual desire we need not expect in
Leonardo. These point however to one direction and allow us to count him
among homosexuals. It has always been emphasized that he took as his
pupils only strikingly handsome boys and youths. He was kind and
considerate towards them, he cared for them and nursed them himself when
they were ill, just like a mother nurses her children, as his own mother

might have cared for him. As he selected them on account of their beauty
rather than their talent, none of them—Cesare da Sesto, G. Boltraffio,
Andrea Salaino, Francesco Melzi and the others—ever became a prominent
artist. Most of them could not make themselves independent of their master
and disappeared after his death without leaving a more definite
physiognomy to the history of art. The others who by their productions
earned the right to call themselves his pupils, as Luini and Bazzi,
nicknamed Sodoma, he probably did not know personally.
We realize that we will have to face the objection that Leonardo's behavior
towards his pupils surely had nothing to do with sexual motives, and
permits no conclusion as to his sexual peculiarity. Against this we wish to
assert with all caution that our conception explains some strange features in
the master's behavior which otherwise would have remained enigmatical.
Leonardo kept a diary; he made entries in his small hand, written from right
to left which were meant only for himself. It is to be noted that in this diary
he addressed himself with "thou": "Learn from master Lucca the
multiplication of roots."[40] "Let master d'Abacco show thee the square of
the circle."[41] Or on the occasion of a journey he entered in his diary:
"I am going to Milan to look after the affairs of my garden ... order two
pack-sacks to be made. Ask Boltraffio to show thee his turning-lathe and let
him polish a stone on it.—Leave the book to master Andrea il Todesco."[42]
Or he wrote a resolution of quite different significance: "Thou must show in
thy treatise that the earth is a star, like the moon or resembling it, and thus
prove the nobility of our world."[43]
In this diary, which like the diaries of other mortals often skim over the
most important events of the day with only few words or ignore them
altogether, one finds a few entries which on account of their peculiarity are
cited by all of Leonardo's biographers. They show notations referring to the
master's petty expenses, which are recorded with painful exactitude as if
coming from a pedantic and strictly parsimonious family father, while there
is nothing to show that he spent greater sums, or that the artist was well
versed in household management. One of these notes refers to a new cloak
which he bought for his pupil Andrea Salaino:[44]

Silver brocade Lira 15 Soldi 4

Crimson velvet for trimming " 9 " 0
Braid " 0 " 9
Buttons " 0 " 12

Another very detailed notice gives all the expenses which he incurred
through the bad qualities and the thieving tendencies of another pupil or
model: "On 21st day of April, 1490, I started this book and started again the
horse.[45] Jacomo came to me on Magdalene day, 1490, at the age of ten
years (marginal note: thievish, mendacious, willful, gluttonous). On the
second day I ordered for him two shirts, a pair of pants, and a jacket, and as
I put the money away to pay for the things named he stole the money from
my purse, and it was never possible to make him confess, although I was
absolutely sure of it (marginal note: 4 Lira ...)." So the report continues
concerning the misdeeds of the little boy and concludes with the expense
account: "In the first year, a cloak, Lira 2: 6 shirts, Lira 4: 3 jackets, Lira 6:
4 pair of socks, Lira 7, etc."[46]
Leonardo's biographers, to whom nothing was further than to solve the
riddle in the psychic life of their hero from these slight weaknesses and
peculiarities, were wont to remark in connection with these peculiar
accounts that they emphasized the kindness and consideration of the master
for his pupils. They forget thereby that it is not Leonardo's behavior that
needs an explanation, but the fact that he left us these testimonies of it. As it
is impossible to ascribe to him the motive of smuggling into our hands
proofs of his kindness, we must assume that another affective motive caused
him to write this down. It is not easy to conjecture what this motive was,
and we could not give any if not for another account found among
Leonardo's papers which throws a brilliant light on these peculiarly petty
notices about his pupils' clothes, and others of a kind:[47]

Burial expenses following the death of Caterina 27florins
2 pounds wax 18 "
Cataphalc 12 "
For the transportation and erection of the cross 4 "
Pall bearers 8 "
To 4 priests and 4 clerics 20 "
Ringing of bells 2 "

To grave diggers 16 "
For the approval—to the officials 1 "
To sum up 108florins
Previous expenses:
To the doctor 4florins
For sugar and candles 12 "
16florins
Sum total 124florins

The writer Merejkowski is the only one who can tell us who this Caterina
was. From two different short notices he concludes that she was the mother
of Leonardo, the poor peasant woman from Vinci, who came to Milan in
1493 to visit her son then 41 years old. While on this visit she fell ill and
was taken to the hospital by Leonardo, and following her death she was
buried by her son with such sumptuous funeral.[48]
This deduction of the psychological writer of romances is not capable of
proof, but it can lay claim to so many inner probabilities, it agrees so well
with everything we know besides about Leonardo's emotional activity that I
cannot refrain from accepting it as correct. Leonardo succeeded in forcing
his feelings under the yoke of investigation and in inhibiting their free
utterance, but even in him there were episodes in which the suppression
obtained expression, and one of these was the death of his mother whom he
once loved so ardently. Through this account of the burial expenses he
represents to us the mourning of his mother in an almost unrecognizable
distortion. We wonder how such a distortion could have come about, and we
certainly cannot grasp it when viewed under normal mental processes. But
similar mechanisms are familiar to us under the abnormal conditions of
neuroses, and especially in the so-called compulsion neurosis. Here one can
observe how the expressions of more intensive feelings have been displaced
to trivial and even foolish performances. The opposing forces succeeded in
debasing the expression of these repressed feelings to such an extent that
one is forced to estimate the intensity of these feelings as extremely
unimportant, but the imperative compulsion with which these insignificant
acts express themselves betrays the real force of the feelings which are
rooted in the unconscious, which consciousness would wish to disavow.
Only by bearing in mind the mechanisms of compulsion neurosis can one

explain Leonardo's account of the funeral expenses of his mother. In his
unconscious he was still tied to her as in childhood, by erotically tinged
feelings; the opposition of the repression of this childhood love which
appeared later stood in the way of erecting to her in his diary a different and
more dignified monument, but what resulted as a compromise of this
neurotic conflict had to be put in operation and hence the account was
entered in the diary which thus came to the knowledge of posterity as
something incomprehensible.
It is not venturing far to transfer the interpretation obtained from the
funeral expenses to the accounts dealing with his pupils. Accordingly we
would say that here also we deal with a case in which Leonardo's meager
remnants of libidinous feelings compulsively obtained a distorted
expression. The mother and the pupils, the very images of his own boyish
beauty, would be his sexual objects—as far as his sexual repression
dominating his nature would allow such manifestations—and the
compulsion to note with painful circumstantiality his expenses on their
behalf, would designate the strange betrayal of his rudimentary conflicts.
From this we would conclude that Leonardo's love-life really belonged to
that type of homosexuality, the psychic development of which we were able
to disclose, and the appearance of the homosexual situation in his vulture-
phantasy would become comprehensible to us, for it states nothing more or
less than what we have asserted before concerning that type. It requires the
following interpretation: Through the erotic relations to my mother I
became a homosexual.[49]

IV

The vulture phantasy of Leonardo still absorbs our interest. In words
which only too plainly recall a sexual act ("and has many times struck
against my lips with his tail"), Leonardo emphasizes the intensity of the
erotic relations between the mother and the child. A second memory content
of the phantasy can readily be conjectured from the association of the
activity of the mother (of the vulture) with the accentuation of the mouth

zone. We can translate it as follows: My mother has pressed on my mouth
innumerable passionate kisses. The phantasy is composed of the memories
of being nursed and of being kissed by the mother.

MONA LISA

A kindly nature has bestowed upon the artist the capacity to express in
artistic productions his most secret psychic feelings hidden even to himself,
which powerfully affect outsiders who are strangers to the artist without
their being able to state whence this emotivity comes. Should there be no
evidence in Leonardo's work of that which his memory retained as the
strongest impression of his childhood? One would have to expect it.

However, when one considers what profound transformations an impression
of an artist has to experience before it can add its contribution to the work of
art, one is obliged to moderate considerably his expectation of
demonstrating something definite. This is especially true in the case of
Leonardo.
He who thinks of Leonardo's paintings will be reminded by the
remarkably fascinating and puzzling smile which he enchanted on the lips
of all his feminine figures. It is a fixed smile on elongated, sinuous lips
which is considered characteristic of him and is preferentially designated as
"Leonardesque." In the singular and beautiful visage of the Florentine
Monna Lisa del Giocondo it has produced the greatest effect on the
spectators and even perplexed them. This smile was in need of an
interpretation, and received many of the most varied kind but none of them
was considered satisfactory. As Gruyer puts it: "It is almost four centuries
since Monna Lisa causes all those to lose their heads who have looked upon
her for some time."[50]
Muther states:[51] "What fascinates the spectator is the demoniacal charm
of this smile. Hundreds of poets and writers have written about this woman,
who now seems to smile upon us seductively and now to stare coldly and
lifelessly into space, but nobody has solved the riddle of her smile, nobody
has interpreted her thoughts. Everything, even the scenery is mysterious and
dream-like, trembling as if in the sultriness of sensuality."
The idea that two diverse elements were united in the smile of Monna Lisa
has been felt by many critics. They therefore recognize in the play of
features of the beautiful Florentine lady the most perfect representation of
the contrasts dominating the love-life of the woman which is foreign to
man, as that of reserve and seduction, and of most devoted tenderness and
inconsiderateness in urgent and consuming sensuality. Müntz[52] expresses
himself in this manner: "One knows what indecipherable and fascinating
enigma Monna Lisa Gioconda has been putting for nearly four centuries to
the admirers who crowd around her. No artist (I borrow the expression of
the delicate writer who hides himself under the pseudonym of Pierre de
Corlay) has ever translated in this manner the very essence of femininity:
the tenderness and coquetry, the modesty and quiet voluptuousness, the
whole mystery of the heart which holds itself aloof, of a brain which

reflects, and of a personality who watches itself and yields nothing from
herself except radiance...." The Italian Angelo Conti[53] saw the picture in
the Louvre illumined by a ray of the sun and expressed himself as follows:
"The woman smiled with a royal calmness, her instincts of conquest, of
ferocity, the entire heredity of the species, the will of seduction and
ensnaring, the charm of the deceiver, the kindness which conceals a cruel
purpose, all that appears and disappears alternately behind the laughing veil
and melts into the poem of her smile.... Good and evil, cruelty and
compassion, graceful and cat-like, she laughed...."
Leonardo painted this picture four years, perhaps from 1503 until 1507,
during his second sojourn in Florence when he was about the age of fifty
years. According to Vasari he applied the choicest artifices in order to divert
the lady during the sittings and to hold that smile firmly on her features. Of
all the gracefulness that his brush reproduced on the canvas at that time the
picture preserves but very little in its present state. During its production it
was considered the highest that art could accomplish; it is certain, however,
that it did not satisfy Leonardo himself, that he pronounced it as unfinished
and did not deliver it to the one who ordered it, but took it with him to
France where his benefactor Francis I, acquired it for the Louvre.
Let us leave the physiognomic riddle of Monna Lisa unsolved, and let us
note the unequivocal fact that her smile fascinated the artist no less than all
the spectators for these 400 years. This captivating smile had thereafter
returned in all of his pictures and in those of his pupils. As Leonardo's
Monna Lisa was a portrait we cannot assume that he has added to her face a
trait of his own so difficult to express which she herself did not possess. It
seems, we cannot help but believe, that he found this smile in his model and
became so charmed by it that from now on he endowed it on all the free
creations of his phantasy. This obvious conception is, e.g., expressed by A.
Konstantinowa in the following manner:[54]
"During the long period in which the master occupied himself with the
portrait of Monna Lisa del Gioconda, he entered into the physiognomic
delicacies of this feminine face with such sympathy of feeling that he
transferred these creatures, especially the mysterious smile and the peculiar
glance, to all faces which he later painted or drew. The mimic peculiarity of
Gioconda can even be perceived in the picture of John the Baptist in the

Louvre. But above all they are distinctly recognized in the features of Mary
in the picture of St. Anne of the Louvre."
But the case could have been different. The need for a deeper reason for
the fascination which the smile of Gioconda exerted on the artist from
which he could not rid himself has been felt by more than one of his
biographers. W. Pater, who sees in the picture of Monna Lisa the
embodiment of the entire erotic experience of modern man, and discourses
so excellently on "that unfathomable smile always with a touch of
something sinister in it, which plays over all Leonardo's work," leads us to
another track when he says:[55]
"Besides, the picture is a portrait. From childhood we see this image
defining itself on the fabric of his dream; and but for express historical
testimony, we might fancy that this was but his ideal lady, embodied and
beheld at last."
Herzfeld surely must have had something similar in mind when stating
that in Monna Lisa Leonardo encountered himself and therefore found it
possible to put so much of his own nature into the picture, "whose features
from time immemorial have been imbedded with mysterious sympathy in
Leonardo's soul."[56]
Let us endeavor to clear up these intimations. It was quite possible that
Leonardo was fascinated by the smile of Monna Lisa, because it had
awakened something in him which had slumbered in his soul for a long
time, in all probability an old memory. This memory was of sufficient
importance to stick to him once it had been aroused; he was forced
continually to provide it with new expression. The assurance of Pater that
we can see an image like that of Monna Lisa defining itself from Leonardo's
childhood on the fabric of his dreams, seems worthy of belief and deserves
to be taken literally.
Vasari mentions as Leonardo's first artistic endeavors, "heads of women
who laugh."[57] The passage, which is beyond suspicion, as it is not meant
to prove anything, reads more precisely as follows:[58] "He formed in his
youth some laughing feminine heads out of lime, which have been
reproduced in plaster, and some heads of children, which were as beautiful
as if modeled by the hands of a master...."

Thus we discover that his practice of art began with the representation of
two kinds of objects, which would perforce remind us of the two kinds of
sexual objects which we have inferred from the analysis of his vulture
phantasy. If the beautiful children's heads were reproductions of his own
childish person, then the laughing women were nothing else but
reproductions of Caterina, his mother, and we are beginning to have an
inkling of the possibility that his mother possessed that mysterious smile
which he lost, and which fascinated him so much when he found it again in
the Florentine lady.[59]

SAINT ANNE

The painting of Leonardo which in point of time stands nearest to the
Monna Lisa is the so-called Saint Anne of the Louvre, representing Saint
Anne, Mary and the Christ child. It shows the Leonardesque smile most
beautifully portrayed in the two feminine heads. It is impossible to find out
how much earlier or later than the portrait of Monna Lisa Leonardo began to
paint this picture. As both works extended over years, we may well assume
that they occupied the master simultaneously. But it would best harmonize
with our expectation if precisely the absorption in the features of Monna
Lisa would have instigated Leonardo to form the composition of Saint Anne
from his phantasy. For if the smile of Gioconda had conjured up in him the
memory of his mother, we would naturally understand that he was first
urged to produce a glorification of motherhood, and to give back to her the
smile he found in that prominent lady. We may thus allow our interest to
glide over from the portrait of Monna Lisa to this other hardly less beautiful
picture, now also in the Louvre.
Saint Anne with the daughter and grandchild is a subject seldom treated in
the Italian art of painting; at all events Leonardo's representation differs
widely from all that is otherwise known. Muther states:[60]
"Some masters like Hans Fries, the older Holbein, and Girolamo dei Libri,
made Anne sit near Mary and placed the child between the two. Others like
Jakob Cornelicz in his Berlin pictures, represented Saint Anne as holding in
her arm the small figure of Mary upon which sits the still smaller figure of
the Christ child." In Leonardo's picture Mary sits on her mother's lap, bent
forward and is stretching out both arms after the boy who plays with a little
lamb, and must have slightly maltreated it. The grandmother has one of her
unconcealed arms propped on her hip and looks down on both with a
blissful smile. The grouping is certainly not quite unconstrained. But the
smile which is playing on the lips of both women, although unmistakably
the same as in the picture of Monna Lisa, has lost its sinister and mysterious
character; it expresses a calm blissfulness.[61]
On becoming somewhat engrossed in this picture it suddenly dawns upon
the spectator that only Leonardo could have painted this picture, as only he
could have formed the vulture phantasy. This picture contains the synthesis
of the history of Leonardo's childhood, the details of which are explainable
by the most intimate impressions of his life. In his father's home he found

not only the kind step-mother Donna Albiera, but also the grandmother, his
father's mother, Monna Lucia, who we will assume was not less tender to
him than grandmothers are wont to be. This circumstance must have
furnished him with the facts for the representation of a childhood guarded
by a mother and grandmother. Another striking feature of the picture
assumes still greater significance. Saint Anne, the mother of Mary and the
grandmother of the boy who must have been a matron, is formed here
perhaps somewhat more mature and more serious than Saint Mary, but still
as a young woman of unfaded beauty. As a matter of fact Leonardo gave the
boy two mothers, the one who stretched out her arms after him and another
who is seen in the background, both are represented with the blissful smile
of maternal happiness. This peculiarity of the picture has not failed to excite
the wonder of the authors. Muther, for instance, believes that Leonardo
could not bring himself to paint old age, folds and wrinkles, and therefore
formed also Anne as a woman of radiant beauty. Whether one can be
satisfied with this explanation is a question. Other writers have taken
occasion to deny generally the sameness of age of mother and daughter.[62]
However, Muther's tentative explanation is sufficient proof for the fact that
the impression of Saint Anne's youthful appearance was furnished by the
picture and is not an imagination produced by a tendency.
Leonardo's childhood was precisely as remarkable as this picture. He has
had two mothers, the first his true mother, Caterina, from whom he was torn
away between the age of three and five years, and a young tender step-
mother, Donna Albiera, his father's wife. By connecting this fact of his
childhood with the one mentioned above and condensing them into a
uniform fusion, the composition of Saint Anne, Mary and the Child, formed
itself in him. The maternal form further away from the boy designated as
grandmother, corresponds in appearance and in spatial relation to the boy,
with the real first mother, Caterina. With the blissful smile of Saint Anne the
artist actually disavowed and concealed the envy which the unfortunate
mother felt when she was forced to give up her son to her more aristocratic
rival, as once before her lover.
Our feeling that the smile of Monna Lisa del Gioconda awakened in the
man the memory of the mother of his first years of childhood would thus be
confirmed from another work of Leonardo. Following the production of
Monna Lisa, Italian artists depicted in Madonnas and prominent ladies the

humble dipping of the head and the peculiar blissful smile of the poor
peasant girl Caterina, who brought to the world the noble son who was
destined to paint, investigate, and suffer.
When Leonardo succeeded in reproducing in the face of Monna Lisa the
double sense comprised in this smile, namely, the promise of unlimited
tenderness, and sinister threat (in the words of Pater), he remained true even
in this to the content of his earliest reminiscence. For the love of the mother
became his destiny, it determined his fate and the privations which were in
store for him. The impetuosity of the caressing to which the vulture
phantasy points was only too natural. The poor forsaken mother had to give
vent through mother's love to all her memories of love enjoyed as well as to
all her yearnings for more affection; she was forced to it, not only in order
to compensate herself for not having a husband, but also the child for not
having a father who wanted to love it. In the manner of all ungratified
mothers she thus took her little son in place of her husband, and robbed him
of a part of his virility by the too early maturing of his eroticism. The love
of the mother for the suckling whom she nourishes and cares for is
something far deeper reaching than her later affection for the growing child.
It is of the nature of a fully gratified love affair, which fulfills not only all
the psychic wishes but also all physical needs, and when it represents one of
the forms of happiness attainable by man it is due, in no little measure, to
the possibility of gratifying without reproach also wish feelings which were
long repressed and designated as perverse.[63] Even in the happiest recent
marriage the father feels that his child, especially the little boy has become
his rival, and this gives origin to an antagonism against the favorite one
which is deeply rooted in the unconscious.
When in the prime of his life Leonardo re-encountered that blissful and
ecstatic smile as it had once encircled his mother's mouth in caressing, he
had long been under the ban of an inhibition, forbidding him ever again to
desire such tenderness from women's lips. But as he had become a painter
he endeavored to reproduce this smile with his brush and furnish all his
pictures with it, whether he executed them himself or whether they were
done by his pupils under his direction, as in Leda, John, and Bacchus. The
latter two are variations of the same type. Muther says: "From the locust
eater of the Bible Leonardo made a Bacchus, an Apollo, who with a
mysterious smile on his lips, and with his soft thighs crossed, looks on us

with infatuated eyes." These pictures breathe a mysticism into the secret of
which one dares not penetrate; at most one can make the effort to construct
the connection to Leonardo's earlier productions. The figures are again
androgynous but no longer in the sense of the vulture phantasy, they are
pretty boys of feminine tenderness with feminine forms; they do not cast
down their eyes but gaze mysteriously triumphant, as if they knew of a great
happy issue concerning which one must remain quiet; the familiar
fascinating smile leads us to infer that it is a love secret. It is possible that in
these forms Leonardo disavowed and artistically conquered the unhappiness
of his love life, in that he represented the wish fulfillment of the boy
infatuated with his mother in such blissful union of the male and female
nature.

JOHN THE BAPTIST

V

Among the entries in Leonardo's diaries there is one which absorbs the
reader's attention through its important content and on account of a small
formal error. In July, 1504, he wrote:
"Adi 9 Luglio, 1504, mercoledi, a ore 7 mori Ser Piero da Vinci notalio al
palazzo del Potestà, mio padre, a ore 7. Era d'età d'anni 80, lasciò 10 figlioli
maschi e 2 feminine."[64]
The notice as we see deals with the death of Leonardo's father. The slight
error in its form consists in the fact that in the computation of the time "at 7
o'clock" is repeated two times, as if Leonardo had forgotten at the end of the
sentence that he had already written it at the beginning. It is only a triviality
to which any one but a psychoanalyst would pay no attention. Perhaps he
would not even notice it, or if his attention would be called to it he would
say "that can happen to anybody during absent-mindedness or in an
affective state and has no further meaning."
The psychoanalyst thinks differently; to him nothing is too trifling as a
manifestation of hidden psychic processes; he has long learned that such
forgetting or repetition is full of meaning, and that one is indebted to the
"absent-mindedness" when it makes possible the betrayal of otherwise
concealed feelings.
We would say that, like the funeral account of Caterina and the expense
account of the pupils, this notice, too, corresponds to a case in which
Leonardo was unsuccessful in suppressing his affects, and the long hidden
feeling forcibly obtained a distorted expression. Also the form is similar, it
shows the same pedantic precision, the same pushing forward of numbers.
[65]

We call such a repetition a perseveration. It is an excellent means to
indicate the affective accentuation. One recalls for example Saint Peter's
angry speech against his unworthy representative on earth, as given in
Dante's Paradiso:[66]
"Quegli ch'usurpa in terra il luoga mio
Il luoga mio, il luogo mio, che vaca
Nella presenza del Figliuol di Dio,
Fatto ha del cimiterio mio cloaca."
Without Leonardo's affective inhibition the entry into the diary could
perhaps have read as follows: To-day at 7 o'clock died my father, Ser Piero
da Vinci, my poor father! But the displacement of the perseveration to the
most indifferent determination of the obituary to dying-hour robs the notice
of all pathos and lets us recognize that there was something here to conceal
and to suppress.
Ser Piero da Vinci, notary and descendant of notaries, was a man of great
energy who attained respect and affluence. He was married four times, the
two first wives died childless, and not till the third marriage has he gotten
the first legitimate son, in 1476, when Leonardo was 24 years old, and had
long ago changed his father's home for the studio of his master Verrocchio.
With the fourth and last wife whom he married when he was already in the
fifties he begot nine sons and two daughters.[67]
To be sure the father also assumed importance in Leonardo's psychosexual
development, and what is more, it was not only in a negative sense, through
his absence during the boy's first childhood years, but also directly through
his presence in his later childhood. He who as a child desires his mother,
cannot help wishing to put himself in his father's place, to identify himself
with him in his phantasy and later make it his life's task to triumph over
him. As Leonardo was not yet five years old when he was received into his
paternal home, the young step-mother, Albiera, certainly must have taken
the place of his mother in his feeling, and this brought him into that relation
of rivalry to his father which may be designated as normal. As is known, the
preference for homosexuality did not manifest itself till near the years of
puberty. When Leonardo accepted this preference the identification with the
father lost all significance for his sexual life, but continued in other spheres

of non-erotic activity. We hear that he was fond of luxury and pretty
raiments, and kept servants and horses, although according to Vasari's words
"he hardly possessed anything and worked little." We shall not hold his
artistic taste entirely responsible for all these special likings; we recognize
in them also the compulsion to copy his father and to excel him. He played
the part of the great gentleman to the poor peasant girl, hence the son
retained the incentive that he also play the great gentleman, he had the
strong feeling "to out-herod Herod," and to show his father exactly how the
real high rank looks.
Whoever works as an artist certainly feels as a father to his works. The
identification with his father had a fateful result in Leonardo's works of art.
He created them and then troubled himself no longer about them, just as his
father did not trouble himself about him. The later worriments of his father
could change nothing in this compulsion, as the latter originated from the
impressions of the first years of childhood, and the repression having
remained unconscious was incorrigible through later experiences.
At the time of the Renaissance, and even much later, every artist was in
need of a gentleman of rank to act as his benefactor. This patron was wont
to give the artist commissions for work and entirely controlled his destiny.
Leonardo found his patron in Lodovico Sforza, nicknamed Il Moro, a man
of high aspirations, ostentations, diplomatically astute, but of an unstable
and unreliable character. In his court in Milan, Leonardo spent the best
period of his life, while in his service he evinced his most uninhibited
productive activity as is evidenced in The Last Supper, and in the equestrian
statue of Francesco Sforza. He left Milan before the catastrophe struck
Lodovico Moro, who died a prisoner in a French prison. When the news of
his benefactor's fate reached Leonardo he made the following entry in his
diary: "The duke has lost state, wealth, and liberty, not one of his works will
be finished by himself."[68] It is remarkable and surely not without
significance that he here raises the same reproach to his benefactor that
posterity was to apply to him, as if he wanted to lay the responsibility to a
person who substituted his father-series, for the fact that he himself left his
works unfinished. As a matter of fact he was not wrong in what he said
about the Duke.

However, if the imitation of his father hurt him as an artist, his resistance
against the father was the infantile determinant of his perhaps equally vast
accomplishment as an artist. According to Merejkowski's beautiful
comparison he was like a man who awoke too early in the darkness, while
the others were all still asleep. He dared utter this bold principle which
contains the justification for all independent investigation: "Chi dispute
allegando l'autorità non adopra l'ingegno ma piuttosto la memoria"
(Whoever refers to authorities in disputing ideas, works with his memory
rather than with his reason).[69] Thus he became the first modern natural
philosopher, and his courage was rewarded by an abundance of cognitions
and suggestions; since the Greek period he was the first to investigate the
secrets of nature, relying entirely on his observation and his own judgment.
But when he learned to depreciate authority and to reject the imitation of the
"ancients" and constantly pointed to the study of nature as the source of all
wisdom, he only repeated in the highest sublimation attainable to man,
which had already obtruded itself on the little boy who surveyed the world
with wonder. To retranslate the scientific abstractions into concrete
individual experiences, we would say that the "ancients" and authority only
corresponded to the father, and nature again became the tender mother who
nourished him. While in most human beings to-day, as in primitive times,
the need for a support of some authority is so imperative that their world
becomes shaky when their authority is menaced, Leonardo alone was able
to exist without such support; but that would not have been possible had he
not been deprived of his father in the first years of his life. The boldness and
independence of his later scientific investigation presupposes that his
infantile sexual investigation was not inhibited by his father, and this same
spirit of scientific independence was continued by his withdrawing from
sex.
If any one like Leonardo escapes in his childhood his father's intimidation
and later throws off the shackles of authority in his scientific investigation,
it would be in gross contradiction to our expectation if we found that this
same man remained a believer and unable to withdraw from dogmatic
religion. Psychoanalysis has taught us the intimate connection between the
father complex and belief in God, and daily demonstrates to us how
youthful persons lose their religious belief as soon as the authority of the
father breaks down. In the parental complex we thus recognize the roots of

religious need; the almighty, just God, and kindly nature appear to us as
grand sublimations of father and mother, or rather as revivals and
restorations of the infantile conceptions of both parents. Religiousness is
biologically traced to the long period of helplessness and need of help of the
little child. When the child grows up and realizes his loneliness and
weakness in the presence of the great forces of life, he perceives his
condition as in childhood and seeks to disavow his despair through a
regressive revival of the protecting forces of childhood.
It does not seem that Leonardo's life disproves this conception of religious
belief. Accusations charging him with irreligiousness, which in those times
was equivalent to renouncing Christianity, were brought against him already
in his lifetime, and were clearly described in the first biography given by
Vasari.[70] In the second edition of his Vite (1568) Vasari left out this
observation. In view of the extraordinary sensitiveness of his age in matters
of religion it is perfectly comprehensible to us why Leonardo refrained from
directly expressing his position to Christianity in his notes. As investigator
he did not permit himself to be misled by the account of the creation of the
holy scriptures; for instance, he disputed the possibility of a universal flood,
and in geology he was as unscrupulous in calculating with hundred
thousands of years as modern investigators.
Among his "prophecies" one finds some things that would perforce offend
the sensitive feelings of a religious Christian, e.g. Praying to the images of
Saints, reads as follows:[71]
"People talk to people who perceive nothing, who have open eyes and see
nothing; they shall talk to them and receive no answer; they shall adore
those who have ears and hear nothing; they shall burn lamps for those who
do not see."
Or: Concerning mourning on Good Friday (p. 297):
"In all parts of Europe great peoples will bewail the death of one man who
died in the Orient."
It was asserted of Leonardo's art that he took away the last remnant of
religious attachment from the holy figures and put them into human form in
order to depict in them great and beautiful human feelings. Muther praises

him for having overcome the feeling of decadence, and for having returned
to man the right of sensuality and pleasurable enjoyment. The notices which
show Leonardo absorbed in fathoming the great riddles of nature do not
lack any expressions of admiration for the creator, the last cause of all these
wonderful secrets, but nothing indicates that he wished to hold any personal
relation to this divine force. The sentences which contain the deep wisdom
of his last years breathe the resignation of the man who subjects himself to
the laws of nature and expects no alleviation from the kindness or grace of
God. There is hardly any doubt that Leonardo had vanquished dogmatic as
well as personal religion, and through his work of investigation he had
withdrawn far from the world aspect of the religious Christian.
From our views mentioned before in the development of the infantile
psychic life, it becomes clear that also Leonardo's first investigations in
childhood occupied themselves with the problems of sexuality. But he
himself betrays it to us through a transparent veil, in that he connects his
impulse to investigate with the vulture phantasy, and in emphasizing the
problem of the flight of the bird as one whose elaboration devolved upon
him through special concatenations of fate. A very obscure as well as a
prophetically sounding passage in his notes dealing with the flight of the
bird demonstrates in the nicest way with how much affective interest he
clung to the wish that he himself should be able to imitate, the art of flying:
"The human bird shall take his first flight, filling the world with amazement,
all writings with his fame, and bringing eternal glory to the nest whence he
sprang." He probably hoped that he himself would sometimes be able to fly,
and we know from the wish fulfilling dreams of people what bliss one
expects from the fulfillment of this hope.
But why do so many people dream that they are able to fly?
Psychoanalysis answers this question by stating that to fly or to be a bird in
the dream is only a concealment of another wish, to the recognition of
which one can reach by more than one linguistic or objective bridge. When
the inquisitive child is told that a big bird like the stork brings the little
children, when the ancients have formed the phallus winged, when the
popular designation of the sexual activity of man is expressed in German by
the word "to bird" (vögeln), when the male member is directly called
l'uccello (bird) by the Italians, all these facts are only small fragments from
a large collection which teaches us that the wish to be able to fly signifies in

the dream nothing more or less than the longing for the ability of sexual
accomplishment. This is an early infantile wish. When the grown-up recalls
his childhood it appears to him as a happy time in which one is happy for
the moment and looks to the future without any wishes, it is for this reason
that he envies children. But if children themselves could inform us about it
they would probably give different reports. It seems that childhood is not
that blissful Idyl into which we later distort it, that on the contrary children
are lashed through the years of childhood by the wish to become big, and to
imitate the grown ups. This wish instigates all their playing. If in the course
of their sexual investigation children feel that the grown up knows
something wonderful in the mysterious and yet so important realm, what
they are prohibited from knowing or doing, they are seized with a violent
wish to know it, and dream of it in the form of flying, or prepare this
disguise of the wish for their later flying dreams. Thus aviation, which has
attained its aim in our times, has also its infantile erotic roots.
By admitting that he entertained a special personal relation to the problem
of flying since his childhood, Leonardo bears out what we must assume
from our investigation of children of our times, namely, that his childhood
investigation was directed to sexual matters. At least this one problem
escaped the repression which has later estranged him from sexuality. From
childhood until the age of perfect intellectual maturity this subject, slightly
varied, continued to hold his interest, and it is quite possible that he was as
little successful in his cherished art in the primary sexual sense as in his
desires for mechanical matters, that both wishes were denied to him.
As a matter of fact the great Leonardo remained infantile in some ways
throughout his whole life; it is said that all great men retain something of
the infantile. As a grown up he still continued playing, which sometimes
made him appear strange and incomprehensible to his contemporaries.
When he constructed the most artistic mechanical toys for court festivities
and receptions we are dissatisfied thereby because we dislike to see the
master waste his power on such petty stuff. He himself did not seem averse
to giving his time to such things. Vasari reports that he did similar things
even when not urged to it by request: "There (in Rome) he made a doughy
mass out of wax, and when it softened he formed thereof very delicate
animals filled with air; when he blew into them they flew in the air, and
when the air was exhausted they fell to the ground. For a peculiar lizard

caught by the wine-grower of Belvedere Leonardo made wings from skin
pulled off from other lizards, which he filled with mercury so that they
moved and trembled when it walked; he then made for it eyes, a beard and
horns, tamed it and put it in a little box and terrified all his friends with it."
[72] Such playing often served him as an expression of serious thoughts: "He
had often cleaned the intestines of a sheep so well that one could hold them
in the hollow of the hand; he brought them into a big room, and attached
them to a blacksmith's bellows which he kept in an adjacent room, he then
blew them up until they filled up the whole room so that everybody had to
crowd into a corner. In this manner he showed how they gradually became
transparent and filled up with air, and as they were at first limited to very
little space and gradually became more and more extended in the big room,
he compared them to a genius."[73] His fables and riddles evince the same
playful pleasure in harmless concealment and artistic investment, the riddles
were put into the form of prophecies; almost all are rich in ideas and to a
remarkable degree devoid of wit.
The plays and jumps which Leonardo allowed his phantasy have in some
cases quite misled his biographers who misunderstood this part of his
nature. In Leonardo's Milanese manuscripts one finds, for example, outlines
of letters to the "Diodario of Sorio (Syria), viceroy of the holy Sultan of
Babylon," in which Leonardo presents himself as an engineer sent to these
regions of the Orient in order to construct some works. In these letters he
defends himself against the reproach of laziness, he furnishes geographical
descriptions of cities and mountains, and finally discusses a big elementary
event which occurred while he was there.[74]
In 1881, J. P. Richter had endeavored to prove from these documents that
Leonardo made these traveler's observations when he really was in the
service of the Sultan of Egypt, and that while in the Orient he embraced the
Mohammedan religion. This sojourn in the Orient should have taken place
in the time of 1483, that is, before he removed to the court of the Duke of
Milan. However, it was not difficult for other authors to recognize the
illustrations of this supposed journey to the Orient as what they really were,
namely, phantastic productions of the youthful artist which he created for
his own amusement, and in which he probably brought to expression his
wishes to see the world and experience adventures.

A phantastic formation is probably also the "Academia Vinciana," the
acceptance of which is due to the existence of five or six most clever and
intricate emblems with the inscription of the Academy. Vasari mentions
these drawings but not the Academy.[75] Müntz who placed such ornament
on the cover of his big work on Leonardo belongs to the few who believe in
the reality of an "Academia Vinciana."
It is probable that this impulse to play disappeared in Leonardo's maturer
years, that it became discharged in the investigating activity which signified
the highest development of his personality. But the fact that it continued so
long may teach us how slowly one tears himself away from his infantilism
after having enjoyed in his childhood supreme erotic happiness which is
later unattainable.

VI

It would be futile to delude ourselves that at present, readers find every
pathography unsavory. This attitude is excused with the reproach that from a
pathographic elaboration of a great man one never obtains an understanding
of his importance and his attainments, that it is therefore useless mischief to
study in him things which could just as well be found in the first comer.
However, this criticism is so clearly unjust that it can only be grasped when
viewed as a pretext and a disguise for something. As a matter of fact
pathography does not aim at making comprehensible the attainments of the
great man; no one should really be blamed for not doing something which
one never promised. The real motives for the opposition are quite different.
One finds them when one bears in mind that biographers are fixed on their
heroes in quite a peculiar manner. Frequently they take the hero as the
object of study because, for reasons of their personal emotional life, they
bear him a special affection from the very outset. They then devote
themselves to a work of idealization which strives to enroll the great men
among their infantile models, and to revive through him, as it were, the
infantile conception of the father. For the sake of this wish they wipe out the
individual features in his physiognomy, they rub out the traces of his life's

struggle with inner and outer resistances, and do not tolerate in him
anything of human weakness or imperfection; they then give us a cold,
strange, ideal form instead of the man to whom we could feel distantly
related. It is to be regretted that they do this, for they thereby sacrifice the
truth to an illusion, and for the sake of their infantile phantasies they let slip
the opportunity to penetrate into the most attractive secrets of human nature.
[76]

Leonardo himself, judging from his love for the truth and his
inquisitiveness, would have interposed no objections to the effort of
discovering the determinations of his psychic and intellectual development
from the trivial peculiarities and riddles of his nature. We respect him by
learning from him. It does no injury to his greatness to study the sacrifices
which his development from the child must have entailed, and to the
compile factors which have stamped on his person the tragic feature of
failure.
Let us expressly emphasize that we have never considered Leonardo as a
neurotic or as a "nervous person" in the sense of this awkward term.
Whoever takes it amiss that we should even dare apply to him viewpoints
gained from pathology, still clings to prejudices which we have at present
justly given up. We no longer believe that health and disease, normal and
nervous, are sharply distinguished from each other, and that neurotic traits
must be judged as proof of general inferiority. We know to-day that neurotic
symptoms are substitutive formations for certain repressive acts which have
to be brought about in the course of our development from the child to the
cultural man, that we all produce such substitutive formations, and that only
the amount, intensity, and distribution of these substitutive formations
justify the practical conception of illness and the conclusion of
constitutional inferiority. Following the slight signs in Leonardo's
personality we would place him near that neurotic type which we designate
as the "compulsive type," and we would compare his investigation with the
"reasoning mania" of neurotics, and his inhibitions with the so-called
"abulias" of the latter.
The object of our work was to explain the inhibitions in Leonardo's sexual
life and in his artistic activity. For this purpose we shall now sum up what
we could discover concerning the course of his psychic development.

We were unable to gain any knowledge about his hereditary factors, on the
other hand we recognize that the accidental circumstances of his childhood
produced a far reaching disturbing effect. His illegitimate birth deprived
him of the influence of a father until perhaps his fifth year, and left him to
the tender seduction of a mother whose only consolation he was. Having
been kissed by her into sexual prematurity, he surely must have entered into
a phase of infantile sexual activity of which only one single manifestation
was definitely evinced, namely, the intensity of his infantile sexual
investigation. The impulse for looking and inquisitiveness were most
strongly stimulated by his impressions from early childhood; the enormous
mouth-zone received its accentuation which it had never given up. From his
later contrasting behavior, as the exaggerated sympathy for animals, we can
conclude that this infantile period did not lack in strong sadistic traits.
An energetic shift of repression put an end to this infantile excess, and
established the dispositions which became manifest in the years of puberty.
The most striking result of this transformation was a turning away from all
gross sensual activities. Leonardo was able to lead a life of abstinence and
made the impression of an asexual person. When the floods of pubescent
excitement came over the boy they did not make him ill by forcing him to
costly and harmful substitutive formations; owing to the early preference for
sexual inquisitiveness, the greater part of the sexual needs could be
sublimated into a general thirst after knowledge and so elude repression. A
much smaller portion of the libido was applied to sexual aims, and
represented the stunted sexual life of the grown up. In consequence of the
repression of the love for the mother this portion assumed a homosexual
attitude and manifested itself as ideal love for boys. The fixation on the
mother, as well as the happy reminiscences of his relations with her, was
preserved in his unconscious but remained for the time in an inactive state.
In this manner the repression, fixation, and sublimation participated in the
disposal of the contributions which the sexual impulse furnished to
Leonardo's psychic life.
From the obscure age of boyhood Leonardo appears to us as an artist, a
painter, and sculptor, thanks to a specific talent which was probably
enforced by the early awakening of the impulse for looking in the first years
of childhood. We would gladly report in what way the artistic activity
depends on the psychic primitive forces were it not that our material is

inadequate just here. We content ourselves by emphasizing the fact,
concerning which hardly any doubt still exists, that the productions of the
artist give outlet also to his sexual desire, and in the case of Leonardo we
can refer to the information imparted by Vasari, namely, that heads of
laughing women and pretty boys, or representations of his sexual objects,
attracted attention among his first artistic attempts. It seems that during his
flourishing youth Leonardo at first worked in an uninhibited manner. As he
took his father as a model for his outer conduct in life, he passed through a
period of manly creative power and artistic productivity in Milan, where
favored by fate he found a substitute for his father in the duke Lodovico
Moro. But the experience of others was soon confirmed in him, to wit, that
the almost complete suppression of the real sexual life does not furnish the
most favorable conditions for the activity of the sublimated sexual strivings.
The figurativeness of his sexual life asserted itself, his activity and ability to
quick decisions began to weaken, the tendency to reflection and delay was
already noticeable as a disturbance in The Holy Supper, and with the
influence of the technique determined the fate of this magnificent work.
Slowly a process developed in him which can be put parallel only to the
regressions of neurotics. His development at puberty into the artist was
outstripped by the early infantile determinant of the investigator, the second
sublimation of his erotic impulses turned back to the primitive one which
was prepared at the first repression. He became an investigator, first in
service of his art, later independently and away from his art. With the loss of
his patron, the substitute for his father, and with the increasing difficulties in
his life, the regressive displacement extended in dimension. He became
"impacientissimo al pennello" (most impatient with the brush) as reported
by a correspondent of the countess Isabella d'Este who desired to possess at
any cost a painting from his hand.[77] His infantile past had obtained control
over him. The investigation, however, which now took the place of his
artistic production, seems to have born certain traits which betrayed the
activity of unconscious impulses; this was seen in his insatiability, his
regardless obstinacy, and in his lack of ability to adjust himself to actual
conditions.
At the summit of his life, in the age of the first fifties, at a time when the
sex characteristics of the woman have already undergone a regressive
change, and when the libido in the man not infrequently ventures into an

energetic advance, a new transformation came over him. Still deeper strata
of his psychic content became active again, but this further regression was
of benefit to his art which was in a state of deterioration. He met the woman
who awakened in him the memory of the happy and sensuously enraptured
smile of his mother, and under the influence of this awakening he acquired
back the stimulus which guided him in the beginning of his artistic efforts
when he formed the smiling woman. He painted Monna Lisa, Saint Anne,
and a number of mystic pictures which were characterized by the enigmatic
smile. With the help of his oldest erotic feelings he triumphed in conquering
once more the inhibition in his art. This last development faded away in the
obscurity of the approaching old age. But before this his intellect rose to the
highest capacity of a view of life, which was far in advance of his time.
In the preceding chapters I have shown what justification one may have
for such representation of Leonardo's course of development, for this
manner of arranging his life and explaining his wavering between art and
science. If after accomplishing these things I should provoke the criticism
from even friends and adepts of psychoanalysis, that I have only written a
psychoanalytic romance, I should answer that I certainly did not
overestimate the reliability of these results. Like others I succumbed to the
attraction emanating from this great and mysterious man, in whose being
one seems to feel powerful propelling passions, which after all can only
evince themselves so remarkably subdued.
But whatever may be the truth about Leonardo's life we cannot relinquish
our effort to investigate it psychoanalytically before we have finished
another task. In general we must mark out the limits which are set up for the
working capacity of psychoanalysis in biography so that every omitted
explanation should not be held up to us as a failure. Psychoanalytic
investigation has at its disposal the data of the history of the person's life,
which on the one hand consists of accidental events and environmental
influences, and on the other hand of the reported reactions of the individual.
Based on the knowledge of psychic mechanisms it now seeks to investigate
dynamically the character of the individual from his reactions, and to lay
bare his earliest psychic motive forces as well as their later transformations
and developments. If this succeeds then the reaction of the personality is
explained through the coöperation of constitutional and accidental factors or
through inner and outer forces. If such an undertaking, as perhaps in the

case of Leonardo, does not yield definite results then the blame for it is not
to be laid to the faulty or inadequate psychoanalytic method, but to the
vague and fragmentary material left by tradition about this person. It is,
therefore, only the author who forced psychoanalysis to furnish an expert
opinion on such insufficient material, who is to be held responsible for the
failure.
However, even if one had at his disposal a very rich historical material and
could manage the psychic mechanism with the greatest certainty, a
psychoanalytic investigation could not possibly furnish the definite view, if
it concerns two important questions, that the individual could turn out only
so and not differently. Concerning Leonardo we had to represent the view
that the accident of his illegitimate birth and the pampering of his mother
exerted the most decisive influence on his character formation and his later
fate, through the fact that the sexual repression following this infantile
phase caused him to sublimate his libido into a thirst after knowledge, and
thus determined his sexual inactivity for his entire later life. The repression,
however, which followed the first erotic gratification of childhood did not
have to take place, in another individual it would perhaps not have taken
place or it would have turned out not nearly as profuse. We must recognize
here a degree of freedom which can no longer be solved psychoanalytically.
One is as little justified in representing the issue of this shift of repression as
the only possible issue. It is quite probable that another person would not
have succeeded in withdrawing the main part of his libido from the
repression through sublimation into a desire for knowledge; under the same
influences as Leonardo another person might have sustained a permanent
injury to his intellectual work or an uncontrollable disposition to
compulsion neurosis. The two characteristics of Leonardo which remained
unexplained through psychoanalytic effort are first, his particular tendency
to repress his impulses, and second, his extraordinary ability to sublimate
the primitive impulses.
The impulses and their transformations are the last things that
psychoanalysis can discern. Henceforth it leaves the place to biological
investigation. The tendency to repression, as well as the ability to sublimate,
must be traced back to the organic bases of the character, upon which alone
the psychic structure springs up. As artistic talent and productive ability are
intimately connected with sublimation we have to admit that also the nature

of artistic attainment is psychoanalytically inaccessible to us. Biological
investigation of our time endeavors to explain the chief traits of the organic
constitution of a person through the fusion of male and female
predispositions in the material sense; Leonardo's physical beauty as well as
his left-handedness furnish here some support. However, we do not wish to
leave the ground of pure psychologic investigation. Our aim remains to
demonstrate the connection between outer experiences and reactions of the
person over the path of the activity of the impulses. Even if psychoanalysis
does not explain to us the fact of Leonardo's artistic accomplishment, it still
gives us an understanding of the expressions and limitations of the same. It
does seem as if only a man with Leonardo's childhood experiences could
have painted Monna Lisa and Saint Anne, and could have supplied his
works with that sad fate and so obtain unheard of fame as a natural
historian; it seems as if the key to all his attainments and failures was
hidden in the childhood phantasy of the vulture.
But may one not take offense at the results of an investigation which
concede to the accidents of the parental constellation so decisive an
influence on the fate of a person, which, for example, subordinates
Leonardo's fate to his illegitimate birth and to the sterility of his first step-
mother Donna Albiera? I believe that one has no right to feel so; if one
considers accident as unworthy of determining our fate, it is only a relapse
to the pious aspect of life, the overcoming of which Leonardo himself
prepared when he put down in writing that the sun does not move. We are
naturally grieved over the fact that a just God and a kindly providence do
not guard us better against such influences in our most defenseless age. We
thereby gladly forget that as a matter of fact everything in our life is
accident from our very origin through the meeting of spermatozoa and
ovum, accident, which nevertheless participates in the lawfulness and
fatalities of nature, and lacks only the connection to our wishes and
illusions. The division of life's determinants into the "fatalities" of our
constitution and the "accidents" of our childhood may still be indefinite in
individual cases, but taken altogether one can no longer entertain any doubt
about the importance of precisely our first years of childhood. We all still
show too little respect for nature, which in Leonardo's deep words recalling
Hamlet's speech "is full of infinite reasons which never appeared in
experience."[78] Every one of us human beings corresponds to one of the

infinite experiments in which these "reasons of nature" force themselves
into experience.
THE END

FOOTNOTES:
[1] In the words of J. Burckhard, cited by Alexandra Konstantinowa, Die Entwicklung des
Madonnentypus by Leonardo da Vinci, Strassburg, 1907.
[2] Vite, etc. LXXXIII. 1550-1584.
[3] Traktat von der Malerei, new edition and introduction by Marie Herzfeld, E. Diederichs,
Jena, 1909.
[4] Solmi. La resurrezione dell' opera di Leonardo in the collected work; Leonardo da Vinci.
Conferenze Florentine, Milan, 1910.
[5] Scognamiglio Ricerche e Documenti sulla giovinezza di Leonardo da Vinci. Napoli,
1900.
[6] W. v. Seidlitz. Leonardo da Vinci, der Wendepunkt der Renaissance, 1909, Bd. I, p. 203.
[7] W. v. Seidlitz, l. c. Bd. II, p. 48
[8] W. Pater. The Renaissance, p. 107, The Macmillan Co., 1910. "But it is certain that at one
period of his life he had almost ceased to be an artist."
[9] Cf. v. Seidlitz, Bd. I die Geschichte der Restaurations—und Rettungsversuche.
[10] Müntz. Léonard de Vinci, Paris, 1899, p. 18. (A letter of a contemporary from India to a
Medici alludes to this peculiarity of Leonardo. Given by Richter: The literary Works of
Leonardo da Vinci.)
[11] F. Botazzi. Leonardo biologo e anatomico. Conferenze Florentine, p. 186, 1910.
[12] E. Solmi: Leonardo da Vinci. German Translation by Emmi Hirschberg. Berlin, 1908.
[13] Marie Herzfeld: Leonardo da Vinci der Denker, Forscher und Poet. Second edition.
Jena, 1906.
[14] His collected witticisms—belle facezie,—which are not translated, may be an
exception. Cf. Herzfeld, Leonardo da Vinci, p. 151.
[15] According to Scognamiglio (l. c. p. 49) reference is made to this episode in an obscure
and even variously interpreted passage of the Codex Atlanticus: "Quando io feci Domeneddio
putto voi mi metteste in prigione, ora s'io lo fo grande, voi mi farete peggio."

[16] Merejkowski: The Romance of Leonardo da Vinci, translated by Herbert Trench, G. P.
Putnam Sons, New York. It forms the second of the historical Trilogy entitled Christ and Anti-
Christ, of which the first volume is Julian Apostata, and the third volume is Peter the Great and
Alexei.
[17] Solmi l. c. p. 46.
[18] Filippo Botazzi, l. c. p. 193.
[19] Marie Herzfeld: Leonardo da Vinci, Traktat von der Malerei, Jena, 1909 (Chap. I, 64).
[20] "Such transfiguration of science and of nature into emotions, or one might say, religion,
is one of the characteristic traits of da Vinci's manuscripts, which one finds expressed
hundreds of times." Solmi: La resurrezione, etc, p. 11.
[21] La resurrezione, etc., p. 8: "Leonardo placed the study of nature as a precept to painting
... later the passion for study became dominating, he no longer wished to acquire science for
art, but science for science' sake."
[22] For an enumeration of his scientific attainments see Marie Herzfeld's interesting
introduction (Jena, 1906) to the essays of the Conference Florentine, 1910, and elsewhere.
[23] For a corroboration of this improbable sounding assertion see the "Analysis of the
Phobia of a Five-year-old Boy," Jahrbuch für Psychoanalytische und Psychopathologische
Forschungen, Bd. I, 1909, and the similar observation in Bd. II, 1910. In an essay concerning
"Infantile Theories of Sex" (Sammlungen kleiner Schriften zur Neurosenlehre, p. 167, Second
Series, 1909), I wrote: "But this reasoning and doubting serves as a model for all later
intellectual work in problems, and the first failure acts as a paralyzer for all times."
[24] Scognamiglio 1. c., p. 15.
[25] Cited by Scognamiglio from the Codex Atlanticus, p. 65.
[26] Cf. here the "Bruchstück einer Hysterieanalyse," in Neurosenlehre, Second series, 1909.
[27] Horapollo: Hieroglyphica I, II. Μητἑρα δἑ γρἁφοντες ... γὑπα ζωγραφοὑσιυ
[28] Roscher: Ausf. Lexicon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie. Artikel Mut, II
Bd., 1894-1897.—Lanzone. Dizionario di Mitologia egizia. Torino, 1882.
[29] H. Hartleben, Champollion. Sein Leben und sein Werk, 1906.
[30] "γὑπα δἑ ἁρρενα οὑ φασνγἑνεσθαι ποτε, ἁιλἁ φηλεἱας ἁπἁσας," cited by v. Römer. Über
die androgynische Idee des Lebens, Jahrb. f. Sexuelle Zwischenstufen, V, 1903, p. 732.
[31] Plutarch: Veluti scarabaeos mares tantum esse putarunt Aegyptii sic inter vultures mares
non inveniri statuerunt
[32] Horapollinis Niloi Hieroglyphica edidit Conradus Leemans Amstelodami, 1835. The
words referring to the sex of the vulture read as follows (p. 14): "μητἑρα μἑν ἑπειδἡ ἁρρεν ἑν
τοὑτω γἑνει τὡων οὑχ ὑπἁρχει."
[33] E. Müntz, 1. c., p. 282.
[34] E. Müntz, 1. c.
[35] See the illustrations in Lanzone l. c. T. CXXXVI-VIII.

[36] v. Römer l. c.
[37] Cf. the observations in the Jahrbuch für Psychoanalytische und Psychopathologische
Forschungen, Vol. I, 1909.
[38] Cf. Richard Payne Knight: The Cult of Priapus.
[39] Prominently among those who undertook these investigations are I. Sadger, whose
results I can essentially corroborate from my own experience. I am also aware that Stekel of
Vienna, Ferenczi of Budapest, and Brill of New York, came to the same conclusions.
[40] Edm. Solmi: Leonardo da Vinci, German translation, p. 152.
[41] Solmi, 1. c. p. 203.
[42] Leonardo thus behaves like one who was in the habit of making a daily confession to
another person whom he now replaced by his diary. For an assumption as to who this person
may have been see Merejkowski, p. 309.
[43] M. Herzfeld: Leonardo da Vinci, 1906, p. 141.
[44] The wording is that of Merejkowski, 1. c. p. 237.
[45] The equestrian monument of Francesco Sforza.
[46] The full wording is found in M. Herzfeld, 1. c. p. 45.
[47] Merejkowski 1. c.—As a disappointing illustration of the vagueness of the information
concerning Leonardo's intimate life, meager as it is, I mention the fact that the same expense
account is given by Solmi with considerable variation (German translation, p. 104). The most
serious difference is the substitution of florins by soldi. One may assume that in this account
florins do not mean the old "gold florins," but those used at a later period which amounted to
1-2/3 lira or 33½ soldi.—Solmi represents Caterina as a servant who had taken care of
Leonardo's household for a certain time. The source from which the two representations of this
account were taken was not accessible to me.
[48] "Caterina came in July, 1493."
[49] The manner of expression through which the repressed libidio could manifest itself in
Leonardo, such as circumstantiality and marked interest in money, belongs to those traits of
character which emanate from anal eroticism. Cf. Character und Analerotik in the second
series of my Sammlung zur Neurosenlehre, 1909, also Brill's Psychoanalysis, its Theories and
Practical Applications, Chap. XIII, Anal Eroticism and Character, Saunders, Philadelphia.
[50] Seidlitz: Leonardo da Vinci, II Bd., p. 280.
[51] Geschichte der Malerei, Bd. I, p. 314.
[52] l. c. p. 417.
[53] A. Conti: Leonardo pittore, Conferenze Fiorentine, l. c. p. 93.
[54] l. c. p. 45.
[55] W. Pater: The Renaissance, p. 124, The Macmillan Co., 1910.
[56] M. Herzfeld: Leonardo da Vinci, p. 88.

[57] Scognamiglio, l. c. p. 32.
[58] L. Schorn, Bd. III, 1843, p. 6.
[59] The same is assumed by Merejkowski, who imagined a childhood for Leonardo which
deviates in the essential points from ours, drawn from the results of the vulture phantasy. But if
Leonardo himself had displayed this smile, tradition hardly would have failed to report to us
this coincidence.
[60] l. c. p. 309.
[61] A. Konstantinowa, l. c., says: "Mary looks tenderly down on her beloved child with a
smile that recalls the mysterious expression of la Gioconda." Elsewhere speaking of Mary she
says: "The smile of Gioconda floats upon her features."
[62] Cf. v. Seidlitz, l. c. Bd. II, p. 274.
[63] Cf. Three Contributions to the Theory of Sex, translated by A. A. Brill, 2nd edition,
1916, Monograph series.
[64] "On the 9th of July, 1504, Wednesday at 7 o'clock died Ser Piero da Vinci, notary at the
palace of the Podesta, my father, at 7 o'clock. He was 80 years old, left 10 sons and 2
daughters." (E. Müntz, l. c. p. 13.)
[65] I shall overlook a greater error committed by Leonardo in his notice in that he gives his
77-year-old father 80 years.
[66] "He who usurps on earth my place, my place, my place, which is void in the presence of
the Son of God, has made out of my cemetery a sewer." Canto XXXVII.
[67] It seems that in that passage of the diary Leonardo also erred in the number of his sisters
and brothers, which stands in remarkable contrast to the apparent exactness of the same.
[68] v. Seidlitz, l. c., II, p. 270.
[69] Solmi, Conf. fior, p. 13.
[70] Müntz, l. c., La Religion de Leonardo, p. 292, etc.
[71] Herzfeld, p. 292.
[72] Vasari, translated by Schorn, 1843.
[73] Ebenda, p. 39.
[74] Concerning these letters and the combinations connected with them see Müntz, l. c., p.
82; for the wording of the same and for the notices connected with them see Herzfeld, l. c., p.
223.
[75] Besides, he lost some time in that he even made a drawing of a braided cord in which
one could follow the thread from one end to the other, until it formed a perfectly circular
figure; a very difficult and beautiful drawing of this kind is engraved on copper, in the center
of it one can read the words: "Leonardus Vinci Academia" (p. 8).
[76] This criticism holds quite generally and is not aimed at Leonardo's biographers in
particular.

[77] Seidlitz II, p. 271.
[78] La natura è piena d'infinite ragionè che non furono mai in isperienza, M. Herzfeld, l. c.
p. II.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LEONARDO DA
VINCI: A PSYCHOSEXUAL STUDY OF AN INFANTILE
REMINISCENCE ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be
renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law
means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States
without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying
and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a
registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook,
except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge
anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg
eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by
U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any
other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you
agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License
available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work,
you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement,
you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy
of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to
be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on
or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying
with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you
follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation”
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are

located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing
Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can
easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you
share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a
constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work.
The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied
or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in
the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from
texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice
indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the
work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a
work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on
the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs
1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the
permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the
copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License
terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently
displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or
immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the
official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no
additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of
exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work
in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format
must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph
1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply
with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in
this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project

Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works
not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and
the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription
errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that
damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except
for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to
you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you
can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund.
If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to

you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you
may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable
to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum
disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause
to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg
work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the

efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of
life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring
that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for
generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)
(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s
laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516,
Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment

including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort,
much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods
and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg
eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a

copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how
to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
newsletter to hear about new eBooks.