[newheart]

In Leonardo's writings, he mentions "Giacomo Andrea's Vitruvius" — seemingly a direct reference to the illustrated Ferrara manuscript. Secondly, Leonardo had dinner with Giacomo Andrea in July 1490, the year in which both men are thought to have drawn their Vitruvian men. Experts believe Leonardo would have probed Giacomo Andrea's knowledge of Vitruvius when they met. And though both drawings interpret Vitruvius' words similarly, Leonardo's is perfectly executed, while Giacomo Andrea's is full of false starts and revisions, none of which would have been necessary if he had simply copied Leonardo's depiction.

Stupid headline. Copy? Looks like to me, from the article itself, that the two men discussed the concept and the discussion itself is apparently referenced in Leonardo's notes. So the attempt to disparage Leonardo is just typical media negativity and hyperbole.

I might also point out that the last line in the quoted paragraphs in no way proves that Andreas drew his first and that Leonardo drew his second. It just shows that Leondardo was a better draughtsman.

[presidio9]

Not that I am disagreeing with your main point, but in my experience Leonardo has a special place in MSM mythology, because they can invent ANY liberal tendency for him and the mystery surrounding his life along with his obvious brilliance and foresightedness makes it believable. Thus, Leonardo was “gay” (even though he had several mistresses), Leonardo was an athiest (even though there is no evidence to support this, and the main subject matter of his limited body of artwork is deeply religious), Leonardo was afraid of “Global Warming,” etc.