https://www.byoblu.com/en/2021/03/26/christopher-columbus-has-never-existed-riccardo-magnani/
Ladies and Gentlemen, a rich episode full of information, an episode with a guest that you have asked for in a loud voice. This is the citizens’ TV, so I am proud to play this role for you, on your behalf, but also for personal interest, because we have a great guest, no less than Riccardo Magnani, who is a great speaker. You will find a lot of his material on the internet. He’s one that the history loves to—I do not want to say rewrite it, but in short thoroughly evaluate it in great detail. Welcome Magnani on Byoblu.
Thank you very much Claudio and good viewing to all.
Riccardo—I’ll call you by name if you don’t mind—is a graduate of Bocconi University in economics and commerce, but he works in a completely different field. You can see that he’s got this calling; this vocation. He left his profession about 13 years ago and he is now dedicating himself completely to the study and revelation of Leonardo da Vinci. He has also written a book that is titled “This is not Leonardo da Vinci”. Did I say it right?
Very well.
“This is not Leonardo da Vinci”. And then he is also dedicated to the study of the discovery of the Americas. He will tell us about his discoveries, intuitions, interesting research. So where do we start from?
We start from wherever you want.
I guess the whole story in the end is well connected. So let’s start with the big picture.
Then let’s start by resolving the issue from the beginning, in the sense that talking about the discovery of the Americas—which is what I was initially called in for—it’s an incorrect statement; why? Because in fact the Americas were known; were inhabited obviously by Native Americans, but most importantly they were completely mapped out and this is what I want to show you, and prove you from the beginning in such a way that we immediately remove from the discussion the fact that in America went the Templars, no the Vikings, no maybe the Chinese, no but wait there is that Roman with the pineapple—then it was the Romans? The problem is not who went to America first, also because this presupposes a Eurocentric vision. Why do we have to talk about the “discovery” of the Americas when the Americas were inhabited by people who had astronomical knowledge much more advanced than ours?
Are you referring to the Aztecs, those populations?
Before them, before the Maya of the 1400. I speak of the Incas, who are the people who were first visited by those who approached the new continent. So to resolve the issue at its root I would like to show something logic, as we were talking about before, that is the approach I borrowed from being a financial analyst or economist. Logic in fact is the most incontrovertible thing, that can be used also to analyze the story.
How well I understand you.
Thank you.
Because I have a scientific background in computer science, then I also did some engineering and this has served me well in journalism. Many do not believe it, but when you learn methods of logic you can apply them somewhere else.
Because there are 2 tricks in the scientific field and in the religious one. They are the postulate and dogma. They impose something on you and you can’t deviate from that. So everything becomes anachronistic according to a date that is fixed randomly. It doesn’t make sense. So logic is the one that is more valuable than anything else in analyzing, at least in my case, the material available, which is a lot. So talking about the discovery of the Americas, which I repeat is an incorrect statement, this has been talked about for many years since the map of Piri Reis, for example, in 1513, and then all to look at the city. Yes, but in Piri Reis there is Brazil, but there is Antarctica perhaps.
Let’s remember what the Piri Reis map was.
Piri Reis is a Turkish admiral. He made this map in 1513 and with a handwritten note he refers to an infidel named Columbus, who would have used it, it is said, a similar map, a pilot book, to reach the new world. And then everybody looks at the Piri Reis map, to build all these thematic broadcasts on the mystery. Ah Piri Reis, the Americas… but in reality mystery does not exist I always say. It is a gap often induced by lack of knowledge. Then when we develop knowledge the mysteries will fall into place, like leaves in autumn. And then we go to see why there is an issue that resolves the situation at its root. There are eloquent images, and we will see it later, in which European people in the Americas are witnessed by customs and traditions, for example there is an image that I gave in direction with Alphonso V of Aragon that has a very particular hairstyle. This is a hairstyle borrowed from a Native American of the Amazon. We have an infinity of these images. Therefore there are evidence between 1414 to 1459 in which geographic representations or characters or even plants or animals are present in most of the paintings and documents of that period. These reveal not only a geographical knowledge but even a relationship. Something that until now is not analyzed. We stop precisely at the presence of geographical elements that demonstrate that the Americas were known. Let’s see what is the mother of all evidence that is Antarctica, the southern land. The southern land is said to be present in all the maps of the Renaissance.
With all the jagged coasts.
Exactly. It is said that it was represented in emulation of Ptolemy, who was the greatest Greek cartographer, Alexandria of Egypt, to give a sense and a balance to the geographical representation and to balance the presence of the continents—Asia, Africa, Europe—with the lower part that did not make sense to leave empty. And then for a sense of balance this land Australis was represented. In fact there are representations also by Leonardo then, representations that denote a widespread knowledge, not only based on cartographers such as Mercator rather than others, which identify the Terra Australis exactly where it should be. There is a map, an octant map, that was the assumption of what then became a planisphere, not this one, but the previous image, in which Leonardo exactly positions Antarctica between the continents of Asia, correct, Africa, Europe. This is a representation that cannot be just a representation of fantasy or just to give a sense of balance of a graphic representation. And if we look at the next image that is a planisphere here in Valtellina and that I trace to Leonardo da Vinci, there is a representation of Antarctica that is very precise. That is, if we see the image perhaps it helps to understand what I’m telling. It’s the one that was aired earlier in an improper way, exactly, on the left side we see the jagged coast of Antarctica with that kind of peninsula, promontory, that we find precisely under the blanket of ice. What does this tell us? It tells us that there is a geographic knowledge, among other things, a representation without ice, therefore apparently anachronistic, that reveals a precise knowledge of the lands that emerged after the Flood. Why do I say lands that emerged after the Flood? Because there was a representation by Kircher, a Jesuit friar who took up many of Leonardo’s works and who makes this representation of the lands that emerged, he said, “after the universal Flood”.
Let’s say this of the anachronistic things that you have said… that the lands that emerged in Antarctica are represented without ice and then with the actual coasts, the rocky ones in short, that now would not be visible. So if they had been made after a certain date no one would have known. And then if they are correct, and maybe we can check via satellite today etc., that clearly must be prior to when Antarctica got covered with ice.
Exactly, this in fact is the smoking gun that, let’s say, it removes all those inaccurate statements for which the Americas would have been discovered by. In reality the Americas, as the whole continent, as the whole planet, was known and mapped since ever. The fact that the coasts of Antarctica in this planisphere, as in many others, are free of ice tells us many things: (1) the precision of these representations; (2) the fact that there is no ice at least on the coasts, which therefore would have allowed one to map this continent. It tells us that there is a cyclicality that the same scientists confirm of the ice ages and temperate ones. This clears away all that… I am very unfair from the political point of view, so the whole battle of the green economy of Greta, the warming of the planet… it is actually a cyclicality that over the millennia has always repeated itself. And these maps are justifying it. Why is this analysis important? Because it leads us to understand what happened in the Renaissance, and we see it afterwards, but also because it tells us how, for example, the message that gets transmitted is wrong. It is not a fact of global warming, that is a cyclical fact, it is a problem of pollution. And the pollution that a capitalist system has induced in our daily lives should be addressed in a different way than that of global warming. So what may seem to be a theme of such curiosity related to the development of cartography since the discovery of the Americas, actually has an undercurrent of truth that leads us to understand the present. It was Oscar Wilde, if I’m not wrong, who said only by knowing the past one can interpret events…
He was the one who said that by changing the past you control the present and future.
Exactly, I didn’t want to say that, but we will get to that later because actually the big change of interpretations comes at the hands of a political faction of the time. So this reading of the geographical maps of the time, it would be enough to take even those of the sixteenth century in which Antarctica is still present, or there are coasts of North America for example that had not yet been explored and therefore could not be mapped, that removes the question of who first reached the Americas. Probably also the Romans the Vikings, but it’s not what we are interested in. What we are interested in is understanding that: a) the world was known in its entirety and there were times when the representations that we have today, including for example the Red Sea in a planisphere of Behaim that fades in color entering the sea, gives us a temporal indication of when these representations had been made because this phenomenon that we see of the Red Sea.
Can you explain it for someone who has never seen this map, leave the image maybe in the background.
Most of the images of the maps of the Renaissance show the Red Sea with the red coloring. This one, that is the Erdapfel, which is a world map made by Behaim in 1492 as a copy of a world map made by Paolo dal Pozzo Toscanelli, presents the red coloring of the sea fading when it meets the Indian Ocean. What does this mean? It means that the coloration is not a decorative coloration, but it corresponds to a phenomenon that is known to be due to a particular algae, for which both the Nile and the Red Sea were colored in red. Probably thanks to this coloring we can also trace back to when these representations were made. It is clear that we are not talking about one or two thousand years ago, because the last deglaciation for which the coasts of Antarctica could be free from ice was at least ten thousand years ago. This resolves at the root all the situations.
Amongst other things this is curious because if you have to say with what precision the coasts of Antarctica have been reproduced, or if they have been navigated one by one, but since they did not have airplanes they should have seen it from satellite. It is curious to try to understand how it was possible with the technology that we presume that they had then to be able to build maps from above so precise.
Then this opens up so many scenarios that we clearly don’t want to.
We don’t want to open, but the question, we have to ask it.
We said let’s reason by logic, so there is a time when the earth was clearly mapped. Mapped according to the knowledge that we have about that time, hence done by sextant. So you moved along the coast little by little. You did the analysis of the measurements of the horizon, the stars, and gave references that now with any satellite are much more immediate. It is clear that it is not possible that it was mapped in that way. So I repeat, this triggers a whole series of questions that perhaps can be investigated later. But right now what we have interest in is that in the Greek world, hence Ptolemy, there was a knowledge that was transferred to the Renaissance world, especially in Florence with Manuel Chrysoloras, that was a Greek present in Florence at the beginning of the fifteenth century, and who was stationed in Hungary, who was then transferred to the Renaissance world then to the Americas. But I repeat, not to discover them because there was a decidedly prior knowledge, and all these images are proving it. So let’s resolve the question of who discovered what. Even because it’s ugly, no, there is this intellectual prevarication of the Euro-centric world that says we discovered those—and Europe from their point of view, when was it discovered? So it’s really an error of method, since that is what we’re using.
And then there were also many similar construction techniques between the Central Americas and for example the Egypt of the ancient Egyptians, when they made those canoes with the exact same construction technique, but, I think it was Lake Titicaca, they made them smaller. Still today that make them smaller, but identical to those made by the pharaohs.
You have said a beautiful thing, that is… let’s get out of here for a moment and enter into my field, Leonardo. Because it is said that Leonardo’s ferry was invented by him. It’s not true, it’s not true at all. There were six stations on Lake Lario, not Lake Como, where this ferry was used, there were some on the Tanaro, some on the Ticino, in fact there are these double boats that were used on Lake Titicaca. This is a doubt that I have always had. Leonardo certainly did not invent the ferry that is attributed to him. He only drew what he saw most of the time. My impression is, in the light of everything we are going to say today, is that there has been such a transfer of knowledge from the new world to the old world that even this type of boat may have been borrowed, like the hairstyle we saw earlier, but also many other things. We are in Milan, we said about Lombardy: the Lazzaretto of Manzonian memory, coming from Lecco the Betrothed is a must, is in fact the repetition of the ceremonial square for the Inti Raymi, therefore the solar cult. The whole Florentine Renaissance movement based on the knowledge brought by Gemistus Pletho, was based on the solar cult, that Gemistus Pletho said would have reset the religious wars between Muslims and Catholics etcetera. So there are a whole series of elements and evidence, as we said before, that testify a very strong connection between the two worlds, even a peaceful one, compared to the one that developed later and we will see later with other images.
Well then, your book, which I did not show before, “This is not Leonardo da Vinci”, here it is. What do you want to tell us, what does this title mean?
Well, this title was born from the suggestion of a dear friend of mine, Stefano Trevisi, who wrote the preface and who is a musician and with whom we will talk about music—because nobody knows, but the most important part of Leonardo’s legacy is music—and it is an evocation of Magritte’s “Ceci n’est pas une pipe”, so there is this representation of Magritte that we wanted to clearly recall, presenting an untrue image of Leonardo, as most of the ones that have been used are. Last year there were celebrations for the 500th anniversary of his death and everyone was using these stereotypical images of a bearded old man wearing a painter’s hat. Actually this is the portrait of a musician that portrays Leonardo just in his function as a musician. And so I wanted to give this sense of unreality to the image of Leonardo that has been told, by asking a friend of mine to redo this—that is Salvatore Vara—this image with Leonardo with the pipe and then recall Magritte and recall etcetera. The book obviously speaks also of the question of the Americas, for that underlies all the Renaissance movement, and strongly conditions the life of Leonardo as well. We know that he came to Milan in 1482. In reality Leonardo probably arrived in 1449. This declaration will make many people turn their noses up, because they say he was born in 1452, but in reality Leonardo was born ten years earlier. He is not linked to the notary in Vinci, but he is linked to one of the most important families of the Renaissance, and therefore when the conspiracy of the Pazzi is hatched, in order to take possession of the territories in the new continent, Leonardo comes to Milan for the second time. The second time, because even in the documents, for example Vasari or the anonymous Gaddiano, they write that Leonardo is in Milan at the time of Francesco Sforza. Francesco Sforza dies in 1465 then, combining logic and documentation, that is the maximum when the two combine, at some point giving undeniable evidence, even if those who live on dogmas and postulates then question that too. So it is a reinterpretation of Leonardo’s biography, of the meaning that all the works then have within the Renaissance context. For example, this way I can arouse your curiosity and we can go a bit off the track: the Gioconda, the portrait of Lisa Gherardini, is not the one exhibited at the Louvre.
Great. I went last year, so I lost time.
Fantastic. And in the book I explain why it is not. But let’s go back to the talk of the Americas, otherwise…
Go go, so we finish one step at a time.
An image, therefore, to solve the question of knowledge prior to the modern era, there is a representation of Pompeii, that I recently discovered, of Zeus. At the feet of Zeus, there is a globe that depicts the Red Sea in the upper left part and therefore identifies a strange portion of the world. It would be necessary to understand why there is this vision of the planet because usually they tend to center it on something known. But I wanted to put this out there because it solves another question.
Let me see it again, please, let’s expose it for a bit.
And in this way we can also satisfy the flat earther.
Because there is that sort of yellow circle on the top left, what is it?
It identifies a red Red Sea.
That is a circle that you made to identify the Red Sea that is red in color.
So what we see in the center could be Madagascar or a representation, since it is also apparently white, but then we would have to see the painting in its state of preservation etc.
Then there is another curious thing, that this is spherical, it is a spherical earth right?
It’s a globe.
Globe. And was the earth known to be a globe at the time?
Evidently yes.
Because history doesn’t speak of…
We know that Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the earth. So the question is actually ill-posed. If we knew that there was Antarctica, and that Antarctica had a well-defined shape it goes without saying that they knew the fact that the earth was round.
And about flat earths, what did you mean?
That this is a globe, and I mean evidently the knowledge is ancestral that the earth is not flat.
Ok ok, on this we can say that it was obvious.
Then no, but you see that curiosity aroused. How did they know in Pompeii? In reality because there was a widespread knowledge of roundness. So once we solve these issues it is instead important to understand what revolves around the alleged discovery of the Americas. That is, what happened in the fifteenth century. Which is very relevant to what we experience on a daily basis, i.e., the use of all the museums or cities of art, Italian in the first place, but also to what we experience on a daily basis, i.e., the society we live in today is deeply rooted and founded on what happened in the fifteenth century. There is a date that is worth more than any other and that is 1459. To make you understand the importance of the Americas issue, the watershed between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance is the discovery of the Americas. So from 1492 onwards we start the Renaissance. In truth the Renaissance is based on the acquaintances formed in Florence during the council of 1438 through the Byzantine dignitaries, through Gemistus Pletho, through the introduction of texts that came from the Greek and Byzantine world, and therefore there has been this revival of the arts: astronomy, music, geometry, mathematics. This watershed in truth is not 1492 but 1459. In 1459 the Renaissance does not begin, but it ends. To attribute the beginning of the Renaissance to 1492 is a macroscopic error because it means that Marsilio Ficino, Pico a Mirandola Botticelli, Leonardo, were all medieval men. The Botticelli’s birth of Venus, the absolute icon of the Renaissance movement, would have been medieval. Among other things, we will see that it also has to do with the issue of the Americas. So 1459 is an important date precisely because it marks the end of the Renaissance and instead takes over those missions of hypocrisy and subtraction of knowledge for which we come to acquire a completely different history.
What exactly happens in 1459?
Two things. On the one hand there is in Florence the Cavalcade of the Magi inside the Palace Medici Riccardi, residence of the Medici family, and on the other hand Pio II, Pope Enea Piccolomini, newly elected, who announces the Council of Mantova to seek alliances and face the Turks who were pushing. They had taken Constantinople and therefore risked putting in danger the Catholic movement. On the other hand the Cavalcade of the Magi instead tells the manifesto of political alliances of the time: the Medici, Sforza, d’Este, Malatesta. All those who opposed the Roman power of the Vatican. And why is it so important? Because all the families that we have cited are holders of a representation of the Americas before 1492. And we speak of 1450 roughly. So this shows that there was a widespread knowledge of these things. Even in this representation, that I do not know if it has been shown, I have not seen it, the Chapel of the Magi in reality.
Let’s see if it is this one.
It is said that the procession was led by Matthias, sorry Lorenzo the Magnificent, in an unreal representation that presented him as more handsome than he actually was, he had a squashed nose, as he was hit by a truck. But in reality the procession was led by Matthias Corvinus. Why Matthias Corvinus? Because it is not the Cavalcade of the Magi, but of the Magyars, one of those seven tribes that competed to form the Hungarian people. Newly elected to the royal throne and accompanied… this is the comparison: on the left we find Matthias Corvinus, on the right Lorenzo de Medici, who are completely different. This representation is important because it connects the Hungarian world with the events of the Americas to the point that the attribution of the name ‘Americas’ has nothing to do with Amerigo Vespucci who appears only because something happens that makes history change course, and then the paternity of the name is attributed to him. But in reality it is Emeric, the son of Stephen I, who was the first Catholic Hungarian king. So the Hungarians had a fundamental role in the attribution of the name ‘Americas’. Also this is not a minor detail, because if today we think… the cradle of civilization is Greece. All our knowledge comes from Byzantium, however, from the Middle Eastern world. The knowledge of the Americas was strongly related to the Hungarian people. Draw a line and you see today where Greece lies, where Hungary lies, where the Middle East lies. They’ve all been completely superseded. So not only it has been emptied of the knowledge but it has also been emptied of a political personality, and this is not accidental, as we will see later. So I was saying the story of the discovery of the Americas was changed by the papacy. There is an image that will be shown in a moment that compares Innocent VIII, who is the Pope who died before Columbus arrived in the Americas, in the official reconstruction, which is this one, and on the left there is a portrait of Columbus done by Ghirlandaio. They are the same person. Why did he enter the scene? Because, as I was saying, when the Medici, the Sforza and the Hungarians went to the Americas, they went there with an extremely peaceful spirit, so much so that at the Chapel of the Magi, the pater patria of the Medici family, and therefore Cosimo de Medici, is not portrayed following Matthias Corvinus, but is depicted in a corner. How? Dressed as a Native American. Not only dressed as a Native American, but also dressed as the Inca chief, Pachacutèc, who died in 1459, and this seems to be a tribute the pater patria pays to the person of the New World, the highest in the priestly and royal hierarchy. What he wears, beyond the hairstyle that we have already seen coming up a couple more times, the important thing here is what he has on his head: that is the Maskaypacha. The Maskaypacha was an ornament made of gold filaments and three feathers of a sacred bird that represented the conjunction between the material world and the etheric world, and therefore it is the same meaning as the Chaperon, so much so that it is improperly said that this trip to the Americas will become the venture of Cosimo de Medici. But in reality we have an antecedent image that concerns a plate that was made by the brother of Masaccio to celebrate the birth of Lorenzo the Magnificent in which this venture appears. But it also appears here in the middle of the fifteenth century; I’m talking about Gravedona on the upper lake, I’m talking about other places that were connected to that political manifesto I referred to earlier. So the Maskaypacha becomes one of those many documented evidence for which the knowledge of the Americas and this alliance is made evident. And here another anomaly intervenes. It’s said to be a documented only what is written because an image can’t be altered, while the words can be changed. It’s the opposition between quadrivium and the trivium. Ethics, dialectic and grammar. With those you change the meaning of everything. But the image does not have mediation. This of the Maskaypacha and all the rest identifies some knowledge as I said, not only geographical but also direct and peaceful, between a political alignment and the New World. So much so that the Old World borrows a whole series of behaviors from the New World, as the Maskaypacha, the hair styles, the ceremonial square, the solar cult above all, and much more.
So from what I understand there was a whole political faction made up of these great families that already knew the Americas, and not only that, already had cultural relations to the point that there were some paintings that portrayed them with Native American headgear. So this should have already been established.
Not only that.
And it was a peaceful relationship as you say.
It was very peaceful, so much so that the two most powerful families of the time, the Sforza and the Medici, actually put a mestizo at the head of their dynasty. Lorenzo the Magnificent and Ludovico il Moro, known as il Moro because of the skin tone, as Paolo Giovio testifies too, were mestizos. They were children of the first voyages to the Americas. This shows how there was a total mixture between the two populations. A peaceful relation that is then overturned by the other faction linked to the papacy from Pius II onwards, for which, a little for the presence as we said before of the Turks, a little for the deep riches that there were in the New World and also for the possibility of not only colonizing but also indoctrinating the new populations to the Catholic cult, there was a total reversal. There was a subtraction of discovery. This subtraction of discovery is denounced in the paintings, again, of the Renaissance. And here later we will get to Ferragni (Italian influencer).
But that painting where you saw the pope and Christopher Columbus, do you want me to explain it? If you can find it then because it is very curious.
The image on the right is the image of Pope Innocent VIII who died in August 1492 and it is the statue that presides over the tomb of Innocent VIII in the Vatican.
Which one is it?
This one on the right.
On the right, the dark one.
Under his statue, which Ruggero Marino spoke of—he is however very entangled in the connection of Columbus and the papacy etcetera—under his image there is written: “he who discovered the New World”. But the New World, hence Columbus, was still to come. The one on the left that you have seen and to which I have put the papal tiara is the image of Christopher Columbus made by Ghirlandaio a few years earlier. They are the same person. Of these images in the book there are two or three others. There are images under the so-called Madonna of the Navigators, the Madonna of Mercy with the open veil that recalls the heart shape, the shape with which the first planispheres were created. And it is a logical image again. If you take a sphere and open it, what comes out is a heart image, that was then the frame of all geographical representations.
Listen, and the fact it was that statue on the right, it looked like it had dark skin, in reality it has nothing to do with it, that is a material construction matter.
Exactly, yes yes. The connections between mestizos and the old continent are others.
And how do you explain that they were the same person?
Now I’m going to tell you. So I was saying there are so many representations that show a knowledge of the New World. Flowers, plants, etc. Today is the celebration of Mary Magdalene, so there is Beato Angelico that in the representation of “noli me tangere” represents Jesus with Mary Magdalene and tells him: “do not touch me”. To avoid the end that Orpheus did with Eurydice. In reality, it is a myth that predates Jesus and Christ. Because of the opposition between the material world and the etheric world. Christ ascends and does not need to be touched by materiality, or like Orpheus, loses the possibility to realize the spiritual marriage, etcetera. The Dominicans are very important because they underlie the whole story of the Americas and the Convent of San Marco in particular. In that representation there is a representation of a flower. There is a particular, the next image, that we find also on the Malatesta Temple of Rimini, we find in the Malatesta petiole, we find on a shield of a Native American that in the codex Florentinii in Florence, it is a flower called Ludwigia Peruviana. It is an autochthonous flower of the Americas. Which is: four petals with an insert of green. If we show the image of the petiole of the coin maybe the comparison becomes more obvious. So as I said, the evidence are really many. At a certain point, what happens? It happens that the Church takes possession of all these discoveries by putting in place first of all a series of bloody events: the conspiracy of the Pazzi, the killing of Galeazzo Sforza here in Milan, the killing of Simonetta Cattaneo Vespucci—the was the model that Botticelli used to represent the Americas in his paintings—but above all there is a cycle of paintings made by Botticelli that forms the story of Nastagio degli Onesti, a Boccaccio story, in which Botticelli paints the Venus, hence Simonetta Cattaneo Vespucci, on the ground wounded in the back with a dagger. That is the representation that recalls the way in which Giuliano de Medici was killed in 1476 in the Cathedral of Florence with the help of Piero the Gouty’s daughter, Bianca de Medici, married to a Pazzi. Correct, this image. And in part of the foliage, above the scene of Giuliano rushing to the aid of Simonetta Cattaneo Vespucci wounded in the back, you can see a kind of passage that references the passage through Panama. This is because probably the very first voyages to the Americas where going the east way, and therefore the first approach is through the Atlantic Ocean—sorry the Pacific, not the Atlantic. The passage on the Atlantic ocean is suggested later on by Paolo dal Pozzo Toscanelli, who leaves a description to a Portuguese canon, Martinez, and makes a description for his king, then for the king of Portugal, in which he says to give up the way from Guinea because there is a much more direct way, traveling west, to reach the coasts of the New World where the houses are covered with gold. Clearly we talk about the myth of El Dorado etcetera. Then if you want we will also talk about El Dorado. In the next image always in this cycle by Botticelli there is the Lady of Mali. That is a reference to that old way to Guinea.
Which is the protrusion that looks like a woman and therefore
Correct. So what happens: the church intervenes.
Let me get this straight then: over here is the Botticelli painting.
To the right, a detail of it.
And over here, where is this mountain?
You see it, it’s in Guinea. It’s called Lady of Mali and it’s one of the places where the expeditions to the New World started from.
That’s what I was missing.
Sorry. Before you said why is it so important the issue about Innocent VIII, and why this double personality? Because there is a painting (I am shaffling the cards a little bit but the director has been very good) there is a painting from 1451 by Piero della Francesca in which there is a representation, not precise, more, of North America and the Gulf of Mexico with Yucatan, this one, with de Yucatan, Florida, on the bottom under the muzzle of the white dog is Cuba. The black and white dogs represent the order of the Dominicans that underlie as I said before the events of the Americas. Ok, this same representation. No, first I want to tell you a particular detail.
It’s crazy.
Piero, 1451, this is impressive. Because you can even see that… there is a lake that has an unpronounceable name in Florida that can be recognized. There is another very small lake above Florida that bears my wife’s name, Marion, and this is just as crazy because between everything you can recognize…
But then there is always my big doubt: how do you make such e realistic map if you do not have the visibility from above? Because it’s okay that one goes back and forth and measures steps, I don’t know, but how do you do it? I mean you can do it in broad terms, but not…
Correct. That’s why I wanted to solve it out at the root with Antarctica. Because that cuts the bull’s head off. In the sense that any doubt you might have about these representations you solve it at the root with that other representation. But on the subject… why did I let you have this painting? Because Piero la Francesca painted it in 1451, when in the pseudo-historical reconstruction Columbus was born. Do you know when Piero della Francesca died? October 12, 1492. Which is a date not by chance. Appreciate the fact that I’m not swearing. October 12, 1492 is important because there is another painting by Pisanello, the vision of Saint Eustace in which a character, which I recognized to be Domenico Malatesta, this one, has in front of him, under the deer, a vision of South America. So Saint Eustace is seeing South America. Again the dogs appear, recalling the Dominicans, but in the Roman Martyrology.
Then always from the east, so this also comes back.
Correct. In the Roman Martyrology, Saint Eustace is today celebrated on 30 September, but before 1492, according to the golden legend by Jacopo da Varazze, Saint-Eustache is celebrated when…?
No I don’t want to say that.
October 12. So what happens? It happens that the story of the Americas that we know is attributed to Christopher Columbus begins to take on a whole series of elements that are recurrent in the initial events of the first trips to the Americas. There is another important document, and so we close the circle on the documents, the is the “Hesperis” of Basilio da Parma. Basilio da Parma writes this set of poems to celebrate Pandolfo Sigismondo Malatesta: the loser; Ezra Pound defines him the best loser of history. In reality he is a loser who takes on a whole series of actions in order to reassemble the dominant role of Domenico Malatesta who is clearly a humanist etcetera. In the Hesperis of Basilio da Parma the military deeds of Pandolfo Sigismondo are narrated. But at a certain point some images appear, four, in which Pandolfo Sigismondo leaves with a caravel, shipwrecks, arrives on the lucky island, and there he stops in the temple of Zephyr with the beloved Isotta. We are talking about the island of San Salvador where Columbus will shipwreck. So you can understand that the story of Columbus is a totally invented story, using true elements of the first excursions to the Americas. Clearly made by the opposite faction. And in order to avoid the claiming of this faction of a primogeniture what gets done? Inquisitions. The inquisitions are supported to, first, protect the Catholic foundation against Neoplatonism, which is the real obstacle to the spread of Catholicism in the fifteenth century. But above all they are made to protect this farce of the discovery of the Americas.
At a certain point you say there is someone in the Catholic world who says now we’re going to attribute the discovery of the Americas, because it’s no good if we give too much political power to another faction. And so how do we discover the Americas? Well, let’s see what we know about the Americas. They go and get all the elements, paintings, the maps, the tales etc. and decide to invent a story.
To take ownership.
Yes, a story, because if you talk about a shipwreck, then, I mean… and the whole story of Nina la Pinta and Santa Maria, and all the things we are taught in school?
So… Nina, Pinta, and Santa are the three daughters of Piero the Gouty who are represented in the Chapel of the Magi, then where Cosimo dei Medici wears the Maskaypacha, in three different positions. They almost seem to navigate in this cycle of frescoes that is on three sides, with the Maskaypacha on their head, changing clothes and using exotic ones. Then the three daughters are called Lucrezia, Bianca and Maria. Maria was adopted, hence Santa. Lucrezia was nicknamed Nannina: Nina. So there is a strong—I had also found a document that certifies that the nickname of the three daughters was Nina, Pinta because painted by Botticelli and Santa just because she was adopted, but I can no longer find it—but it seems that the name of the three caravels is in fact was the name of the three daughters of Piero the Gouty, and therefore it further justifies an element of those first trips that was then used. Do you want to know where masts of the caravels that have returned are? Because as you know one was shipwrecked and two returned. In the Cathedral of Siena. There are two masts that are associated with a thirteenth-century carriage. In reality they are two masts of two caravels. It is presumable to think that they are the masts of the caravels that have returned. Earlier an image appeared that…
But excuse me, then did the caravels leave or not? What I can’t understand: if Christopher Columbus is an invention, what kind of journey is that? Ah, a real journey made before, by someone else.
Exactly, whoever built the tale of Christopher Columbus built it on the basis of what happened before. I was telling you the Inquisitions were done to protect the Catholic foundation. But they are made by four states: the Vatican, the Germans, the Portuguese and the Spanish. It happens to be the four states affected by the events of the discovery of the Americas. There is at the Piccolomini Library a portion of a painting by Pinturicchio that shows the moment when Enea Piccolomini, then Pope Pio II, introduce to Federico III of Germany, the last emperor of the Sacred Roman Empire, Eleonora of Portugal. Behind them, this one, behind them who is there? The one dressed in the black with the cross: Amerigo Vespucci. Here is born that plot through which to abduct the truth of the discovery of the Americas. That is Amerigo Vespucci’s grandfather, Nastagio Vespucci. That is why Botticelli made those four paintings with which to denounce the abduction of the truth of the discovery of the Americas, referring to the Boccaccio novel Nastagio degli Onesti. So there is a plot that obviously I am synthesizing for editorial needs, for space.
Also because the hour we have available is running out.
However, there are many elements that allow us to understand how the story of the discovery of Americas is, in fact, a total fiction invented by the Church at the expense of those who actually had first access to the Americas, in order to develop the change that is still taking place today. I have told you many times that the Dominicans are at the base of the whole movement. After the Columbus tale, the Dominicans became the Jesuits. Who did not exist before. Jesuits that we still find today in the double pope without function. And everything revolves around this. Monte dei Paschi di Siena 1472, Banco Mediceo ended. So banking, a certain kind of trade, above all a total virtuality. There is a very important phrase that Leonardo said that I always repeat: “nothing can be loved or hated without full knowledge of it”. Without knowledge you don’t get to know what is actually going on. That’s why it is so important to approach these subjects precisely, developing a critical sense, something that today our society has completely lost. I got angry, I burn your next question, about the story of the influencer at the Uffizi. Because it’s like bringing young kids into the spider’s web. You don’t take an influencer to bring young people to the Uffizi. You explain to young people the true course of history. The true meaning behind the works. Showing an influencer in front of Botticelli’s Venus makes no sense. If you don’t explain that the veils that Botticelli’s Venus is dressed in are a representation of North America and South America. The most iconic painting from the Renaissance and the Uffizi that we see: the red veils are a representation of North America and South America. As represented by Martin Waldseemüller in 1507 in the first cartographic representation in which the name “Americas” appears, that is already part of the mystification of history that has been built step by step through all these actions.
Listen and then what happens? This story is built, your reconstruction, and then from there begins the persecution of the people of South America. That is, the various exterminations, the appropriations, because you tell me that before, they were peaceful… so that story can also be, and has functioned, let’s say by justification, to say “well now it is ours because we have discovered it, now we take it”.
Well, my university teacher would have given you an 8 for the use of the verb “function”, which was a must. That is, you were questioned, all you had to do was say “function” and you won. But that’s how it is. As I said, the Renaissance ends in 1459 and then the great mystification starts. The church, the Portuguese, Spanish, what do they do? They take legal possession of the New World, also through a series of papal bulls and through the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1494, and then everything takes on a different meaning. Clearly with the extermination of the local population because they had gold, and they took it away from them. There is in the Cathedral of Seville a statue behind the altar made with gold stolen from the Native Americans. It’s two and a half tons. It’s a lot, it’s impressive. Two and a half tons. It completely erases whatever cultural reference they had: solar worship. The Catholic creed is forcibly imposed on them: today most of South America is Catholic.
It is a conquest to all intents and purposes.
It is an abuse of power.
The military conquests are always an abuse, let’s say.
Therefore, the course of history has been profoundly changed. One wonders what would have happened if the other political faction had gone ahead. Under a cultural profile, under a political profile, under an economic profile.
In your opinion, what cultural heirs does that other faction have today?
Those who operate in the underworld like us. In the sense that there is a deep-rootedness of that Neoplatonic cult made of knowledge related to natural law, but it is almost difficult to externalize. Because it is branded as conspiracy. Among other things, a conspirator is someone who plots, not someone who reveals.
The conspiracy, with this hunt for fake news, could be a reinterpretation of the Holy Inquisition.
Correct, right, that’s why I continue to argue that everything was born in the development of the fifteenth century. Because at some point, as it did at the time of the Alexandrian Library, or the various councils that developed, what does the Church do? The people demand knowledge, the Church gives knowledge. It burns all the sources and then gives drugged knowledge. Let me say one thing about Leonardo, and then we will eventually do other meetings on Leonardo. We are accustomed to thinking that he was born the son of a notary in Vinci in 1452 because it is written by Vasari, who is considered the official biographer of Leonardo in “The Lives”. In reality, there are two versions of “The Lives”, one dated 1568, written with the privilege and license of Pio V, who happened to be the inventor and institutor of the index Librorum Prohibitorum, and therefore the censorship, and an antecedent one dated 1550, in which Leonardo is the NEPHEW of the notary in Vinci, who was a good UNCLE and relative helping him in his youth. and his mother was not even a slave. “Because for mother is born of good blood”. This about Leonardo, but Leonardo is only a sort of litmus paper to tell what happens, is the change, the mystification of the documentation which then changes the course of history. We have seen it with the Americas. So many evidence —October 12, the landing, the shipwreck on the island of Antilla, Santo Domingo – the Church takes possession and distorts the course of history and meaning in such a way as to build a completely fictitious reality. Today we live completely in a fictitious world full of fake news. That’s why I say that our genesis develops there.
Listen, however, today in reality the Church is in difficulty because its values, those that it has handed down over the centuries, or that can be recognized, the value of the family, the same clear belief in a higher god, etc., are continually challenged and dismantled by what is now the neo-liberal horde that pursues different goals such as the dismemberment of individuals, etc., so can the polarities be inverted or are there more complex logics within factions against factions?
Yes and no. Which Church are we talking about? That of the religious cultural foundation or that which has temporal power? Because the Church possesses both. It is no accident that I mentioned Jesuits and today’s pope is a Jesuit. And many of those people who have helped to lead Italy in recent years come from the Jesuit school. Prodi, Monti…
That are the heirs of the Dominicans, you were saying.
They take over from the Dominicans. Once that there is the Americas discovery the Dominicans are completely supplanted. The Dominicans had the cartographic knowledge of the Americas but they did not have that business-like nature that the Jesuits had, which instead transformed into a sort of relic of the Dominican order, that becomes business-minded. That’s why I was questioning what you were saying. It is true that in terms of recourse to faith, family values, the Church is being completely emptied. But in terms of economic and political control, the Church is stronger than ever. Really stronger than ever, since Wojtyla. And it is not a coincidence perhaps that today the pope, who is then to be seen if he has or has not the title of pope, but at this moment in the chair is a Jesuit.
Why do you say it is to be seen if he is pope or not, because of the double election with Ratzinger?
Because Ratzinger is living and because in the Jesuit oath there is full fidelity to the pope. In fact if you notice that as soon as he was elected to the papal throne, what did Pope Bergoglio say? “I thank the leaving bishop”; he did not thank the pope. And he never recognizes Ratzinger in the role of pope. Because otherwise he would owe him obedience according to the oath he took as a Jesuit. And so then a whole series of things are triggered here that I honestly have no interest in developing.
So we had an hour of talk and we completely rewrote history.
A little bit.
I knew it would have been a very interesting chat with a lot of documents, and so I thank the citizens who pointed out Riccardo Magnani to us so that he could come to the citizens’ TV. But since I suspect, also from the voluminousness of your books, that there are many other things that we have not said and probably this is only the tip of the pyramid, I am already booking for a second part in September.
Very very willingly.
In which we could go on about the analysis of these very fascinating themes and I imagine that your research, your thesis are, will not be seen well everywhere, if I may say so.
Many enemies, much honor, someone said. Unfortunately, it’s part of the role, in the sense that you know that when you tell something different from the commonly perceived foundation, you find criticism and you find support. It’s never easy to put things in order. Before you put things in order, you have to make a mess. If you make a mess, your wife will come and she’ll criticize you for making a mess. And it’s what’s happening here. But it’s part of the game. There’s one thing that drives me in a very strong way: first of all, a love for knowledge, which is a very subjective thing, but also because I believe that each of us must do something to ensure that young people have a different future than the one we’re giving them. And this is the way I can do it. Or I know how to do it. And this thing is stronger than any attack I can receive. So I go forward undaunted.
All right, thank you, Riccardo Magnani, it has been a pleasure having you as a guest here on byoblu.com and on television on Davvero tv. We remember your book: Riccardo Magnani— “This is not Leonardo da Vinci”. I will read it with great pleasure because you have written a beautiful dedication.
Thank you.
My habit is to always ask for dedications from guests.
I remind you that we are finally, we are actually experimenting, but you can find many things on digital terrestrial channel 606 for Lombardy, 632 in Lazio. If every now and then strange things happen don’t worry, it’s me who fiddles, but from September we will surely be perfect like an army. We need to sustain all these costs. We also need to expand because we don’t want to limit ourselves to Lombardy and Lazio, but we want to move at military pace towards all the other regions to give an alternative way of thinking, which to me always seems to be a useful thing at the end, no?
Absolutely.
There are also apps, Davvero tv, look for them on your devices, if you want to support us you can do it with a small subscription of only three coffees per month, go.byoblu.com/abbonati or with a donation that never hurts, the gift economy. At the end of the day I always say Riccardo: if we were on private networks we would have mega-billionaire advertisers who usually have different interests from those of the citizens; if we were on public television we would have money from taxes. We are the television of the citizens, we don’t even have advertising, but on the television of the citizens the editors are the citizens and therefore we ask the citizens to support us. This is the reason to remain free. Thank you and goodbye.