Too spoon

I mean of course not unheard of but it's kinda odd to think jesus' parents would just have a statuette of a method of execution. It'd be like having [insert revered religious figure/beloved humanitarian of history] in an electric chair, presuming that the figure is not a crucifixion of jesus.

You mean... like Jesus?

Yes like Jesus, but we can't use Jesus. That'd create paradoxes which the painting is implying. Either that or the keeper of the stable Jesus was born in really liked crucifixion art.

Lol. I agree with famousone on this so far. The thought crossed my mind that it COULD be a cross with someone else on it. For precedent- many saints are depicted in the often horrifying ways they died, and people display those. It’s also not so uncommon through history for people to use animal and human body parts or bones and decoration, from ivory to pelts to mounted heads or horns and even human skulls, teeth, and ears. Terrorists like Ernesto Guevara or Osama Bin Laden are commonly used as decorations for home and self. Serial killer paintings and such are less common, but are sometimes found as decoration, and beheadings, quartering, people in stocks- all historically common wall art. So I mean.... it COULD just be a case or foreshadowing or even an odd coincidence- perhaps a photo of an infant Donald Trump might have a painting of the White House in it.

Most likely in my mind is that the artist put it in there to try and make the religious iconography clear or “brand it.” I lean- the original question on this thread implies that the painting, of its own merits, isn’t universally clear in the subject it depicts. So perhaps the artist said: “better add a cross.” If it weren’t for the cross, I probably would have stopped looking at the painting before I realized it was a nativity.

It’s very pre renaissance, knowing this there might even be an insert of the person who commissioned this piece.