Tran 1

Nghia Tran
Professor Mark Rosen
AHST 2331.002
25 March, 2015
Leonardos Most Famous Portrait
The Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci is perhaps the most famous painting in the world
and a symbol of Western culture. Nowadays it is among the greatest attractions in the Louvre,
being one of the very few artifacts that virtually anyone can instantly recognize. The popularity
of the painting is often attributed to the mysteries that enshrouded its history and origin. Apart
from the enigmatic, mesmerizing half-smile, the identity of the sitter is probably the biggest
secret that people seek to uncover. Many experts believe that the woman is Lisa del Giocondo,
the third wife of a wealthy Florentine silk merchant named Francesco del Giocondo, but is this
really the truth?
In his essay Leonardo, Mona Lisa and La Gioconda: Reviewing the Evidence, art
historian Jack Greenstein claims that the original name of the famous artwork is La Gioconda,
not Mona Lisa. He draws his conclusion based on the inventory of the estate of Salai, one of
Leonardos pupils, which refers to the masterpiece as the painting called La Joconda. The
translation of the title in English would be something like the jocund, or smiling, woman.
Greenstein also believes that until the 17th century, La Joconda was a generic title and was
never associated with the surname of the sitter. However, Giorgio Vasari and his book eventually
made the situation regarding the interpretation of the title complicated (Greenstein 17, 21, 22).
The Lives of Leonardo da Vinci by Vasari was believed to be first secure documents on the
portrait, and probably the first one to cause confusion (24). The book is considered an influential
writing on art during the Italian Renaissance, thus its biography of Leonardo plays an important
role in influencing other sources. In the book, Vasari spends three narratives discussing the

Tran 2

portrait of Monna Lisa. He states that Leonardo undertook to execute, for Francesco del
Giocondo, the portrait of Mona Lisa, his wife; and after toiling over it for four years, he left it
unfinished; and the work is now in the collection of King Francis of France, at Fontainebleau
(Vasari 37, 38). It is clear that according to the Italian writer and historian, Mona Lisa was a
portrait of the wife of Francesco del Giocondo.
Nonetheless, no source ever said that Mona Lisa and La Gioconda were the same
painting until Pere Dans guidebook in 1642. The French critic identified Leonardo's famous
painting as the portrait of Mona Lisa, or Gioconda, but many details of his account are
inaccurate, as he provides confusing information about Mona Lisa and Francesco Gioconda. Still,
he insisted on interpreting the paintings title as Mona Lisas surname in his first publication of
Leonardos writings (23, 24). The most notable scholars who follow Pere Dan and refer La
Gioconda to Lisa del Giocondo are Shell, Sironi, and Zllner. Although Vasari does not
explicitly refer to the Mona Lisa as La Gioconda, they believe he talks about the same
painting and then try to verify their assumption, either by interpreting the title of the paiting as
the name of the sitter, or by providing historical details of Leonardos life that support it (19, 27).
Among those scholars, Zllner did an excellent job in demonstrating his evidences,
interpretations, and assumptions, and he probably gives the strongest defense of Vasari (25).
However, there is no record that proves any connection between Leonardo and the Giocondos, so
his research is claimed by Greenstain to be irrelevant. Greenstain then asserts that Zollner's
argument, like Shell's and Sironi's interpretation of the title in the Salai inventory, depends on
Vasari's identification of the sitter (27, 28).
Therefore, according to Greenstain, the accuracy of the references to Lisa del Giocondo
all comes down to Vasaris identification. Then, in his essay, Greenstain discusses some of the
most important evidences used by Zllner, and shows that Vasari's account of the creation of the

Tran 3

Mona Lisa is questionable. Firstly, there is no conclusive evidence that Vasari ever interacted
with the female sitter who sat for La Gioconda, whether it was Lisa del Giocondo or not, nor is
there any evidence that Vasari ever met the Giocondos, or whomever commissioned La
Gioconda. Secondly, Vasari does not seem to be inaccurate on every single detail about
Leonardo, and his inaccuracy and uncertainty made his source less credible. For example, he
provides doubtful information on the time Leonardo was in Florence, or Leonardos finances and
commissions. Vasari's description of the Mona Lisa also includes a number of errors, including
his claim that the portrait is unfinished, and he seems to describe a different portrait, not La
Gioconda. Vasari did a great work with the materials he acquired, but it is possible that he wrote
the narratives without having ever seen the painting. He might have described the painting based
on the rumors he collected from those who had seen it (25, 28, 29).
At the end of his essay, Jack Greenstein provides us with three possible scenario for the
identity of the sitter. The first scenario is that the sitter was actually Lisa del Giocondo, and the
painting was commission by the husband, Francesco del Giocondo, as many modern scholars
believe. The the second scenario is more open to interpretation: the painting was modeled by
Lisa del Giocondo but presented as a perfect beauty. The third scenario proposes that La
Gioconda did not have any connection with Lisa del Giocondo. In this scenario, Leonardo
created the painting of his own accord to demonstrate art, and the title is just a generic name.
Greenstein does not support the first two scenarios as he believes there are not sufficient evidents
to back them up, so he leans toward the third one, claming it to be the best and most plausible
explanation (30, 31, 32). In addition, Jack Greenstein is convinced by the credibility of Dal
Pozzo and Lomazzo. The two Italian art experts did not think that La Gioconda was the portrait
of Mona Lisa del Giocondo, and Greenstein believes in their judgment, given their profound
knowledge of Italian arts as well as their great understanding of Vasaris account (23, 24). His

Tran 4

conclusion is that the name La Gioconda is not a reference to the last name of a merchants wife,
but rather a variant spelling of the painting originally named La Joconda inventoried in the
estate of Salai. If his argument is true, La Gioconda is not a portrait of any specific individual,
but rather of a generic smiling woman (32).
Considered the most famous painting ever created, the Mona Lisa, or La Gioconda, is
greatly regarded and valued as a portrait. Artistically speaking, the painting shows a masterful
use of sfumato to manipulate viewers perception and serves as a perfect example of the threequarter view that Leonardo himself pioneered. The pose, composition, background, light, and
clothing in the portrait were excellent, and they are studied and followed by many contemporary
as well as modern artistis. The smile is no doubt the main contributing factor that makes Mona
Lisa a masterpiece, but the actual reason for the prominence of the painting is perhaps its
mysterious background, or the lack thereof. The fact that it was hung in Napoleon Bornapartes
bedroom and then stolen from the heavily secured Louvre pushes its popularity all the way to the
top. The Mona Lisa became more and more famous for being famous, and it is probably the most
notable instance of art being appraised so greatly due to its context in the history of humanity. As
a result, many historians and scholars are interested in revealing the secret of the artwork,
devoting their time and effort to discovering the true identity of the woman. Jack Greensteins
argument is solid and convincing, and I also incline toward the third scenario. However, I still
prefer not to make any definitive conclusion, and leave the background of the Mona Lisa
unknown. Would the Mona Lisa still be the legendary Mona Lisa today, if its mysteries were
unveiled?

Tran 5

Works cited
Greenstein, Jack. Leonardo, Mona Lisa, and "La Gioconda." Reviewing the Evidence. Artibus et
Historiae Vol. 25 No. 50 (2004), pp 17-38. Electronic reserve. 25 Mar, 2015.
Vasari, Giorgio. The Lives of the Artists. Translation by DeVere, Gaston. Web. 25 Mar, 2015.