You can see for yourself in the example on White Aries, the nymph with a red hat and blue stripes. This is not a nymph with a blue hat and red stripes, or any other color combination. Is this just a chance combination of color and pattern?
If you are familiar with the origins of the tradition of the cardinal's red galero, you may know that it began with Pope Innocent IV, who was Sinibaldo Fieschi, whose family possessed an armorial insignia blazoned as bendy, argent et azur. When you look at the VMs illustration, it should be recognized that there are two ways to interpret how the blue striped patterns might fit into a standard heraldic interpretation. Both radial and page-base interpretations exist. And here, the more subtle, page-based interpretation shows a pairing of pattern orientations that almost matches the standard heraldic, bendy pattern and the stripes are blue.
Innocent IV raised several of his relatives to the rank of cardinal. The most significant of these in 1251, was his nephew, Ottobuono Fieschi, who was later elected pope as Adrian V. The papelonny patterns on the preceding pages make the suggestion that they both are popes, and in fact history confirms it. A red hat and blue stripes in a pair of bendy patterns is the only color and pattern combination that has any historical significance.
Not only is the secondary interpretation the one that was and is historically significant, the existence of a secondary interpretation of such apparent significance is a clear revelation of duplicity and a warning to beware of VMs trickery - if that wasn't already apparent in the VMs cosmos. Not only do the VMs illustrations appear odd by their nature, they are made strange and ambiguous by intent.
What exists are two intentionally ambiguous nymphs and a darn good match to historical events of traditional significance promulgated by one of the primary systems of visual communication (heraldry) concurrent with VMs dates for one of history's primay religious organizations. The illustrations are ambiguous, but the history is good. An interesting story, too easily dismissed?
Here is where the investigation returns to the source of the White Aries illustration, If the illustrations are ambiguous, the structure is not. If the interpretation of the illustrations is subjective, the interpretation of the structure is objective. The structure is composed of hierarchical position, heraldic placement, sacrificial association and heraldic canting. All this structure is objective in its detail. It does not depend on the interpretation of appearance. It does not seem reasonable to me that the artist would or could construct these various independent structures that confirm an identification that was *unknown* to the image creator. The structure was not built around a mistaken interpretation. There is a valid history.
If the structure is objective and the appearance is ambiguous, what more is needed when deception and obfuscation have already been clearly shown? Potentially ambiguous interpretations can be validated by historical investigation and the examination of internal VMs details. There is more to ambiguous appearance that just seeing the visual differences. It also helps to try to appropriately interpret the more significant examples of C-14 iconography and learn more about them, as it relates to the VMs.
If you are familiar with the origins of the tradition of the cardinal's red galero, you may know that it began with Pope Innocent IV, who was Sinibaldo Fieschi, whose family possessed an armorial insignia blazoned as bendy, argent et azur. When you look at the VMs illustration, it should be recognized that there are two ways to interpret how the blue striped patterns might fit into a standard heraldic interpretation. Both radial and page-base interpretations exist. And here, the more subtle, page-based interpretation shows a pairing of pattern orientations that almost matches the standard heraldic, bendy pattern and the stripes are blue.
Innocent IV raised several of his relatives to the rank of cardinal. The most significant of these in 1251, was his nephew, Ottobuono Fieschi, who was later elected pope as Adrian V. The papelonny patterns on the preceding pages make the suggestion that they both are popes, and in fact history confirms it. A red hat and blue stripes in a pair of bendy patterns is the only color and pattern combination that has any historical significance.
Not only is the secondary interpretation the one that was and is historically significant, the existence of a secondary interpretation of such apparent significance is a clear revelation of duplicity and a warning to beware of VMs trickery - if that wasn't already apparent in the VMs cosmos. Not only do the VMs illustrations appear odd by their nature, they are made strange and ambiguous by intent.
What exists are two intentionally ambiguous nymphs and a darn good match to historical events of traditional significance promulgated by one of the primary systems of visual communication (heraldry) concurrent with VMs dates for one of history's primay religious organizations. The illustrations are ambiguous, but the history is good. An interesting story, too easily dismissed?
Here is where the investigation returns to the source of the White Aries illustration, If the illustrations are ambiguous, the structure is not. If the interpretation of the illustrations is subjective, the interpretation of the structure is objective. The structure is composed of hierarchical position, heraldic placement, sacrificial association and heraldic canting. All this structure is objective in its detail. It does not depend on the interpretation of appearance. It does not seem reasonable to me that the artist would or could construct these various independent structures that confirm an identification that was *unknown* to the image creator. The structure was not built around a mistaken interpretation. There is a valid history.
If the structure is objective and the appearance is ambiguous, what more is needed when deception and obfuscation have already been clearly shown? Potentially ambiguous interpretations can be validated by historical investigation and the examination of internal VMs details. There is more to ambiguous appearance that just seeing the visual differences. It also helps to try to appropriately interpret the more significant examples of C-14 iconography and learn more about them, as it relates to the VMs.