About the Modigliani Initiative

The Modigliani Initiative is an independent nonprofit research organization dedicated to the careful study and documentation of Amedeo Modigliani’s life, work, and circle. Founded by art historians Leslie Koot and Julia May Boddewyn, it operates as a 501(c)(3) entity with a clear scholarly mandate: to build a reliable, publicly accessible body of knowledge grounded in primary sources, archival research, and verifiable facts rather than market considerations.
The Initiative is supported in its endeavors by a highly respected group of scholars and curators who serve as Advisors.

Unlike traditional catalogues raisonnés, the Initiative does not authenticate works, issue certificates, or charge fees for opinions. Its Amedeo Modigliani Digital Catalogue (AMDC) is explicitly presented as a research resource, not a definitive catalogue raisonné. The first phase focuses on the fifty-nine paintings held in public collections in the United States that appear in Ambrogio Ceroni’s 1970 catalogue, providing high-resolution images, expanded provenance, exhibition histories, and related literature. Future phases are expected to broaden this scope. The organization maintains an extensive internal database that cross-references models, collectors, dealers, exhibitions, and publications, enabling connections that are often difficult to establish through conventional catalogues alone.

This approach has already produced concrete scholarly contributions. Through its Spotlight essays and the Modigliani Reconsidered series, the Initiative has published research that identifies previously overlooked sitters, clarifies exhibition histories, and reexamines works omitted from Ceroni on the basis of lifetime references and archival evidence. These findings do not claim to settle questions of authenticity; instead, they supply documented material that other scholars, curators, and institutions can evaluate independently. By prioritizing open research over commercial services, the Initiative offers a useful counterpoint in a field long marked by competing catalogues, disputed attributions, and market pressures. Its independence and refusal to issue certificates for payment distinguish its work and give its discoveries a particular value for anyone seeking to understand Modigliani’s oeuvre on the basis of evidence rather than opinion alone.

The Modigliani Initiative faces a set of structural challenges that are inherent to the study of an artist whose oeuvre remains incompletely mapped and commercially contested. As the organization expands beyond its initial focus on the fifty-nine Ceroni-listed paintings in U.S. public collections, it will need to decide how far to extend its documentation of works that fall outside the most widely accepted catalogue. Its “Modigliani Reconsidered” essays already demonstrate an interest in pieces with lifetime references that Ceroni omitted; scaling this approach will require sustained archival research and technical collaboration while preserving the clear distinction the Initiative has drawn between documentation and authentication.

A second difficulty lies in the crowded and polarized landscape of existing catalogues raisonnés. With MR’s multi-volume publication now “available” and other projects continuing to circulate, the Initiative’s refusal to issue certificates or definitive attributions may limit its influence on the market even as it strengthens its scholarly credibility. Institutions, collectors, and auction houses have long relied on Ceroni as a practical filter; any resource that deliberately withholds that function risks being treated as supplementary rather than authoritative, regardless of the quality of its research.

Funding and institutional independence present a related constraint. As a nonprofit reliant on grants, donations, and institutional partnerships, the Initiative must maintain its distance from commercial interests while securing the resources needed for long-term digital infrastructure, high-resolution imaging, and continued archival work. Legal exposure is another practical concern: even carefully worded statements about contested works can attract challenges from owners or competing experts, particularly in a field with a history of litigation.

Finally, the Initiative will have to manage expectations. Its emphasis on open, fact-based research and its explicit rejection of paid certificates distinguish it from market-oriented services, yet the demand for clear answers about authenticity is unlikely to diminish. Success will depend on its ability to enlarge the documented record, foster wider scholarly consensus, and remain transparent about the limits of what its evidence can support. If it sustains that balance, its contributions can continue to clarify aspects of Modigliani’s production that catalogues focused primarily on attribution have left under-examined.

So, lets give them time to work and a bit of trust.