foreword of the author
unique collection of art objects, represented in The Kulenovic Collection Museum, in
Karlskrona ,Sweden, administrated by Rizah Kulenovic is the property of the Kulenovic
Family, the ancestor of which is Kulin Ban who, ca. 1130, established Bosnia as a national
entity, as documented in a form of constitution, being among the oldest written ones (cf.
From its very origin,
the Kulenovic Family, based in Bosnia and the historic Republic of Venice, has been
represented by leading statesman, diplomats and owners of trading companies; the activity
of the Family covered huge geographical areas reflecting the vast political and
business empire of the republic of Venice comprising the Ottoman empire, including
the Mediterranean and the Middle Eastern countries , Persia and Turkey,
all the way to the border India.
Historical records show that the Kulenovic Family always had , and still has, a passion
for art. Over the centuries, the family built up a unique collection of art objects
the Kulenovic Family Collection of Art Objects -, always kept within an entailed estate,
transferred intact from generation to generation and administrated
by the head of the Kulenovic Family. This way of handling and
administrating the estate went smoothly over the centuries, not the least because the
Familis leading positions as statesmen etc. provided all necessary protection of the
overall Kulenovic Famili Estate. However, this situation changed dramatically
after the First World War, during The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and later when Yugoslavia was taken over by the Tito communist regime: one of
the very first target of the regime was the Kulenovic family, at the time owner of vast
properties all over Yugoslavia (and internationally ) and a large unique collection of
One of the senior sons of the Family, Rizah Kulenovic, was, like all family members,
severely persecuted by the regime. Mr. Rizah Kulenovic , a very gifted
artist, decided to escape the oppression. He settled down in Italy
where he soon became a sought after artist, and later on in France during this time
he was associated whit many now very famous artists, including Dali, Gatuso, Picasso and
Warhol. After a sejour in the U.S.A., Rizah Kulenovic came back to Europe and settled down
in the beautiful naval city Karlskrona. Here, he devoted his time to his internationally
well known skill of reverse glass painting.
As this time, Rizah Kulenovic had very little or no knowledge of whether the
Kulenovic family Collection of Art Objects existed or, if so, where. He suspected that the
Collection was gone for ever from his family he knew that both the national
socialistic and the Soviet socialistic regime had made major efforts to trace and steal
the Family Collection.
As time passed by, at a certain point in time, Rizah Kulenovic got
a request from the head of the Kulenovic Family to travel to a specific location in
Western Europe. Without Rizah Kulenovic having known about this fact, the Collection had
been hidden away out of reach of advocates of the above-mentioned regimes. Rizah Kulenovic
had never before seen the Collection and paintings and a mass of sculptures, archeological
objects (some dating from 4000 years before Christ), ceramics, etc! This was
the moment when Rizah Kulenovic piece by piece started to transfer objects of art to
Sweden and to Karlskrona, over time building a unique private collection of art objects in
The part of the
Kulenovic Family Collection gathered in Karlskrona has been kept as a more or less
private, rather anonymous, collection fore mostly visited by art lovers coming from
all over the world. This collection will now be made publicly accessible and shown in a
new location in the historic setting of the Grand Square in Karlskrona. Once
established, the Museum will be launched internationally and without doubt, this will be
somewhat of a sensation in the world of art! Art lovers will be taken aback by having the
opportunity to see original pieces of art by many of the most world-renowned
artists several of which not seen for centuries, to appear again on the world
scene! This will specifically be true with regard to Leonardo da Vincis miraculous
painting the Nativity.
THE NATIVITY by
It is an established fact based on
very extensive research process, seriously initiated in the 1880s, and hundreds of
books and dissertations that Leonardo da Vinci (LdV) only produced a very few
paintings during his lifetime (1452-1519). Despite this, quite a number of paintings have
been presented as original works by Leonardo. So then , how to sift the wheat from the
This issue is discussed in this note with regard to Leonardo da Vincis breathtaking
painting the Nativity, showing Virgin Mary sitting with the Jesus child
on her knees, on her left side, and with. St. John standing at her right hand side, all
depicted in a triangular setting, against a dark background. The painting is kept in the
estate of the Kulenovic family a family dating back to the 12th century.
The Nativity , together with a multitude of other works of art of world
renowned painters, will be exhibited in Museum The Kulenovic Collection, tu be
inaugurated on 6th of June 2009. The discussion in this note is based on The
Kulenovic Theory on Movements / Turnings in Leonardo da Vincis Paintings.
In order to establish the authentication of
painting, documentary and literary sources can indeed be of value, as is also true for
iconographic studies. However, rather few artworks are accounted for in such sources and
conditions can be misunderstood or falsified. Moreover, such sources most often do not
pertain to the artwork per se but to the environment in which it was
produced. And with regard to iconographic analyses , these focus on physical objects and
symbols applied in a painting and not on the nucleus of the painting per se .
The analytical approach towards authentication applied in this note follows in the
tradition of such eminent scholars as Giovani Morelli, Bernard Berensson and Jens
Thiis: in order to establish the originality of painting the analytic approach should
focus on the artwork per se on the way in which the artwork expresses
the specific soul of the specific artist.
With reference to what has been said by Thiis ( see Jens Thiis Leonardo da Vinci
The Florentine Years of Leonardo and Verroccio , Herbert Jenkins, London
1913; first edition in Norwegian 1909 and new edition in 1949. ) , the most decisive proof
for establishing the authenticity of a painting (or drawing) is to focus on the language
that the specific painting speaks. If this on clearly defined, it will tell as about the
originator but above all, about his specific unique trait as an artist. This is also
the approach applied in this note: to establish the specific unique trait of the language
spoken by the specific artist, Leonardo da Vinci.
The danger when applying such an analytic approach is, of course, that the
interpreter of the language is wrong in defining the specific trait of the specific
painter: the interpreter is not able to show / document the specific unique trait of the
painter and that this apply to all his paintings, distinguishing him from that other
painters . If so, the chosen analytical approach has failed its purpose.
In this note we are convinced that we have not failed in this respect: the specific
trait of LdV as a painter defined in this note is the one manifest in his painting
the Nativity and in all those generally accepted as being original paintings
of Leonardo, while at the same time clearly distinguishing him from that of other
The fact that Leonardo da Vinci produced a very few paintings during a relatively long
lifetime of sixty-seven years, reflects the enormous complexity of arriving at his
specific unique trait as a painter: his truly astonishing ability to depict movements in
human beings (and animals) reproduced on a flat canvas !
From the outset, it should be understood that
movements referred to here are not those perceived by an observer of a painting
when the painter has depicted person in a turned position for example, sitting with
his body fixed to the left or to the right. And these are not those movements
particularly of the eyes - perceived by an observer of a person depicted on
canvas, or those based on optical illusions, occurring when rectangular or quadratic
objects, reproduced in a painting ( a work of art ) are observed.
Movements, as referred to in this note, are a
matter of movements / turnings in major body parts of human beings for example, in the
limbs, in the head or in the upper part of the body of a human being, depicted in a
painting. These movements / turnings are realized by the observer of a painting as he /
she passes by the painting, from the left to the right or, in the opposite direction,
following a 180 degree (half) circle in front of the painting. As argued here these
movements / turnings can be seen in original paintings by Leonardo da Vinci.
* * * * *
It only takes a minute or two of observation
passing by the Nativity in its setting in the Museum The
Culenovic Collection in the way said above, to clearly recognize the movements /
turnings in major body parts of persons depicted in the painting.
Facing the painting in a narrow angle from the right
hand side of the painting one sees Jesus child sitting on Virgin Marys
knees with his head (face), arms and shoulders directed towards the observer. In
the same way, the arms, the head and the shoulders of Virgin Mary are directly directed
towards the observer.
As the observer is looking at the painting in a narrow angle from the left hand
side, the Jesus child is seen lying down on Virgin Marys knees with his body
stretched out towards the observer the body now seems to be two times as long as
when the observed faced the Jesus child from a narrow right hand side angle . The head ,
the upper body and the legs of the Jesus child are now focused directly towards the
observer. The head, the upper body and the hands of Virgin Mary are also focused directly
towards the observer.
Leonardo da Vinci has given his painting a third dimension : a depth, which gives
the same sensation as when one observes a sculpture or a living human being one
gets a feeling that the persons are coming out of the painting (from the interior of the
painting ): this is especially so for the Jesus child, who also is the focal point / the
most important human being depicted in the painting.
By repeating the same process of observations referred to above , it can be established
that the same type of movements / turnings are evident in those few paintings which are
generally accepted as being original paintings by Leonardo da Vinci ( the only
exception is the Lady with the Ermine, which painting also, based on
other criteria, has been doubted as being an original painting by Leonardo; this issue can
probably not be finally decided on until one has established whether restoration work has
distorted the original painting). This can be easily established for example, when
observing LdV:s most well-known paintings, La Gioconda (Mona Lisa) and
the Last Supper .
All paintings by Leonardo da Vinci applying the so called sfumato-technique
get their shadow in the same way and the light comes from the same direction. They are all
lightened up in 45 degrees from the left to the right. There is an astonishing intensity
LdV:s mysterious light it is not possible to decide whether his light
emanates from the inside of the painting or from the outside. Numerous other great
painters tried to copy / imitate LdV:s light but the result was not LdV:s but their own
type of light. This light obscure type of painting is typical of all LdV:s work
and indeed, Leonaro had to paint shadows and lights, clair-obscure , in
this way as one important precondition for being able to depict movements /
turnings in his paintings ! And if no other painter was his ability to depict movements /
turnings, as referred to in this note.
This specific unique trait of Leonardo as a
painter has been admired and envied by many of the worlds most famous painters,
including del sartor, Michelangelo, Botticelli, Raphael, Caravaggio and Rembrandt: they
all tried but unsuccessfully to depict human movements / turnings
in their paintings. One relevant example is Andrea del Sartro who almost exactly copied
the Jesus child in the Nativity ( see del Sartros painting the
Mystical Marriage of S:t Catherine 1512 ). However, he did not succeed
as Leonardo da Vinci in depicting movement / turning in the body of Jesus child.
Raphael Sanzio, who was totally enchanted by LdV:s trait of painting (see Thiis, op
cit . pp 217 -218 based on Vasari) provides some other example. In his
Madonna in the Meadow , Raphael tried to depict movement / turning in the
small child at the side of the Madonna: the result was a wrongly designed knee and a leg
with a peculiar anatomical form but no movements / turnings. And the same conclusion can
be reached with regard to Rembrandt and Caravaggio, as also seen in their major works kept
within the same family estate as the one comprising the Nativity.
in general, by studying, specifically, the Madonna figure at the time such a
beloved motive as depicted in paintings by Raphael, Botticelli, Michelangelo,
Bellini, Caravaggio, Lippi and others, one can easily conclude that none of these managed
to depict a Madonna figure characterized by the movements / turnings so uniquely
documented in LdV:s paintings: it is only LdV who has managed the seemingly
unmanageable to combine compositions, shadow , light, anatomy and the
perception of the eye in such a way that the observer realize movements / turnings in
human beings depicted in his paintings.
The reason why
such truly outstanding painters as those mentioned above and others
were unable to depict movements / turnings was that they were painters while
LdV was a scientifically based painter. As is obvious from LdV:s own manuscripts
(see especially Madrid Codex and Madrid Codex 2, re-discovered in the Madrid Museum in
1965, and his thesis about painting and human movement, as referred to by Luca Pacioli in
Felony in 1498 in the dedication To his De divina proportione) LdV was
from very young age totally consumed by applying scientific theories related to
mathematics, geometry, physics mechanics, etc. to his art of painting, in order to
arrive at his ultimate goal of depicting human movements / turnings in his paintings.
It could be said
that LdV became a slave under the art of scientific painting. His paintings concentrate on
presenting triangular shapes as clearly seen with regard to how he presents Virgin Marcy (the
Madonna), the Jesus Child and St. John in the Nativity. But
also, in specific instances, he would subordinate the artistic value of a painting in
order to fulfill his ambition as a scientifically based painter. For example, in the Nativity
he has placed the head of the Jesus child in a sort of awkward position it is
somewhat shifted to the right, for LdV to be able to depict movement / turning in the head
of the Jesus child.
complexity inherent in LdV:s unique ability to depict movements / turnings explains, as
said, why other painters failed to challenge him with regard to his specific unique trait
of painting. But also, that LdV himself probably experienced ultimate limits as far as
it concerned his ability to depict movements / turnings. As a matter of fact such
turnings in the
Nativity pertain to the Virgin Mary and to the Jesus child but not to
St. John. And in the Last Supper, such movements/ turnings are constrained to
the person of the Jesus figure and to one or a few specific apostles. Such restrictions in
depicting movements / turnings can also be seen in his Anna Self Third (in
London): in that painting movements / turnings are confined to the legs. (However,
it has to be appreciated that restoration work has been done on this painting, as well as
on, for example, the Last Supper, and this may have distorted the present
documented extent of movements / turnings in these artworks).
* * * * *
absorbing fascination with depicting movements / turning is also clearly documented in his
writings, as referred to above, and in so many of his drawings, as studied below. LdV
so often draws one and the same specific human figure (or, an animal.
Specifically the horse, as applied to his major work the Battle of Anghiari
a piece of work that will be discussed in some other context, than the present one,
as it relates to Museum the Culenovic Collection) or group of figures to (such
as the Virgin and the Jesus child) in so many different positions, from so many
experts on LdV:s drawings have also noted this and their conclusions, if any, are that
this is because LdV wanted to examine which specific position of the drawn
positions of a human figure - from which specific angle he in the end would want to
depict the person in a specific painting. However, here one overlooks LdV:s true purpose
of drawing a specific figure from so many different angles: to be able to represent
human movements / turnings in his paintings!
LdV was not
interested in depicting a person in one angle but in all those specific angles
which were necessary to control simultaneously, in order for LdV to be able to show
movements / turnings in his paintings. That this is so is clearly seen from his viewer
diagram in Codex Madrid I (folio no 44, verso). Here he tries (using
mirrors) to work with different visual angles. He faces a specific point
directly from the front as well as from various side angles here LdV attempts to
show a series of projections without any optical deformation. It can be said that many
have observed the white spots the fact that LdV draws a specific figure from
different angles but none has realized that these spots made up the structure of a
white Elephant, in terms of LdV:s ambition to present movements / turnings on a flat
In conclusion, as based on The Culenovic Theory on Movement / Turnings in Leonardo da
Vincis Paintings, it can be established that the Nativityis an
original painting by LdV: his specific unique trait as a painter to depict
movements / turnings is also found in his other paintings, while other painters
have not been able to master what it takes to demonstrate LdV:s specific unique trait of
This conclusion focusing on LdV:s specific unique traits as a painter and the originality
of the Nativitycan now be further substantiated based on an
analysis of LdV;s drawings.
Leonardo da Vinci has produced more than 2500 drawings, include on human beings,
animals and physical objects. The purpose of these drawings was to work out ideas of how
to depict human beings, etc., to be implemented later on in his paintings.
However, this does not mean that one always will
find drawings corresponding to specific painting. Sometimes there are no specific drawings
relating to a specific painting for example, there is hardly any drawing to be
found hitherto, relating do LdV:s most well- known painting La Gioconda .
(There is a drawing in the louvre Museum related to Mona- Lisa but this is a
copy based on LdV:s painting, made by Raphael on this and also on the issue
of drawings in other museum, than the Louvre Museum: related to the Nativity ,
( see Woldemar von Seidlitz , Leonardo da Vinci , Phaidon Verlag,
It may also be so that drawings are not meant for a specific painting: the purpose of a
drawing or a set of drawings may be to depict specific human figures (or objects) to be
included in more than one drawing. This may be the case when it concerns drawing
related to Virgin Mary and the Jesus child a motive which can be seen in more than
one of LdV:s painting (including , the Nativity, the Adoration of the
Magi, the Virgin and the Child with the Cat and the Virgin of the
Rocks). And, as is well-known, LdV also draw various motives in one and the same
drawing and thus, it can be difficult to ascertain the specific correlation between what
is depicted in a drawing and what is represented in one of his specific paintings.
The analysis here will be based on an examination of the rich collection of LdV drawings
as exihibited in 2003 in the Louvre Museum (see Leonardo de Vinci Dessins et
manuscripts , Musèe du Louvre, Paris, 2003, and also for page referns given below).
Several interesting observations can be made this collection.
There are several drawings focusing on the issue of depicting human movements /
turnings for example, drawings no. 14 ( >> la Vierge et lEnfant, avec le
petit saint Jean et un ange >> ) and no. 15 ( << Etude darcatures
en perspective, calculs mathèmaticques >>). These clearly show how LdV is working
on the issue of movement / turning by drawing the Jesus child different angles vis
à- vis the Virgin, and trying to works this out mathematically. The same is true
for drawings no. 16 ( << la Vierge et lEnfant tenant un Chat >> ) and
no. 18 ( recto, << Duex etudes pour la Vierge et lEnfant tenant un chat,
etc.>>) Of clear interest is the observation made pertaining to drawings no. 20
(recto, << la Vierge à lEnfant, dite Vierge aux fruits >> and
vesro, << Etude de construction architectural pour une voûte >> ) where one
speaks about << mobilité >> , as is also the case with regard to drawing no.
22 (recto, << LAdoration des Mages >> , see also fig. 36,p. 101 on
perspectives ). A very intresting cimment is made (p. 99) stating: <<elle est
définie avec ce procède, familier de Leonardo, de lajustement progressif
dunde idée par déplacement du motif autor dune axe , avec trios peutê tre
quatre positions différentes de la tête et autant pour le mouvements des jambs >>.
These and other
observations on different positions drawn related to specific person reflect on what has
been said before. Eminent experts very well recognize the existence of such a
multitude of positions and even, they use the word movement. However still, as said , they
overlook LdV:s purpose behind this way of drawing: to depict movements / turnings
in his paintings. Also, in some other respect, eminent experts can overlook a manifest
fact: according to the official registration of LdV:s place of birth , his first name is
not be spelled whit an e but whit an i in Leonardo - Li
onardo da Vinci ideale and not, Le onardo da Vinci !
Thus , based on analysis of LdV:s
drawings, his fascination with representing human movements / turnings can again be
established. But then, first, what could an analysis of LdV:s drawing tell us about a
possible link between specific drawings and his painting the Nativity ? And
second, what does such an analysis indicate on the existence of painting referred to here
as the Nativity ?
answer to the first question is that there are numerous drawings which can be linked to
the Nativity. This is even more so if one appreciates what was noted before:
LdV, when drawing a specific, may have been more concerned with the perfection of a specific
motive than with drawing for a specific painting.
The brief answer
to the second question is that there are clear indications of the existence of the
Nativity at the time of LdV. This conclusion can be reached based
on a focus on the motive represented in the Nativity and its relation to a
missing painting by LdV, relating to said motive.
Focusing on an
examination of the motives there are a number of darwings which clearly relate to the
Nativity, including no 13 (recto « la Vierge et lEnfant
tenant un chat » and verso « Etude dun enfant »), no 14 («
La Vierge assise, avec lEnfant et saint Lean-Baptiste; tête de putto »),
no 15(« La Vierge et lEnfant, avec le petit saint Jean et un ange »),
no 17 (recto, « La Vierge et lEnfant; profiles; esquisses techniques » and
verso « La Vierge et lEnfant »), no 18 (recto, « Deux éstudes pur
la Vierge et lEnfant tenant un chat ») and, of particular relevance, no. 20 (recto,
« La Vierge á lEnfant, dite Vierge aux fruits » and verso « Etude de
construction architectural pour une voûte »).
as shown in the expert comments referred to here in the source noted above -, in
establishing links between drawings and a specific painting, one may have different
opinions and perceptions.
However, as an absolute minimum, a well-founded
conclusion would be that those drawings referred to above (and others, possibly
including drawing no. 14, cat. 15 in the Ashmolean Museum; see Karl T. Perker
Catalogue of the Coollection of Drawings in the Ashmolean Museum, vol. II,
Italian schools, Oxford, 1956) in no way whatsoever exclude that LdV has painted
the Nativity. Moreover, drawings worked out for the purpose of depicting
in general the motive of Virgin Mary and the Jesus child. (cf. Musée du Louvre,
* * * * *
answer to the first question stated above is linked to what can be ascertain as an answer
to the second question stated above that is, the issue on a missing painting by LdV,
disappeared from the public domain. On this issue we should refer to several comments
made by eminent experts on LdV:s drawings and paintings (the page numbers stated
below refer to Musée du Louvre op.cit).
With regard to
various drawings focusing on the motive of Virgin Mary / Madonna and the child ant the cat
(p.75), the experts conclude that these were destined for some other
composition by LdV representing the motive with the virgin and the child. One notes that
many drawings related to the virgin and the cat do not seem to have given rise to any of
the specific known paintings of LdV (pp. 73-74): one speaks about the
mystery which pertains to LdV:s project focusing on the Madonna and the cat, and for what
painting these drawings were destined (p. 84). One also notes (p. 119
and pp. 132-134) that certain drawings are destined for some painting focusing on
the nativity or on the adoration of the Jesus child. Also, it is noted that LdV seems to
have abandoned a project on a painting focusing on the Madonna and the child.
speaks (p 134) of drawings directly destined for a non-documented
painting of the nativity where LdV focuses on representing Virgin Mary, the Jesus child
and St. John. It is said by the experts that LdV worked on this painting during the
years of 1480-1485. It is also noted that during LdVs lifetime, copies were made of
this painting: the conclusion by the experts is that the original painting may not have
been finished by LdV or, that it has disappeared from the public domain.
* * * * *
conclusions can now be arrived at based on an analysis of the comments made by the experts
(ref. Musée du Louvre op-cit.).
are several drawings which the experts are unable to link to a specific now known existing
painting by LdV.
there are clear statements made by the experts on a missing painting by LdV depicting
the motive of Virgin Mary, the Jesus child and St. John. The existence of such a LdV
painting is also supported by what this (op-cit. p 141 f.) is saying
based on his analysis of a drawing in the Windsor collection (drawing no. 13)
this drawing presents quite a large sketch for a Mary with Child and the
little St. John. The existence of such a painting can also be ascertain based
on Vasaris account of LdV:s life (as referred to in Jay Williams
Leonardo da Vinci, American Heritage Publishing Co. New York, 1965 and in
Swedish, Allhems Förlag, Malmö, 1966 p. 123): He seems to have painted
very little because it is told only about Madonna with the child and a Jesus child, which
was said to be captibating in its beauty, but there are no traces left of this.
* * * * *
There can be no doubt that these conclusions
refer to the Nativity. The reference ( Musée du Louvre op-cit., p.
134 ) to the existence of contemporary copies of this painting again give proof to
the existence of said painting: how could copies be made if the original did not exist?
to such copies is not at all surprising. All contemporary painters focused on
religious motives and above all, on the motive of Virgin Mary and the Jesus child. And
indeed, all contemporary (as is true for painters after that) painters
adored and envied LdV:s ability to depict referred to before, Andrea del Sarto made an
almost exact copy of LdV:s Jesus child painted by LdV. And, as said, Raphael also tried to
copy the way LdV depicted same motive but, as said, he also failed to represent LdV:s
technique related to movement / turning.
So then, us the Nativity as
referred to here a copy of an original Nativity? Hardly so, the examples just
referred to give proof to the fact that none of the contemporary painters could depict
movements / turnings, as being the specific unique trait of LdV:s style of painting. And,
if the Nativity, as referred to here, is a copy of an original
Nativity, then we would have detected a true sensation in the world of art
one more LdV would have existed in the world history of art- one more
painter would have been able to depict movements / turnings in the same way as LdV!
Nativity might have disappeared already during the lifetime of LdV is not an
unrealistic hypothesis. After all, the Kulenovic Family Estate which includes the
Nativity belongs, as said, to a prominent family whose documented history goes
back to the 12th century and whose main geographical sphere of operation was
Italy (more specially, the historic Republic of Venice): it can not be
excluded that the Family acquired the Nativity during the lifetime of LdV and
that the Nativity during the lifetime of LdV and that the Nativity
since then has been kept out of the public domain.
* * * * *
The analytical approach towards establishing the authenticity of the
Nativity has been directed towards establishing the specific unique trait of
Leonardo da Vinci as an artist, focusing on interpreting the specific language in which
his painting speaks. In so doing we have already including or touched upon
most of those points of observations which are comprised in a traditional approach towards
establishing authenticity of a painting, including the style of painting, similarities
whit other paintings by the same painter, the existence of documentary references to the
specific painting, the relation between drawings and the specific painting, etc. To
this , a few comments can be added with regard to the Nativity and elements of
importance in a process of establishing authenticity.
An iconographic analysis shows the complete correspondence between the
Nativity and so many other paintings and drawings by LdV: the focus on
religious motives and, above all, the overwhelming focus on Virgin Mary and the Jesus
child. From an examination of the physical attributes of the Nativity the
following ccan be noted: the size of the Painting is the same as the size of the painting.
La Gioconda (Mona-Lisa, 77x66 cm, before the painting was cut in
1911 on the vertical sides, in connection with its theft from the Louvre museum; the
current size of the Mona-Lisa paintings is 77x53 cm ); the frame of the painting is the
same including the coils and the Bethlehem star, on which LdV has produced many
drawings as that of the Madonna in the Cave (Louvre Museum); the
painting is on a canvas fixed to cardboard / carton; the canvas of the painting is in a
state of a certain degree of decomposition; etc. To this as
referred to above can also be added the facts related to the context in which
the nativity is found: in a family estate consisting of wonderful artworks,
based on several hundred years of passionate devotion to art thus, the context is
exactly that in which it would be probable to find a piece of art of this status.
And finally, there is the issue on the highly intricate way in which Leonardo daVinci
signed his paintings: an issues that will be referred to in some other context, taking its
point of departure in LdV:s painting the nativity, extending this issues to
LdV:s other paintings.
taking into account all what has been said above, there is no doubt whatsoever that the
Nativiti is an original painting by Leonardo da Vinci ! And in the end, who
could refute this and the pronouncement of what is the specific unique trait of LdV:s
genius as a painter the proofs is in the pudding: everyone is invited to visit The
Culenovic Collection Museum and pass by the Nativity, taking away the
persons breath hi / she realizes how human beings represented on a flat
canvas are moving their limbs and other body parts, continuously facing these
towards the observer as he / she is passing by in half circle around the Nativity
For sure, the launching publicly on an international scale of the
Nativity, in the context of the launching of The Culenovic Collection Museum in
its new location, will arouse a worldwide attention and be of huge importance in the
world of art: for the first time, in hundreds of years, the Nativity will be
seen publicly, a painting which probably is the most skillfully composed painting of any
of LdV:s all known paintings ! And of course, this launching will occur simultaneously
whit the launching of the Kulenovic Theory on Movements / Turnings in Lionardo da
Vinics Paintings, presented by the caretaker having devoted
several decades of his life to art studies, particularly of LdV of the Kulenovic
Family Collection of Art Objects, comprising the Nativity and a host of
other wonderful paintings and objects of art. The launching of the Kulenovic Theory
will document its relevance for the Nativiti but also, for all those paintings
which are generality accepted as being original LdV paintings.
should be clearly appreciated that launching of the Nativity will not occur
without arousing controversy: there are so many vested interests in the field of LdV
and his paintings both as it concerns scholars in the art world and actors in the
commercial sector of this world. All of these have, of course and understandably so, a
vested interest in questioning the originality of the Nativity and the
Kulenovic Theory, having overlooked what is the specific unique trait of Leonardo da Vinci
as a painter. However, this in itself - especially in combination whit the fact that, as
said , the proof is in the pudding does not need to present any major
problem it will only heighten the interest in the painting. And, indeed the same
will be true with regard to the launching of the Culenovic Theory of Movements /
Turnings in Lionardo da Vincis painting: the application of this theory to any
painting professed to be an original painting of Leonardo da Vinci , vill sift the wheat
from the chaff !