The Voynich Ninja

Quote:You have found swallowtail merlons in northern Italy. Now show me a coned tower with balcony from northern Italy and you win.

I haven't just "found" swallowtail merlons in northern Italy.

If you had glanced at the history of the Ghibelline and Guelphs, as I suggested, you would know that Ghibelline merlons originated there as a political statement. There is plenty of textual evidence to support it even if one can't find very many pictures.

Quote:You have found swallowtail merlons in northern Italy. Now show me a coned tower with balcony from northern Italy and you win.

There's no proof that it's a coned tower. We've discussed this before.

See the two tickmarks at the top corners of the tower? It's similar to the tower a few inches away, just slightly smaller and less detailed:



That usually means it's a saddleback tower with a flag at each apex, a common style in Bavaria and parts of Lombardy at the time. I've posted pictures of saddlebacks on another thread.

Counteroffer

Find the origin of that painting with the towers, since that is your evidence, let's start there. 

There is no point discussing it, if it was never meant to show the event you speak of, no matter how many websites post it as such.  Also no point if the painting was done in the 14th or 15th century, or any time not contemporary with the event, since they would just have been dreaming up the scene and there would be nothing to look for.

(05-03-2019, 03:49 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Counteroffer

Find the origin of that painting with the towers, since that is your evidence, let's start there. 

There is no point discussing it, if it was never meant to show the event you speak of, no matter how many websites post it as such.  Also no point if the painting was done in the 14th or 15th century, or any time not contemporary with the event, since they would just have been dreaming up the scene and there would be nothing to look for.

It's not a painting. It's an illustration from a medieval manuscript which is all I can recall about it.

Both the VMS drawing and this illustration were likely made after the event, which could account for one or the other making a mistake regarding the top of the cone, as pointed out by JP. From a distance, a very narrow saddleback might look like a cone. A cone with two flags from a small opening on the top would be another possibility.

There can be no doubt that the illustration depicts Montségur: the winding path, the catapult, the French soldiers on the left, and the bonfire in a field below, all point to Montségur.

Yes ok it is an illustration, but which medieval manuscript. You should want to know, i would think.

(05-03-2019, 03:40 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Quote:You have found swallowtail merlons in northern Italy. Now show me a coned tower with balcony from northern Italy and you win.

There's no proof that it's a coned tower. We've discussed this before.

See the two tickmarks at the top corners of the tower? It's similar to the tower a few inches away, just slightly smaller and less detailed:



That usually means it's a saddleback tower with a flag at each apex, a common style in Bavaria and parts of Lombardy at the time. I've posted pictures of saddlebacks on another thread.

JP, Rectangular towers lead to saddleback tops and circular towers lead to conical tops. That's common sense. The VMS depiction of Montségur gives no indication that the tower is rectangular (like it does for the other depiction you show us), so it could very well be a conical tower with a small opening on top for the protrusion of two flags. The other medieval drawing of Montségur clearly reflects a roundish tower, a circular balcony and a conical top.

Yep, toast and toast. Circa 1400, know how i knew? Because of the hats. I just wanted to prove it to myself first.

And



PHILIP II AUGUSTUS, 1165-1223, watches heretics burn during the Crusade against the Albigensians in 1209, manuscript illumination from the Grandes Chroniques de St Denis, c. 1400

It was pretty specific about not being your bonfire. So it would make no difference to discuss whether or not this spire or that matches the vms unless you want to move your massacre down to this one, but even then, they are likely imagined, since it is 200 years later.

The tower on the left is a very tiny drawing and it has two ticks, like the one on the right, which is quite a bit bigger.

There is no way you (or any of us) can know for sure if the left tower is round or the roof is conical, and it would be very rare for two flags to protrude out of a pointed tower. More likely it is a smaller version of the one on the right, but no one can know for sure.

Even if they are, the illustration you are using of the burning of the Cathars is a later version and whoever drew it probably never saw the original towers and just made up some towers. This is very common in medieval illuminations. Look how many different versions there are of this event:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

Look at these towers. Each one has one flag and the arrangement of the towers is completely different from the VMS drawing:




You are imposing your desires on what you see rather than trying to figure out what it really is.

(05-03-2019, 07:40 AM)Linda Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yep, toast and toast. Circa 1400, know how i knew? Because of the hats. I just wanted to prove it to myself first.

And



PHILIP II AUGUSTUS, 1165-1223, watches heretics burn during the Crusade against the Albigensians in 1209, manuscript illumination from the Grandes Chroniques de St Denis, c. 1400

It was pretty specific about not being your bonfire. So it would make no difference to discuss whether or not this spire or that matches the vms unless you want to move your massacre down to this one, but even then, they are likely imagined, since it is 200 years later.

I've given you a "like" because I really appreciate seeing the full page.

Wikipedia says: "When Pope Innocent III called for a crusade against the "Albigensians," or Cathars, in Languedoc in 1208, Philip did nothing to support it, though he did not stop his nobles from joining in."

Please tell us where Philip personally oversaw the burning of Cathars so that we can identify the mountaintop fortress seen in the background. Thanks.

I thought kings were normally depicted wearing a crown whether they were actually wearing one at the moment or not. Why isn't Philip II depicted with a crown?

Lastly, please tell us which part of the manuscript text you translate as saying "PHILIP II AUGUSTUS, 1165-1223, watches heretics burn during the Crusade against the Albigensians in 1209." I can read French and am having trouble seeing that description, or even an approximation of that description for that matter.

Also note that publication date is not the same as creation date (a common confusion in this forum) as the artist here was very likely copying a much older drawing.

(05-03-2019, 07:40 AM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.The tower on the left is a very tiny drawing and it has two ticks, like the one on the right, which is quite a bit bigger.

There is no way you (or any of us) can know for sure if the left tower is round or the roof is conical, and it would be very rare for two flags to protrude out of a pointed tower. More likely it is a smaller version of the one on the right, but no one can know for sure.

Even if they are, the illustration you are using of the burning of the Cathars is a later version and whoever drew it probably never saw the original towers and just made up some towers. This is very common in medieval illuminations. Look how many different versions there are of this event:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.:

Look at these towers. Each one has one flag and the arrangement of the towers is completely different from the VMS drawing:




You are imposing your desires on what you see rather than trying to figure out what it really is.

JP, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the VMS artist's memory nor for the realism of his or her artistic style. But a fortress tightly squeezed by seep slopes is clearly indicated and this fits Montségur perfectly, and, as I have repeatedly stated, there are pointers to Cathars in the VMS.

Cones appear to have been a popular architectural feature of that region of France and it seems logical that Montségur's tower (we know it had a tower from historical records) would have been conical in shape.