The Voynich Ninja

Interesting...
You've got the eagle incorporated into a flag - that's sort of close to the eagle motif *as* a flag or banner. However, the semy of fleur-de-lys and a red and white double 'bordure' is just not the same thing as the the heraldic use of a "label" even though both make reference to French connections.

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

Three variations of a label are shown. Generally only one is used on an insignia. Other styles of representation also exist.

Labels are used on a number of these insignia.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

The chief, as it was described, exists in heraldry. Was it also a flag or banner? Still not sure about that.

Stefano Guidoni commented on my blog about the Scrovegni chapel in Padua, where Giotto depicted the Golden Gate with swallowtail merlons. It's been added.

Also in the Peruzzi chapel in Florence.



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

I'm getting a bit lost here.
Have you got:
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Some lovely examples here in this You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

And just to be mischevious, the Kremlin?


I also found this panel from a cassoni (bridal chest). The Story of Trajan and the Widow, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view., c.1450. Note the wall in the background.

David, did you confirm for all of those buildings that they had swallowtail merlons pre-1450? For example the bridge from your first link has been completely rebuilt, and parts of the castle as well.

On the subject of Guelphs and Ghibilines, I have tried to get my head around the distinction and have found that the more one looks into the topic the more complicated it seems to be. Nevertheless I am keen to get to grips with it.

I wonder if they were almost like political parties such as Capitalists and Socialists or Liberals and Conservative. However I am not clear as it what extent one can differentiate between the political policies or positions of one party versus the other. I wonder to what extent people viewed them in terms of their own tribal identity i.e. my father was a Guelph so I am a Guelph, that is why I compare them to football clubs where ideology is not a consideration. Also I wonder to what extent they were more defined in opposition to one another, so for example, I hate the way that the Guelphs have been running my city therefore I support the Ghibilines. So that Guelphs are really anti-Ghibilines and Ghibilines are really anti-Guelphs.

I have a suspicion that the distinction between Guelphs and Ghibilines comes down to many considerations and that it cannot be neatly summarised.

(23-09-2021, 03:46 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.David, did you confirm for all of those buildings that they had swallowtail merlons pre-1450? For example the bridge from your first link has been completely rebuilt, and parts of the castle as well.

Verona undertook a very careful reconstruction programme after WWII to replace medieval buildings destroyed during the war. The intention was to restore them to their original style, or as close as possible.
For example, the bridge is mid 14th century. It was badly damaged by the French in 1804 and blown up during WWII. It was restored to its original medieval structure by architect Libero Cecchini, who went so far as to make the new blocks from the original 14th century quarry the original stone came from. According to the tourist board, the merlons were rebuilt in brick "following the original colour, materials and style". Although I have been hunting around, I don't know if the original merlons (destroyed by the French) were swallowtail in style or not. However, given that they are such a prominent part of the structure, and it is right next to Castelvecchio, I assume they were all the same.

Castelvecchio castle was likewise blown up in WWII, and rebuilt in 1949. It underwent another restoration which finished by 1965. In You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.showing the 1945 aftermath you can see remains of the original swallowtail merlons.

Cefalú cathedral is a 12th century building that has undergone changes over time. Given that it is in Sicily, away from the Ghibiline influence, the swallowtails are likely a later addition and may have nothing to do with politics. I can't find anything about that, although they seem to be pre-Renaissance. The cathedral is an UNESCO monument due to its originality.

Verona city gate, again destroyed during the war. Haven't hunted up references, but I assume that it was subject to the same restoration programme as the other monuments.

The old castle for sale, no idea. Likewise for the Kremlin wall!

(23-09-2021, 04:42 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I wonder if they were almost like political parties such as Capitalists and Socialists or Liberals and Conservative. However I am not clear as it what extent one can differentiate between the political policies or positions of one party versus the other. I wonder to what extent people viewed them in terms of their own tribal identity i.e. my father was a Guelph so I am a Guelph, that is why I compare them to football clubs where ideology is not a consideration. Also I wonder to what extent they were more defined in opposition to one another, so for example, I hate the way that the Guelphs have been running my city therefore I support the Ghibilines. So that Guelphs are really anti-Ghibilines and Ghibilines are really anti-Guelphs.

OK, stop thinking like that and you'll start to understand.
We are talking about factions here. The average serf had no choice in the matter, he and his family followed their master. The master followed their patron. The patron (doge) changed allegiance based on the politics of the era. An entire town could switch allegiance based on the whim of the doge. And the fact that a town had switched could cause their rival doges, who now found themselves on the same side, to switch in turn just to spite their enemy.... ie, when Milan switched to Guelph, the city of Parvia at once came out for the Ghibilines.
The two sides emerged from a civil war in Germany after the Holy Roman Emperor Henry V died in 1125. The heirs were quarrelling over who would be the new HRE. The Papacy supported one side, and the Imperials the other. Remember that the HRE was also the King of Italy, although this was mainly symbolic it did have political repercussions across Italy when the new King was crowned.
Eventually, the whole warring thing became unsustainable and everyone agreed to an electoral college, where the princes could vote the new HRE in. Far more dignified.

(23-09-2021, 05:59 PM)davidjackson Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

(23-09-2021, 04:42 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I wonder if they were almost like political parties such as Capitalists and Socialists or Liberals and Conservative. However I am not clear as it what extent one can differentiate between the political policies or positions of one party versus the other. I wonder to what extent people viewed them in terms of their own tribal identity i.e. my father was a Guelph so I am a Guelph, that is why I compare them to football clubs where ideology is not a consideration. Also I wonder to what extent they were more defined in opposition to one another, so for example, I hate the way that the Guelphs have been running my city therefore I support the Ghibilines. So that Guelphs are really anti-Ghibilines and Ghibilines are really anti-Guelphs.

OK, stop thinking like that and you'll start to understand.
We are talking about factions here. The average serf had no choice in the matter, he and his family followed their master. The master followed their patron. The patron (doge) changed allegiance based on the politics of the era. An entire town could switch allegiance based on the whim of the doge. And the fact that a town had switched could cause their rival doges, who now found themselves on the same side, to switch in turn just to spite their enemy.... ie, when Milan switched to Guelph, the city of Parvia at once came out for the Ghibilines.

I'm afraid I don't feel like I understand the situation any better after your explanation.

Of course there are different factions, but this is really like parties although there can be factions within parties. In modern British politics one could talk about the Corbyn faction or Blairite faction. In the 19th century in Britain you had the Torys and the Whigs, but most people couldn't vote, so it is not necessary for every citizen to have the vote in order for this parallel to apply. In ancient Greece most people such as slaves did not take part in the democracy.  So the presence of serfs in that society doesn't discount that the phenomena that there were political groupings of people. There were many different groups of people who were not serfs such as merchants, aristocrats, clergy and others.

In Milan the Ambrosian republic was established after a popular revolt.

At an earlier period Ghibilines rebels assassinated Giovanni Maria Visconti.

These were to an extent popular uprisings. So I think your explanation doesn't really captures it. These were not only top down identifications.

When you refer to Parvia, I guess you are referring to Pavia, which period are you pointing to?

I know about the historical origins of the grouping of Guelphs and Ghibilines, but as I said clearly these groupings came to be more than that. Did you read my earlier comments in this thread?

So I am still in the position of feeling that I don't have a good understanding of the dynamics and nature of these groupings.

The Kremlin wall dates from 1485-1495, so its current form is 100% irrelevant for VM research: it didn't exist yet. From the wiki:

Quote:By the end of the 15th century, however, it was clear that the old constructions had long passed their time and Czar Ivan the Great's visions. Between 1485 and 1495 a whole brigade of Italian architects took part in the erection of a new defence perimeter including Antonio Fryazin (Antonio Gilardi), Marko Fryazin (Marco Ruffo), Pyotr Fryazin (Pietro Antonio Solari) and Alexei Fryazin the Old (Aloisio da Milano).[7] (The term Fryazin was used to refer to all people of Italian origin at this time). The new walls were erected by building on top of the older walls (some white stone can still be seen at the base in some places).

This is why the 1450 cutoff is so important.