The Bayswater Omnibus by George William Joy, 1895.

Bernard Montgomery (1887-1976)

Bernard Law Montgomery (1st Viscount Montgomery of Alamein) was a prominent British military leader in World War II and its aftermath. He became famous for his successful campaigns against the Axis forces in Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia and was later deputy commander of NATO. He wrote several books, including his Memoirs (1958) and The Path to Leadership (1961).

In this chapter, the evidence that Field Marshal Montgomery had Asperger Syndrome or Asperger’s disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) is examined.

Life History

Bernard Montgomery was born on November 17, 1887, the fourth child and third son in the family. His great-uncle, Samuel Montgomery (known as Uncle Montgomery), was obsessed with religion and frittered away the family legacy. He was eccentric, lived with his two unmarried sisters, and was ignorant of the ways of the world. Samuel had a diminutive carriage built so that he would not have to give a lift to the local poor. He suffered from depression and was shy.

Robert Montgomery (Bernard’s paternal grandfather), a brave soldier and a brother of Samuel Montgomery, never received due recognition for what he did, because he was not a man to push his own claims, according to Hamilton (1981). He disarmed the Sepoy Regiment when the Indian mutiny broke out and was clearly a brilliant decision maker under stress.

Montgomery’s maternal grandfather, the clergyman and theological writer Frederic Farrar, was reserved and shy. He was ill at ease in company, could not make small talk, and appeared unapproachable. He tended to write for most of the day and also to spend much of the night writing or correcting proofs.

Bernard Montgomery’s mother had an indomitable will and a passion for order, method, and routine (Hamilton, 1981). Very critical of her son, she was basically affectionless toward Bernard. His father, Henry, was a bishop and was completely dominated by the mother. Montgomery tended to idealize his father.

Bernard Montgomery was a wayward and immature child. He was regarded as the black sheep of the family — a troublemaker and sometimes a renegade. He was also described as charmless, mischievous, and individualist (Moorehead, 1946). The rigidity of his personality was shown when he decided to join the army: He had a tremendous argument with his mother but achieved his aim.

In school he often dreamed his way through the day. He considered work a nuisance, and his conduct in class was abysmal or sometimes strange. He had no notion of style in writing essays and was regarded as backward in mathematics, while in Latin, French, science and art he was marked no higher than “fair.” He was regarded as being slow to grasp principles, self-sufficient, intolerant of authority, and steeled to take punishment, but industrious in things that interested him (Hamilton, 1981). Control was extraordinarily important to him, and on the playing fields in school he could plan his own battles. His behavior on the rugby pitch was downright violent.

In personality he was described as extremely egocentric and eccentric (Montgomery, 1987). He had an awkward, single-minded, and prickly character (Horne, 1994), and was described as a tragedy of personality and failed communications (Taylor, 1965). In the army, he was neither willing nor able to cooperate with his fellow chiefs of staff.

Social Behavior

As Horne (1994) pointed out, Montgomery always had problems in peer relations — in fact, he was unable to deal with his peers. He had a lifelong inability to open up to contemporaries and isolated himself from other senior officers. His lack of empathy was seen when he said that very few of his contemporaries at Staff College were any good. Horne pointed to his self-contained, solitary, awkward, unclubbable, and intractable disposition vis-a-vis his colleagues and his susceptibility to abrasive arrogance and intolerance. He was so isolated in his headquarters (he did not read papers sent to him) that he could not understand the criticism and jealousy that his behavior was causing among the British and U.S. Army chiefs. He described U.S. errors in the Ardennes battle with a ruthless clarity that was grossly insensitive and totally counterproductive. In addition, he was supercilious in his treatment of the U.S. military (Horne, 1994).

Generally, he was extremely poor at communicating with his superiors, such as General Eisenhower, whom he would lecture as if he were patronizing a student at Staff College (Horne, 1994). Indeed, he tended not to communicate with Eisenhower, and this caused major problems because the Americans could not understand why he was not advancing in the war more quickly, particularly at Caen — they could not understand because he did not explain it to them. He was regarded as scandalously peremptory and contemptuous and was christened Chief Big Wind by the U.S. military establishment in Europe; indeed, Field Marshal Brooke described his relations with U.S. soldiers as a disaster (Horne, 1994).

According to Winston Churchill, Montgomery made it a rule not to accept hospitality from any of his subordinate commanders. His essential lack of sensitivity was felt not only by men but also by women, and he was described as a misogynist. He claimed that one could not marry and be an efficient officer. Kay Summersby, Eisenhower's driver, described him as a supercilious, woman-hating little martinet (Horne, 1994).

Narrow Interests/Obsessiveness

Soldiering was Montgomery’s only interest. In comparison to another senior officer in the British Army, Alan Brooke, he was less practical and much narrower in his skills and interests (Brett-James, 1984).

He wanted to master his profession, and was full of energy. Accordin to Hamilton (1981), it was Montgomery’s keenness that stood out most. He had an enormous capacity for work and an imperturbable efficiency; he threw himself into his soldiering with a dedication that seemed to border on madness. Not surprisingly, he suggested a narrow strategy for ending World War II rather than a broad strategy (i.e., attacking over a broad front, which Eisenhower put forward and carried through successfully). Controversy remains as to how successful his narrow-front strategy would have been.

Routines/Control

Montgomery exerted control over both himself and others. What people especially noticed about him was his self-will: His iron determination singled him out from seemingly more talented, more educated and more appropriate leaders, according to Horne (1994). He went to bed rigidly at 9:30 p.m. and was extremely routinebound. He was described as a man of completely regular habits and could be obstinate to the point of bigotry — he would never admit that he had altered a battle plan (Brett-James, 1984). As a result of his inflexible personality, he was not good at seizing opportunities (Horne, 1994).

Montgomery imposed tyrannical discipline on others. He was only interested in his soldiers as efficient fighting machines and looked after their health and morale for this reason only. He totally controlled the younger officers: They did not argue with him, and they were totally obedient, like all his staff had to be (Hamilton, 1981). Any sensitivity shown to junior officers was solely on the basis of his total control and their obedience (Horne, 1994).

Montgomery could be vindictive and cruel. As he grew up, he bullied other children and was beaten himself. Even during World War I, his mother appears to have regarded him as an all-too-bossy child. In midlife he had a brief marriage to a 17-year-old named Betty Anderson; once again, he controlled everything and took over her life (Horne, 1994).

Despite his egocentricity, soldiers liked to have somebody who knew what he was doing (i.e., to have a leader in full charge; Horne, 1994). Mostly, Montgomery was an obsessively cautious commander, but on rare occasions he was capable of extreme recklessness in actions and relationships (e.g., at Arnhem and in his relationship with Eisenhower).

Language/Humor

We have no information on speech and language problems.

Lack of Empathy

Throughout his life Montgomery showed a gross lack of a capacity to empathize or understand what others might be feeling. Indeed, on one occasion he was reduced in military rank because he set fire to another cadet in military college. He had no political sense, and could not see the implications of what he was doing and how others might view his actions.

Although essentially a shy man, Montgomery showed his lack of empathy through boastfulness, vanity, and cutting out his family. He lorded it over his friends and finally became a despot (Hamilton, 1981). It appears that de Guingand, his chief of staff, was essentially a loyal subordinate but had a much wider range of human qualities than Montgomery and much greater capacity for empathy, as well as an instinctive gift for friendship and good humor that Montgomery did not have.

Montgomery's lack of sensitivity and empathy was also seen in his treatment of his son David, whom he would not allow to visit his grandmother or any other members of the family during the war. Indeed, David saw very little of his father for a period of 10 years (Horne, 1994).

Naivety/Childishness

In frontline warfare, Montgomery could concentrate on immediate tasks without worrying over other things, and was able to see things with the simple clarity of a child. This was advantageous in the fog of war (Hamilton, 1994).

Nonverbal Communication

His brother Brian Montgomery (1987) stated that a girl who was dancing with him found him stiff and unamusing. Horne (1994) noted that the atmosphere around him was one of extraordinary quietness and calm.

He showed a lack of fear during battle that can only be described as abnormal, with no trace of apprehension for his future safety. He was decorated for bravery.

Motor Clumsiness

We have no information on motor clumsiness.

Conclusion

Montgomery demonstrates a qualitative impairment in social interaction and restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests and activities. He meets the criteria for Asperger’s disorder according to the DSM-IV (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) and meets the criteria for Asperger Syndrome (Gillberg, 1996) with the exception of motor clumsiness and speech and language problems.

The issue of high-functioning autism (or autistic disorder as classified in DSM-IV) also has to be considered. He meets the criteria for qualitative impairment in social interaction, as just noted. For the second criterion — qualitative impairments in communication — it is more difficult to draw a final conclusion. One can say that there is no evidence of a capacity for symbolic play in childhood, and, indeed, he was very poor at writing essays in school. He certainly had an impairment in the ability to sustain communication; as Horne (1994) pointed out, Montgomery was a lonely man. He did meet the third criterion of restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities. Nevertheless, Asperger Syndrome is the most likely diagnosis.

Although he had serious impairment in the capacity for empathy, it is also possible that he had problems with central coherence (Frith, 1989); that is, he was always good at taking into account his immediate battlefield in both wars, but was poor at understanding the bigger picture. The serious mistakes that he made as a result prolonged World War II (e.g., not capturing the port of Antwerp and not pursuing Rommel after the battle of Alamein). His inability to communicate with his superiors, and with Eisenhower, in particular, made him extremely unpopular in the United States and almost led to him being fired from his job.

It is difficult to know whether there was a family history of Asperger Syndrome, but there was evidence of relevant traits on both the maternal and the paternal side.

Just finished watching Avenging Force (1986) and Forever Young (1992)...

Just finished watching Evil Dead (2013) and Summer School (1987)...

Alpha Lipoic Acid Main Uses and Side Effects

https://www.verywellhealth.com/alpha-lipoic-acid-88727

Alpha-lipoic acid is an antioxidant known for its potential to support weight loss and lower blood sugar levels, particularly in people with diabetes. Research is ongoing, and the benefits and side effects are important to understand. 

Health Conditions

Many integrative medicine providers believe ALA may help prevent or manage health conditions like high blood pressure. Research primarily focuses on its role in managing diabetes and aiding weight loss.

However, alpha-lipoic acid has been studied for benefits with health conditions such as:

- Liver disease
- Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS)/polyendocrine metabolic ovarian syndrome (PMOS) and infertility problems
- Cancers, including breast and colon cancers
- Brain injury due to stroke
- Neurodegenerative diseases, like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's disease
- Chronic kidney disease
- Infections, including yeast infections, COVID-19, and Rocky Mountain spotted fever
- Anti-aging and inflammation effects
- Rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, and other autoimmune diseases
- Erectile dysfunction
- Nerve function

To date, there is little evidence to support any of these claims for ALA use. Keep in mind that no supplement is intended to treat, cure, or prevent disease. 

May Help With Weight Loss

Research on ALA for weight loss is still preliminary and lacks firm conclusions. Studies have shown:

- A 2017 review of studies found that ALA supplements, ranging in doses from 300 milligrams to 1,800 milligrams daily, helped prompt an average weight loss of 2.8 pounds compared to a placebo.
- A 2018 review similarly found that ALA resulted in more weight loss compared to placebo. However, the average weight loss was only 1.5 pounds.
- In 2020, a meta-analysis found that treatment with ALA significantly reduced body mass index (BMI) and reduced weight by about 5 pounds as compared to a placebo. BMI is an estimate of body fat based on height and weight.

While these three systematic reviews offer some promising evidence, the study methods varied greatly among the individual studies, and the amount of weight loss was small. As a result, it's difficult to draw firm conclusions from them.

May Help Control Blood Sugar

ALA might help control glucose by enhancing blood sugar metabolism, potentially aiding diabetes management. The research results, however, are mixed and include:

-  A 2018 review of 20 randomized controlled trials looked at ALA use in people with metabolic disorders, including type 2 diabetes. Results showed ALA supplements lowered fasting blood glucose, insulin concentration, insulin resistance, and hemoglobin A1C levels. Your hemoglobin A1C level shows your average blood sugar over the past three months.
- A 2019 review suggested that ALA reduced fasting blood glucose and A1C levels.
- A 2021 review found that ALA supplementation reduced insulin and insulin resistance but did not reduce A1C levels.

If you have diabetes and are considering ALA supplementation, ask a healthcare provider if it would be appropriate for your needs.

May Help With Neuropathy

ALA is an antioxidant that acts to limit cell damage from harmful compounds called free radicals. The antioxidant properties may help with neuropathy, which causes symptoms like nerve pain, numbness, and tingling.

An analysis of five studies found ALA helped improve function and reduce pain after surgery for people with carpal tunnel syndrome—a condition in which compression of a nerve in the wrist produces tingling, numbness, weakness, and pain in the hand and fingers.

Neuropathic pain is the medical term used to describe the pain, numbness, and abnormal sensations caused by nerve damage. The damage is often caused by oxidative stress placed on the nerves by a chronic disease, such as:

- Diabetes (diabetic neuropathy is a common complication)
- HIV
- Kidney failure
- Lyme disease
- Shingles
- Thyroid disease

A 2021 study found that people with pain from unknown causes reported less severe pain scores when they took between 400 milligrams and 800 milligrams of an oral ALA supplement compared to those who took a placebo.

A review of studies concluded that the antioxidant properties of alpha lipoic acid could help manage neuropathic pain, though it also noted that clinical studies have been inconsistent with dosing and treatment protocols. And because ALA is often combined with other compounds, it's not yet known how much benefit is due to ALA.

May Reduce Heart Disease Risk Factors

A 2018 study suggested ALA may improve lipids, including "bad" low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglycerides, but found no improvement in "good" high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol.

However, results are mixed, with a 2019 study showing no improvements in blood lipid levels with ALA.

There is some evidence that ALA can reduce markers of inflammation, such as:

- C-reactive protein
- Interleukin-6
- Tumor necrosis factor-alpha, which promotes insulin resistance and is associated with type 2 diabetes

High levels of C-reactive protein are considered a risk factor for heart disease.

A 2019 review found a significant reduction in all three markers with supplementation of ALA.

Another study published in 2020 found that 600 milligrams of ALA given orally for four months significantly reduced these same inflammatory markers.

May Support Skin Health

ALA is an ingredient in many skin care products. In several small studies, ALA has been shown to reduce water loss from the skin and improve skin hydration, skin scaling, and roughness.

As an antioxidant, ALA may help protect against skin damage by protecting against the sun’s harmful UV radiation and reducing fine lines, wrinkles, and age spots.

However, some of these studies are older, and larger studies are needed to confirm whether ALA has these skin benefits.

Primary Mitochondrial Disorders

ALA supplementation has been recommended in people with primary mitochondrial disorders, or PMDs. PMDs are rare genetic disorders that occur due to errors in the function of the mitochondria, limiting the body's ability to make energy within cells and leading to seizures and other symptoms.

Most of the evidence for ALA use is based on case reports, though, simply because the disorders are so rare. Research data are lacking, and people with PMDs should be monitored by a team of specialists who focus on these complex metabolic disorders.

Are There Side Effects Associated With ALA?

ALA is generally considered safe when taken as an oral supplement or used as a topical (cream) ointment. It also can be used intravenously. There do not appear to be significant adverse effects with ALA.

However, some people may experience side effects that include:

- Low blood sugar
- Nausea
- Rash (when using an ALA cream or ointment)
- Vomiting
- Headache
- Heartburn

Since ALA is an acid, it may contribute to reflux. Eating a small snack (like graham or saltine crackers) when taking a supplement can help ease heartburn or reflux.

Precautions

ALA is possibly safe in children aged 10-17 years when taken by mouth in doses up to 600 mg daily for 3 months. However, when taken in larger amounts, seizures, vomiting, and unconsciousness have been reported.

Like many other supplements, ALA is not recommended for people who are pregnant or breastfeeding. Not enough research has been done to understand ALA's effects in these groups, although some studies suggest there may be benefits for people with complicated pregnancies.

Drug Interactions

ALA supplements may interact with:

- Thyroid medication
- Statin cholesterol drugs
- Chemotherapy treatment
- Diabetes medication
- Blood thinners

Sources and Dosage

The food you eat will always be your best source of nutrients. If you eat plenty of leafy green vegetables, seeds, and nuts, you may be able to get plenty of ALA from your diet. ALA can be found in:

- Kale, spinach, and other leafy greens
- Nuts and seeds (such as flaxseed, chia seeds, and walnuts)
- Plant oils (such as flaxseed oil, soybean oil, and canola oil)
- Oil-based salad dressings

ALA deficiency is extremely rare. Generally, healthy people can produce all the ALA the body needs. The recommended amount of ALA daily is 1.6 grams for men and 1.1 grams for women. There is also no set upper intake limit. 

If you take too much ALA, you may experience side effects that typically resolve when the supplement is stopped. There are cases of severe symptoms from taking large amounts of ALA, including seizures and organ failure.

In one case, a 22-year-old woman experienced tachycardia (rapid heartbeat), altered mental state, and metabolic acidosis.

Always speak with a healthcare provider before taking a supplement to ensure that the supplement and dosage are appropriate for your individual needs.

Like most nutritional supplements, ALA should be stored in a cool, dry place.

A brief summary of the science and inventions of Leonardo da Vinci

Leonardo da Vinci and Verrocchio. Annunciation. Uffizi Gallery.

As I pointed out in an earlier post, I’m not particularly interested in my YouTube channel at the moment. I think that, for now, I will leave YouTube to the horde of reactionaries and conspiracy theorists that has dominated YouTube and other popular websites for many years already, so that they can continue to yell into the void, accomplish nothing, and repeat establishment propaganda. I’m not greedy. I guess that I’m a bit glad that my YouTube channel hasn’t been taken down. All of my channels on other video-sharing websites got taken down some years ago because of censorship or copyright claims. I didn't get to use them for anything or to have any fun with them for long. Even my PayPal account got deleted about a decade or more ago because of censorship, since I linked it to my YouTube channel, though it didn’t bring me any income and I almost never used it. In order to confirm my suspicions, I later called PayPal and spoke to a representative. But, when I asked him why my account got deleted, he said that something strange happened. So, he couldn't activate my account again even though he tried. At least I still have my blog, though I haven’t taken it all that seriously either since I’ve tried to check if I can lose followers for some years. Well, it seems that no matter how many bad jokes I make, crazed propagandists like Alex Jones will never stop looking at my blog. What's also worth mentioning is that although Jones has been gone from YouTube for almost a decade, others have taken his place. The young, angry, badly-educated reactionary crowd that listened to Jones and voted for Donald Trump in 2016 is still there. Some people have figured out that they can gain many subscribers and make money by pandering to this huge right-wing crowd and telling them what they want to hear. So, nowadays, I usually see videos of reactionaries insulting, attacking, and trying to silence people that they don't agree with in the feed of my app even though I don't watch these videos. And Jones himself hasn't gone anywhere. Since he knows what to say and do in order to continue to get support from certain wealthy people, he has used other websites to continue to spew his lies and madness, and I never thought that he'd be ruined after getting purged from YouTube because I've always known who he is. So, YouTube hasn't been occupying my mind for a long time. It never has occupied my mind much. Moreover, I’ve been experiencing such debilitating fatigue in the last year that I’ve been finding it difficult to speak and not really wanting to speak. Well, this is what can happen if you have a disease that always attacks your liver, your brain, your heart, and possibly (probably) your other internal organs. Therefore, my focus and energy have been so poor for the last several months that I haven’t even been able to spend much time on reading and researching, which is what I wanted to do. Well, this is really the story of my life because I’ve always had this disease. The worst thing about my disease is that there is no cure for it. Still, because of my reading, I’ve been able to find effective supplements that make me feel somewhat better, since I now know what this almost unknown disease is called, thanks to my reading of old medical books. I think that I will talk about these supplements in some future post. I finished reading Vasily Zubov’s ‘Leonardo da Vinci’ (1961) a few months ago, and I will quote from it now because I did highlight some, though not many, pages from it. “Often we find the word “ask” in Leonardo’s notebooks: “Ask Benedetto Portinari how the people go on the ice in Flanders”. “Ask the wife of Biagino Crivelli how the capon rears and hatches the eggs of the hen when he is in the mating season”. Leonardo turned to books with such questions, in order to get primary evidence on a question that occupied him, and he turned to them when he had just developed or thought through a viewpoint of his own. Leonardo’s notes are not only the fruit of his independent observations as a scientist and artist, but reveal the diversity of his reading. Solmi’s remarks are quite correct in this respect, although his studies of Leonardo’s sources are dated in places, especially where he skips over the intermediaries and has Da Vinci reading a number of Arab and ancient authors whose books would scarcely have been read by the great Italian scientist. Now let us take a close look at Leonardo da Vinci’s attitude toward the books he read, using as our example two works he definitely knew: Leon Battista Alberti’s three books on painting and ten books on architecture. We might say that as Leonardo read the books on painting, he entered into a conversation with the author. His notes and remarks are comments addressed to a collocutor. On comparing Leonardo’s texts with those of Alberti, we seem to be witnessing a dialogue, a metamorphosis and continual development of ideas, leading at times to a direct clash of opinions. That gives individual shadings to assertions which at first glance seem to be identical. Here is a notable example. Alberti spoke rather cursorily of the reflections of the faces of persons walking through a meadow: “We see in the faces of people that are walking over grass that they always have a greenish hue.” Leonardo spoke of the same thing in a much more specific and accurate manner: “If the surface of the ground near to her be meadows, and the woman be placed between a meadow lit by the sun and the sun itself, you will find that all the parts of the folds [of her dress] which are turned toward the meadow will be dyed by the reflected rays to the color of the meadow”. And, he states further: “that part [of the woman] which is exposed to the luminous air, through the weaving and penetrating of the sun’s rays, will tend toward blue, since the air is blue”. Vasari’s biography of Leonardo contains the following lines: “Philosophizing of natural things, he set himself to seek out the properties of herbs, going on even to observe the motions of the heavens, the path of the moon, and the courses of the sun.” In the first edition (1550) this is followed by the phrase: “That is why he formed in his mind a heretical view of things, not in agreement with any religion; evidently he preferred being a philosopher to being a Christian.” In the next edition (1568) he omitted this phrase, remarking that he had been poorly informed, but he could not reconcile things and left in his biography the story that Leonardo, on his deathbed, “asked to have himself diligently informed of the teaching of the Catholic faith, and of the good way and the holy Christian religion,” and that re repented of “how much he had offended God and mankind in not having worked at his art as he should have done.” It did not occur to Vasari that his picture of Leonardo’s deathbed repentance indirectly confirmed his earlier statement that throughout life Leonardo preferred to be a “philosopher.” The clarity of mind with which Leonardo approached faith in spirits is remarkable not only for this time, but for a much later period. It should not be forgotten that belief in magic continued to hold on stubbornly through the sixteenth century. One need but recall the names of Girolamo Cardano and Paracelsus." Even before I finished reading Zubov’s book, I finished reading ‘Michelangelo: His Life, His Times, His Era’ (1921) by Georg Brandes. I will quote from it too because I haven’t yet posted everything that I highlighted. “Both Leonardo and Michelangelo were poets. Michelangelo’s verses have come down to us, and they startle us with their blending of deep human passion and sophisticated reflection. He was at bottom a poet of solid competence, but there is too much that is labored in his considerable output. Surprisingly enough in a creative artist of swift decision, Michelangelo kept on revising, improving and polishing his verses; and equally surprising, Leonardo, working with infinite deliberation as an artist, making sketch after sketch before tackling a task, was an improviser par excellence as a poet. Accompanying himself on a lyra di braccio he had constructed himself, he was able to sing songs he made up on the spot. Il migliore dicitore di rime all improviso del tempo, he was called - the greatest lyric improviser of his time. We are in no position to judge Leonardo’s verses, for they have all been lost. We do know his prose. As for Michelangelo, his prose we know only from his letters, which deal for the most part with financial straits and family troubles. They have nothing to do with art, even though they may include an occasional emotional passage. Leonardo, however, was clearly a stylist. His description of a storm - the thrice-revised word picture of the Deluge - lives and breathes, reveals the talent of a painter and musician transmuted into words. Michelangelo’s poetry is introspective, marked now by the bitter irony, now by flaming pathos. Leonardo is preeminently thoughtful and lucid, as revealed in his fables and parables. Take the one about the butterfly that burns its wings: “Thou false light, how many hast thou not wretchedly deceived in days gone by, as thou hast deceived me! Were I meant to see the light, should it not then also be within my power to tell the sun from a miserable penny taper?” Leonardo’s minor poetic endeavors reflect the clarity of his mind, the serenity of his wisdom. Michelangelo at his best impresses with the power and fierceness of his style. In Milan, where he was drawn to the court of Ludovico il Moro, and where he later executed the collossal equestrian statue of Francesco Sforza - a glorification of the individual which democratic envy would have made impossible in Florence - a practical orientation prevailed, a striving for knowing and transforming reality, which may be properly designated as Aristotelian rather than Platonic. It is instructive that the name of Plato occurs but once in Leonardo’s five thousand manuscript pages, and on that occasion in a geometrical context, whereas he constantly cites Aristotle. Leonardo’s life was not solely devoted to the cultivation of art, but was spent in practical activities, scientific experiments and the observation of nature. In Milan he began the construction of canals equipped with ingenious locks of his own design. Toward the end of his life he proposed to Francis I the construction of a canal to join the rivers Sauldre and Morantin and to serve irrigation as well as navigation. He invented one machine after another, not merely numerous war devices, which can scarcely have been very practical, since otherwise they would have rendered Il Moro invincible, but countless appliances for peaceful purposes, from modest ones to serve everyday needs to highly ambitious ones. They included an ingenious pedometer, a rolling mill for iron, machines for making cylinders, files, saws, and drills, for cutting cloth, for planing and carding, a mechanical wine press, a goldbeater’s hammer, a ditch-digger, a wind-driven plow, a machine for drilling into the earth, a wheel for powering ships. He was not only the first to invent the screw propeller and to use a screw on a moving axle as a motor, but thought of using it in flight, built small paper models with thin steel propellers that could steer themselves. He invented a device for measuring the density of air. He was forever occupied with building different types of aircraft. He wrote a study on the flight of birds, constructed wings, flying chairs, gondolas for airships. He invented the parachute. “If a man have a tent of stiffened canvas,” he writes, “twelve ells wide and twelve ells long, he can plunge down from any height without fear.” Heat radiation is the object of his inquiries. He notes that rays passing through a glass globe filled with cold water are warmer than the fire whence they come, behaving much like rays reflected by a concave mirror. Leonardo understood steam power before anyone else did. He gives a careful description of a device he constructed to hurl a ball weighing one talent a distance of six stadia. All matters of mechanical construction came easily to him. He took the use of iron for cogwheels, beams, levers and rolls for granted, though it was quite rare at his time. He constantly pondered on how to replace hand work with machines. Leonardo understood before Copernicus that the earth revolves around the sun. He discovered the law of complementary colors before Chevreul. Before Pascal he perceived that water in two joined pipes always maintains the same level, whatever the form of the vessels. He studied cloud formation. Before the invention of telescopes, he recommended that eye glasses be made for seeing the moon larger (fa occhiali da vedere la luna grande). He was a passionate student of optics. He delved into the peculiarities of mirrors. He invented the camera obscura and explained its property of inverting images. He studied the nature of magnets. He invented the diving bell, but was reluctant to publish this invention, for fear, he said, that it might be used to commit murder under water. He studied acoustics as he did optics. He had a vague notion of radio communications, asserting that if holes were bored into the earth at two distant points, the human voice could be heard over great distances. He grasped the function of the heart and the circulation of the blood before anyone else did. He immersed himself into botany, found the rules by which leaves are arranged about a stalk and tested the effects of poisons on plants. Numerous drawings of plants from his hand, testify to his love of plant life. He had insight into geology before anyone else did. He protested that 5,288 years, given by the theologians of his time as the age of the earth, were not long enough. The banks of the Po, he insisted, showed alluvial deposits that would have required at least 200,000 years to accumulate. His geological studies led him to voice cautious doubt that there could have been anything like a general deluge. Seventy years before Bernard Palissy, founder of ceramics, who is regarded in France as the creator of geology, Leonardo laid the foundations of that science. Pondering the marine shells found high up in the mountains, he says: “These shells cannot have been carried there by the Deluge. They are all found at the same level, even though the mountain peaks are often still higher. If one believes that these molluscs, ordinarily found near the sea coast, began to move when the oceans swelled, then forty days of rain would not have been enough for these slow-moving creatures to traverse the distance of two hundred and fifty miles from the Adriatic coast to Montferrat.” He grasped that these shells had been deposited on the mountains by waters that had run off - something Voltaire failed to understand two-and-a-half centuries later. Leonardo declared, further, that the reflex movements of the limbs originated in the spinal cord rather than the brain. Like Michelangelo after him, he was a devoted anatomist. He had no patience with artists who, in revulsion before flayed and decomposing cadavers, shrank from obtaining insight into the structure and true character of the human body. Unlike Michelangelo, he concentrated on the influence of the emotions on the organs rather than on the interplay of muscles. Universal as he was, he strove to grasp the very essence of life. He found the source of life in movement (il moto e causa d’ogni vita) and here as in so many other areas anticipated the future. Among the many astonishing aspects of his genius is the fact that he left his manuscripts unpublished, indeed, made them difficult of access by employing mirror-writing, from right to left. He seems to have been entirely free of scientific ambition, for he allowed no one even to see his manuscripts.”

Now listening to Supergirl by Claudia Sarne and Anne Briggs by Anne Briggs...