Leonardo da Vinci May Have Painted a Lost Nude Version of the Mona Lisa According to New Research

10 January 2026

A centuries-old mystery surrounding one of the most famous works of art in history may be moving closer to an answer as art historians and technical experts revisit evidence that Leonardo da Vinci himself might have painted a nude version of the Mona Lisa. The possibility is rooted in long-held speculation about a charcoal drawing known as La Joconde Nue or Monna Vanna, a semi-nude figure bearing striking similarities to the iconic Mona Lisa that has sparked debate about its origins and whether it could represent an unfinished or alternate take by the Renaissance master.

For decades, scholars have pondered whether Leonardo or someone in his circle produced a depiction of the same figure seen in the Mona Lisa without clothing. The Mona Lisa, painted by Leonardo between about 1503 and 1519 and now housed in the Louvre Museum in Paris, has captivated the world with its enigmatic expression and technical mastery, but it has also prompted speculation about lost versions or preparatory works that might shed light on the artist’s intent. Leonardo’s reputation for experimentation, his deep understanding of human anatomy and his penchant for visual innovation make the possibility of alternate iterations a tantalising prospect.

At the heart of the current intrigue is La Joconde Nue, a large charcoal drawing with white highlights held at the Condé Museum in Chantilly, France. The figure in this drawing sits in a pose almost identical to the Mona Lisa, with hands folded in a familiar three-quarter stance and a similarly ambiguous facial expression. These compositional parallels have encouraged experts to consider whether the drawing was a preparatory work or conceptual study for a more explicit version of the Mona Lisa concept. Scientific analysis has identified technical features consistent with Leonardo’s own practice, such as left-handed strokes and the use of sfumato-like shading that blends tone and shadow in a way characteristic of the master’s technique.

The Monna Vanna drawing is not alone in its lineage. Art historians have identified roughly twenty versions of nude Mona Lisas and related reinterpretations, some by known followers of Leonardo like Salaì, the artist’s pupil whose close relationship with Leonardo also makes him a fascinating figure in the narrative of Renaissance art and attribution. Salaì’s renditions, which sometimes closely resemble Leonardo’s original compositions, complicate the question of authorship but also suggest that Renaissance workshops were hubs of creative evolution in which masters and students collaborated or influenced one another. These alternate versions, including both drawing and painted examples, demonstrate the enduring impact and reinterpretation of the Mona Lisa theme.

Experts examining the La Joconde Nue sketch argue that certain features suggest it may be more than a simple copy by a pupil. The watermark on the paper has been dated to Leonardo’s lifetime in Italy, and technical elements observed under close scrutiny point toward a work conceived with serious artistic intent rather than mere imitation. The drawing’s composition, scale and handling of form place it within the creative sphere of questions about Leonardo’s process at the height of his career, possibly during his time in Rome from 1513 to 1516 when he was engaged with influential patrons like Giuliano de’ Medici. Historical inventories also reference artworks resembling semi-nude or nude versions of the Mona Lisa, adding archival texture to the mystery.

The relationship between the Mona Lisa and its potential nude counterpart has also been discussed in the context of other Renaissance works. For example, paintings like Raphael’s La Fornarina share compositional echoes that hint at cross-influence among artists working in Rome during the same period. These parallels underline a culture of artistic exchange and mutual inspiration among masters like Leonardo and Raphael, each navigating the interplay of human beauty, form and narrative in ways that stretched established norms. ([turn0news0])

Despite these compelling threads of evidence, the question of whether Leonardo painted a nude Mona Lisa remains unresolved. Scholars urge caution, noting that while certain technical markers and stylistic elements strongly suggest Leonardo’s hand may have contributed to La Joconde Nue, definitive proof is elusive and may never be fully established. Some strokes in the drawing, for instance, appear to be the work of a right-handed artist unexpected for Leonardo, who was famously left-handed leading to ongoing debate about collaborative workshop practices and later modifications or enhancements by assistants.

The resonance of this mystery extends beyond academic circles. The very notion that Leonardo, the polymath whose achievements spanned painting, sculpture, anatomy, engineering and philosophy could have engaged in playful or provocative reinterpretations of his own iconic work adds a layer of richness to the cultural narrative surrounding the Mona Lisa. The enigmatic smile that has fascinated viewers for centuries may hold deeper connections to investigations like these, where each discovery or hypothesis expands our understanding of why Leonardo’s work continues to captivate and confound.

While the Mona Lisa remains protected behind bulletproof glass at the Louvre, her half-smile still evokes wonder and speculation. Works like La Joconde Nue ensure that the dialogue around Leonardo’s genius and his possible intentions in depicting the same sitter in different guises will persist. Whatever the final conclusions of researchers, the enduring allure of these artworks lies not only in their technical genius but in their capacity to ignite imagination and invite fresh interpretations centuries after their creation.