Researchers report having collected DNA they believe to belong to the legendary artist Leonardo da Vinci, offering a potentially promising new method of validating some of the artist’s disputed works and revealing whether genetic gifts played a role in their creation.
The Leonardo da Vinci DNA Project (LDVP) is an international scientific collective that has conducted research over the past decade. In a recent paper posted on bioRxiv, LDVP researchers reported their latest findings after swabbing numerous known and suspected works by Leonardo da Vinci for DNA.
Disputed Works of Leonardo da Vinci
Several of Leonardo’s works, such as Holy Child, have long been disputed. Owners claim they are the master’s own work, while experts argue they were more likely produced by Leonardo’s students.
The new research by the LDVP encompasses the emerging field of “arteomics,” which seeks to use biological evidence to support art attributions, rather than more open-ended, expertise-based methodologies such as brushstroke analysis. Notably, arteomics would provide more conclusive, objective evidence compared to traditional connoisseurship, which is more opinion-based. The resulting knowledge could ultimately help bring art historians one step closer to conclusively determining the disputed authorship of several of Leonardo’s works, and those of other famous artists throughout time.
For the study, researchers collected DNA from numerous artworks and from a letter written by one of Leonardo’s cousins. Analysis of the Y chromosome sequences reveals that the sources all share a common ancestor from Tuscany, the city in which the artist was born. While falling short of conclusive proof in itself, the link to Tuscany strengthens the possibility that Holy Child was indeed one of Leonardo’s works.
Potential Sources for Leonardo da Vinci’s DNA
The initial impetus behind LDVP was to gain access to the presumed tomb of Leonardo da Vinci and search for any relics that may contain his DNA. Over the years, the team grew from three individuals to more than three dozen worldwide. Funding is provided by a variety of public and private sources, and the researchers work in their spare time.
While officials at the tomb housing Leonardo’s remains say they may eventually grant LDVP access, the project must first isolate the artist’s DNA from his art. Beyond artwork, one of the best hopes for isolating the DNA is through analyzing a lock of hair excavated in 1863, believed to have come from the artist’s beard.
Hair is particularly useful for DNA isolation because it can be easily scrubbed of contamination. The team’s current plan is to first radiocarbon date a single hair strand to determine whether it is the correct age to belong to Leonardo da Vinci; if the results are positive, they will then use a second strand for DNA analysis.
One outcome LDVP hopes for is increased access to Leonardo da Vinci’s known artworks and notebooks, based on the strength of their findings. They note that the artist is known to not just paint with brushes, but also to directly use his fingers. According to the team, this means that some of his skin cells may be mixed into the paint of his artwork.
An Elusive Subject
Unfortunately for LDVP, Leonardo da Vinci is not an optimal subject for this type of work. More than 500 years ago, Leonardo was initially interred in the Chapel of Saint-Florentin at the Chateau d’Amboise. By the nineteenth century, the building had fallen into such disrepair that it was destroyed. Later, bones believed to be those of Leonardo were removed and placed in the Chapel of Saint-Hubert. Even if they are granted access to the presumed tomb, there is no guarantee they will find remains that are truly Leonardo da Vinci’s.
Given the uncertainty about whose remains are interred in the space and Leonardo’s lack of direct descendants, isolating his DNA ultimately depends on obtaining DNA from his father’s descendants. Extracting DNA from those known tombs provides some circumstantial evidence, but Leonardo’s DNA itself remains a difficult target.
Another complication is that no one knows where his mother is buried. Mitochondrial DNA is 100 times more abundant than the chromosomes that reside in the nucleus, but is inherited from the mother, making establishing a logical match unfeasible. On the Y chromosome, some DNA segments can be traced across many generations over centuries. While his mother may have died in obscurity, his father, who had 23 known children with many different women, is much easier to track.
Following the DNA
Elaborate genealogical research identified 15 living male descendants, whose DNA the team plans to sequence by the end of January. Additionally, the researchers have identified graves of male relatives who lived much closer to Leonardo da Vinci’s time, and excavated one last year to collect samples. The identity of the remains is uncertain, but the team plans to compare them with living relatives to obtain a clearer indication of whether this is one of da Vinci’s contemporary relatives.
The researchers also developed protocols for safely extracting DNA from artworks without damaging the works. The porous nature of paper makes it an exceptional trap for DNA, the team noted. They preferred to work with Leonardo da Vinci’s more obscure works, as his most famous pieces had been handled so frequently and cleaned so often that collecting DNA samples would be difficult. Notably, the Holy Child contained DNA from the sweet orange tree, known to grow in the gardens of the Medici family, the patrons of Leonardo.
The first step was to rule out that human DNA on Holy Child did not originate from Kline, which the team demonstrated. Using DNA collected from a wax seal on a letter written by a cousin of Leonardo da Vinci’s grandfather, researchers found a shared lineage traceable back to Tuscany. The team hopes to continue utilizing recent advances, such as telomere-to-telomere sequencing, to more precisely sequence the Y chromosome, thereby enabling the differentiation of even closely related family members.
What Made Leonardo da Vinci Great
Some researchers also seek not only to identify the origins of disputed works but also to investigate the age-old debate of nature versus nurture, determining whether something in Leonardo da Vinci’s genes resulted in his genius, beyond his favorable cultural and economic circumstances. Part of this could involve whether Leonardo possessed a unique level of visual acuity, allowing him to more thoroughly capture lighting and motion in his work.
In fact, one experiment suggested that da Vinci’s eyes may have resolved motion at 100 frames per second, compared with the 30-60 frames per second at which most human eyes perceive motion. This possibility is based on minute motion details that past studies have revealed in his artwork. Another possibility is that his brain processed information in a unique way, allowing for unusually astute pattern inference.
The researchers warn that determining whether the man had a distinct biological advantage that enabled him to create his legendary works remains out of reach at present, but is a goal of some LDVP members. Whether the research reveals that Leonardo possessed genetic gifts or simply helps resolve attribution disputes, the new work offers a promising potential for advancing our understanding of the Renaissance master.
The paper, “Biological Signatures of History: Examination of Composite Biomes and Y Chromosome Analysis from da Vinci-associated Cultural Artifacts,” appeared on bioRxiv on January 6, 2025.
Ryan Whalen covers science and technology for The Debrief. He holds an MA in History and a Master of Library and Information Science with a certificate in Data Science. He can be contacted at ryan@thedebrief.org, and follow him on Twitter @mdntwvlf.