Was Leonardo da Vinci homosexual?
A Florentine accusation in 1476, a life without a known wife, male companions and nearly thirty years of proximity to Salaikh: the clues are real. But their meaning requires more precision than legend.
Leonardo's attraction to men is plausible, perhaps probable, but it cannot be proven as an identity in the modern sense. The 1476 case is documented without conviction. Salaikh was certainly his student, assistant and long-term relative; no preserved document explicitly names him as her lover.
A legitimate question, an answer without false certainty
The word "homosexual" today designates an orientation or identity. In 15th century Florence, archives mainly speak of forbidden acts, reputation and urban discipline: they do not classify people with our categories.
It is therefore necessary to separate three levels. The first is documentary: in 1476, Leonardo is aptly named in a denunciation for sodomy. The second is biographical: he did not marry, no female affair is attested, and he shared his work permanently with men, notably Salaigh then Francesco Melzi. The third is interpretative: artists, historians and psychoanalysts sought confirmation in the works that they cannot provide alone.
The fairest wording is neither "we know nothing" nor "Salaikh was certainly her lover". It is more nuanced: the sources make an attraction to men credible, but they do not directly document a claimed identity or the sexual nature of a specific relationship.
Documented
A Florentine procedure from 1476, the absence of known marriage, the lasting presence of Salaigh and Melzi, and the provisions of the will.
Plausible
Leonardo's attraction to men, emotional intimacy with certain companions, and the influence of young models on his ideal of beauty.
Not demonstrated
Whether Salaikh was her lover, whether each young face was her portrait, or whether the paintings make it possible to diagnose a sexual orientation.
The trial which was not a conviction
In the spring of 1476, an anonymous post accused several young men of having had sexual relations with Jacopo Saltarelli, an apprentice goldsmith aged around seventeen. Leonardo, then aged twenty-four and still linked to Verrocchio's workshop, was among those denounced.
The procedure falls under the Ufficiali di Notte, the "Officers of the Night", a magistracy created to monitor and prosecute sodomy. The accusation was serious. However, it does not result in any conviction retained: for lack of admissible testimony and because the denunciation remains anonymous, the case is abandoned.
First anonymous denunciation. Leonard and three other men are named with Jacopo Saltarelli.
The denunciation is repeated. Here again, it does not provide the witnesses specifically responsible required by the procedure.
Prosecutions are dismissed or dropped. There is no judgment finding Leonardo guilty.
Important clarification: to say that Leonardo was "convicted of homosexuality" is false. To say that the accusation never existed is just as false. The archives establish a denunciation and a procedure without conviction.
In Florence, sodomy was a legal act, not an identity
Renaissance Florence had a masculine culture very structured by workshops, brotherhoods, clienteles and age gaps. Relations between men could be part of these sociability, but they were also monitored, punished and used in political or personal rivalries.
Historian Michael Rocke has shown, from court records, that prosecutions were numerous and that practices were more diffuse than the image of a handful of "homosexuals" separated from the rest of society. Modern categories therefore do not overlap properly with 15th century archives.
This prudence should not erase the possibility of desire. It only avoids transforming a judicial word, "sodomy", into a complete diagnosis of the intimate identity of a man of whom no personal diary has been preserved.
Student entered workshop at ten years old
Gian Giacomo Caprotti da Oreno, nicknamed Salaikh or Salai, joined Leonardo's house-workshop in Milan in 1490, around the age of ten. A note from Leonardo immediately describes a difficult, greedy, lying, thief and stubborn child. The nickname refers to the "little devil" of a popular story.
These criticisms do not end their relationship. Salaikh remained linked to Leonardo for almost three decades, as a student, assistant, trusted man and painter in his own right. He traveled with the workshop, wore expensive clothes paid for or counted by Leonardo, and finally received a share of Milanese vines in the will of 1519.
This duration is remarkable. It establishes a deep human and professional proximity. However, she does not say, on her own, whether it was paternal, emotional, economic, sexual - or several of these dimensions at different times.
Birth of Gian Giacomo Caprotti near Milan.
Entrance into Leonardo's workshop, still a child.
Assistant and painter activity in the studio orbit.
Leonardo's will leaves him half of the Milanese vines.
Salaikh dies from gunshot wound, known documents show.
No preserved letters qualify him as a lover or describe a sexual relationship.
The relationship with Salaikh: proof, possibility and invention
A more honest picture is obtained by not asking every detail to "prove" the same thing. Some facts are solid, others support a hypothesis, still others are a late reconstruction.
Sustainable proximity
- Salaikh entered the workshop in 1490.
- Leonardo's accounts and notes record his behavior, expenses and clothing.
- He remained associated with the workshop for decades.
- He receives half of the Milan vineyard in the will.
- He developed his own activity as a painter based on Leonardo models.
Affection, desire, model
- Leonardo's tolerance towards Salaikh can reflect an exceptional personal attachment.
- The curly beauty of some young men corresponds to the type associated with those around him.
- An intimate or sexual relationship is possible in the context of biographical cues.
- Certain tables were able to use Salaikh as a model, without all the cases being documented.
An identifiable "couple"
- No contract, poem, confession or direct testimony names Salaikh as a lover.
- Material inheritance is not a statement of sexual orientation.
- An androgynous face is not automatically a portrait of Salaikh.
- The procedure of 1476, fourteen years before his arrival, does not document anything about their relationship.
Works can suggest an ideal, not reveal a private life
Young faces with abundant curls, ambiguous smiles and supple bodies nourished Leonardo's queer readings. They are fruitful for the history of reception. But the identification of models often remains uncertain, and iconography is not an intimate document.
The Angel of Baptism
Painted in Verrocchio's studio before the meeting with Salaigh, this angel shows that youthful grace already belongs to the language of Leonardo. We must therefore not reduce each masculine beauty to a single model.
Saint John the Baptist
Tradition sometimes associates the smile, curls and androgyny of the saint with Salaigh. The Louvre notice, however, recalls that this identification has no assured documentary basis and that another proposed model exists.
A Saint John from the workshop
This version painted by Salaigh mainly shows the circulation of compositions in the workshop. It provides information about his learning and a shared repertoire, not about the sexual nature of his bond with the master.
Bacchus, between saint and ancient god
Transformed over time from a Saint John in the desert into Bacchus, this sensual figure condenses the ambivalence specific to the workshop. His softness, his skin and his gesture can nourish a story of the male gaze; they do not allow us to identify with certainty a loved one.
Elderly Leonardo?
Even Leonardo's most familiar image is a "presumed self-portrait". This caution on a famous face reminds us how vigilant we must be when recognizing Salaikh in other works.
Two close ones, two different heritages
Francesco Melzi later joined Leonardo, accompanied him to France and watched over him in his last years. Opposing a Salaikh "lover" to a Melzi "secretary" is attractive, but too simple. The documents mainly distribute roles and goods.
Salaikh, long irregular loyalty
Present since childhood, alternately a source of annoyance, assistant, painter and beneficiary of the will.
- Entrance
- 1490, in Milan
- Duration
- Nearly thirty years of documented connection with the workshop
- Legacy
- Half of the Milanese vines
- Relationship
- Exceptional proximity; undocumented sexuality
Melzi, the intellectual heir
Young Lombard nobleman, cultured disciple, traveling companion and guardian of the handwritten corpus.
- Entrance
- Around 1506 -1508
- Last years
- Rome then Amboise, with Leonardo
- Legacy
- Books, instruments, drawings and manuscripts
- Relationship
- Attested friendship and trust; undocumented sexuality
The will does not resolve a sentimental rivalry. He entrusted Melzi with Leonardo's intellectual memory and gave Salaikh significant land. These legacies prove the place of the two men, not the exact form of their intimacy.
The silence of sources does not prohibit the hypothesis. It only prohibits presenting the hypothesis as an archive.
Why did the legend grow so much?
In 1910, Sigmund Freud published a study on a childhood memory of Leonardo. He constructs an interpretation of his sexuality, his mother and his desire sublimated in research. The text has had a lasting impact on popular culture, but it is partly based on an erroneous translation: the nibbio from the Italian text is a kite, not a vulture.
Since then, novels, films and essays have sometimes treated Sala§ as a universal key. Queer studies have also made it possible to usefully reopen the file, to see what older biographies kept silent about and to question the masculine ideal of the works. Their interest does not depend on the impossible discovery of a modern certificate of sexual orientation.
Good history therefore distinguishes contemporary visibility from historical evidence. We can recognize the strong plausibility of a masculine desire in Leonardo without inventing intimate scenes that the documents do not tell.
Six questions so as not to turn a biography into a rumor
The legal file of 1476 weighs more than a fictionalized story of the 20th century.
Florentine justice pursues acts qualified as sodomy; it does not define a modern orientation.
No. The existence of a charge does not amount to a guilty verdict.
For the Saint John the Baptist, identification with Salaikh remains debated.
No. He distributes property among relatives and documents their importance.
A reasonable conclusion from converging clues, different from an explicitly attested fact.
The Saint John and Bacchus of the workshop
These two figures are among the most discussed images when we approach desire, androgyny and the circulation of models in Leonardo. The shop's reproductions above all allow us to study light, gesture, sfumato and the ambiguity of the gaze on the scale of the painting.
Also read
The workshop sheds light on the daily lives of Salaikh and Melzi better than isolated speculations.
Salaigh, Melzi and the workshopFAQs
Was Leonardo da Vinci convicted of sodomy?
No. He was named in an anonymous denunciation in 1476, then the case was dropped without a known conviction. The absence of named witnesses and the anonymous nature of the complaint weighed on the procedural outcome.
Who was Jacopo Saltarelli?
A young Florentine apprentice goldsmith, aged around seventeen, named in the denunciation of 1476. Modern accounts sometimes add spectacular qualifications that must be handled with caution.
Was Salaikh Leonardo's lover?
It's possible, but not proven. Salaikh was certainly a student, assistant, painter and long-term relative. No preserved document explicitly describes a sexual or romantic relationship between them.
Did Salaikh pose for Saint John the Baptist?
Identification is traditional and often repeated, but it is not assured. The Louvre notice emphasizes that reading the painting as a hidden portrait of Salaikh lacks documentary basis.
Why are we also talking about Francesco Melzi?
Melzi accompanied Leonardo during his last years and inherited his manuscripts and instruments. His place reminds us that Leonardo's intimate and professional entourage is not reduced to Salaikh.
What conclusion do historians draw?
Formulations vary. Many view an attraction to men as plausible or probable, while refusing to assert a modern identity with certainty. Direct sources remain limited.
0 comments