Researchers from the University of Paris-Saclay in collaboration with experts at the Louvre Museum undertook a detailed chemical investigation of Leonardo da Vinci’s most celebrated work, the Mona Lisa. The study aimed to uncover hidden details about the painting’s materials and techniques, offering new insight into the inventive methods employed by the Italian master. The work was documented for publication in the scientific journal of the American Chemical Society, underscoring the interdisciplinary nature of art history and modern analytical science.
Using advanced imaging and analytical approaches, including X-ray spectroscopy and measurements conducted at synchrotron facilities, the team examined a sample from the panel on which the Mona Lisa was painted. Their careful analysis identified the presence of plumbonacrite, a mineral containing lead, within the first layer of the painting’s ground or underlayer. This finding is noteworthy because plumbonacrite is not a common component in traditional ground layers, making its detection a significant clue about the specific materials Leonardo chose for the foundational layer of the artwork.
The discovery supports long-standing art-historical hypotheses regarding Leonardo’s use of lead oxide materials. By dissolving lead oxide powder in a solvent such as linseed or hazelnut oil and applying the mixture as a thickened layer, Leonardo could accelerate the drying process while achieving a distinctive, warm golden hue. The researchers describe how heating this formulation produced a viscous, honey-colored solution that contributed to the unique appearance of the Mona Lisa’s surface, revealing a deliberate technical strategy behind the painting’s initial coating.
Victor Gonzalez, the lead author of the study, remarked that Leonardo’s experimental approach was highly individualized across his body of work. He noted that the Mona Lisa’s underlayer stands out as an example of a specialized application technique, one that reflects Leonardo’s willingness to push the boundaries of pigments and binders to achieve desired optical effects and drying behavior. The study emphasizes that this particular method represents a departure from more conventional practices of the period, highlighting Leonardo’s enduring fascination with how materials interact under the forces of time and light.
Beyond Leonardo, the research also mentions Rembrandt as another master who used similar lead-containing preparations in the 17th century. This parallel points to a broader lineage of pigment experimentation and recipe transmission within European art lore. The reference to continued interest in dye formulations across generations suggests that the knowledge surrounding pigment preparation traveled through workshops and studios, influencing techniques well beyond a single artist’s lifetime.
In broader terms, the investigation contributes to ongoing conversations about how Renaissance and early modern painters managed issues such as pigment stability, moisture resistance, and surface finish. Historical paintings can be vulnerable to environmental factors, especially humidity and fluctuations in temperature, and the choices made in early layers often play a critical role in a work’s longevity. The study’s emphasis on specific mineral components and binding media offers a clearer picture of the practical challenges artists faced and the inventive solutions they devised to ensure the durability of their masterpieces. It also invites contemporary conservators to reexamine with fresh eyes the protective strategies that might be employed to preserve works that rely on similarly layered constructions and aging dynamics. (Source: American Chemical Society)