Thanks for taking the time to reply.
Koen,
That is exactly my point. The whole page of White Aries is painted to emphasize the whiteness of the animal in the medallion. If the page is unpainted, then coloration is not defined. This apparently indicates that the application of paint of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was to some extent planned in advance. And it seems to contradict the opinion expressed in Stolfi's remark that you posted, which negates the possibility of intentional decisions in the choice of coloration. Specifically that paint was applied by someone who did not understand what s/he was doing.
I disagree. White Aries is white for a reason. And that reason has to do with the traditional dictates of religious sacrifice. Surely, as a proponent of Hellenistic influences, you are aware of the old tradition of sacrificing white animals to celestial divinities and dark animals to the chthonic deities. All the other VMs animals are darkly painted and this (f71r) is the only one, (with whiteness emphasized), that is suitable for celestial sacrifice. This suggestion of celestial connotations is very compatible with certain historical persons of high religious office also represented on this page. This is one of the objective, positional confirmations I have listed - that the blue-striped patterns were put on the White Aries page *for a reason*! Because they share the celestial connection!
Sam G,
Now we're getting to it. One of the figures associated with the blue-striped patterns is *unquestionably female* and therefore the whole construction collapses. Let's look more closely at that illustration.
In keeping with the thorough painting of the page (f71r), the body of this 'nymph' has been colored red. So it seems unlikely that this figure is nude, as is generally seen on other pages. Then, in this pattern of red paint, there is something that looks like a breast, or a pocket on a shirt. Are we seeing something that is on the clothing or under the clothing? Certainly it is possible for overweight men to accumulate fat in such a way as to give a similar appearance *under* clothing. So the *unquestionably female* viewpoint is not unquestionable.
But also look at the structure of the illustration itself. Typically breasts are drawn with simple ink lines. But in this example, we have a collection of red dots. Do you think the artist painted each of these dots individually to create the current image?
Let's also look at the matter of the papelonny pattern. First of all, your alternating, black and white is not the best representation of this design. Take a look at the red and gold pattern attributed to Chotard Chateaubriand. All the scales are red and the lines used to define the pattern are gold.
Meanwhile, your 'Not Papelonny' counter example is simply not relevant. Besides the looping lines used to make the scales, it is crossed with a series of horizontal lines that are completely extraneous to the VMs illustration.
We have the VMs illustration, and in some cases the alignment of the scales does not match up with the line above. These patterns in the VMs are rather small, and perhaps a bit sloppy. And the VMs is not intended as an instruction manual for heraldry. Rather, I would argue that the illustrations are supposed to be evocative of heraldic patterns, sufficiently so that they convey the *idea* of papelonny, in this case, and that the reader is supposed to use that idea, rather than quibble about minor details. That is, if the evocative interpretation makes sense in context, the interpretation is likely to be valid, even if the actual image isn't perfect in every detail. And while that is certainly more difficult to accomplish in the construction of a visual pun. We do have the fact that the location of the two papelonny patterns clearly does mimic the placement of the two blue-striped patterns as to the intentional placement in a specific quadrant and a specific celestial sphere. How is it that pape and papelonny are aligned *in pairs?*
Incidentally, there is a historical connection between Chotard Chateaubriand, as suggested by the papelonny pattern, and Pope Innocent IV, suggested by the blue-striped pattern, through their mutual association with the French King Louis IX. And this is another factor that adds to the confirmation of the White Aries identification. The VMs creator knows the history and the heraldry that are relevant to the origins of the tradition of the red galero. The subtle and inventive use that has been made of this information is clearly unexpected.
Koen,
That is exactly my point. The whole page of White Aries is painted to emphasize the whiteness of the animal in the medallion. If the page is unpainted, then coloration is not defined. This apparently indicates that the application of paint of You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. was to some extent planned in advance. And it seems to contradict the opinion expressed in Stolfi's remark that you posted, which negates the possibility of intentional decisions in the choice of coloration. Specifically that paint was applied by someone who did not understand what s/he was doing.
I disagree. White Aries is white for a reason. And that reason has to do with the traditional dictates of religious sacrifice. Surely, as a proponent of Hellenistic influences, you are aware of the old tradition of sacrificing white animals to celestial divinities and dark animals to the chthonic deities. All the other VMs animals are darkly painted and this (f71r) is the only one, (with whiteness emphasized), that is suitable for celestial sacrifice. This suggestion of celestial connotations is very compatible with certain historical persons of high religious office also represented on this page. This is one of the objective, positional confirmations I have listed - that the blue-striped patterns were put on the White Aries page *for a reason*! Because they share the celestial connection!
Sam G,
Now we're getting to it. One of the figures associated with the blue-striped patterns is *unquestionably female* and therefore the whole construction collapses. Let's look more closely at that illustration.
In keeping with the thorough painting of the page (f71r), the body of this 'nymph' has been colored red. So it seems unlikely that this figure is nude, as is generally seen on other pages. Then, in this pattern of red paint, there is something that looks like a breast, or a pocket on a shirt. Are we seeing something that is on the clothing or under the clothing? Certainly it is possible for overweight men to accumulate fat in such a way as to give a similar appearance *under* clothing. So the *unquestionably female* viewpoint is not unquestionable.
But also look at the structure of the illustration itself. Typically breasts are drawn with simple ink lines. But in this example, we have a collection of red dots. Do you think the artist painted each of these dots individually to create the current image?
Let's also look at the matter of the papelonny pattern. First of all, your alternating, black and white is not the best representation of this design. Take a look at the red and gold pattern attributed to Chotard Chateaubriand. All the scales are red and the lines used to define the pattern are gold.
Meanwhile, your 'Not Papelonny' counter example is simply not relevant. Besides the looping lines used to make the scales, it is crossed with a series of horizontal lines that are completely extraneous to the VMs illustration.
We have the VMs illustration, and in some cases the alignment of the scales does not match up with the line above. These patterns in the VMs are rather small, and perhaps a bit sloppy. And the VMs is not intended as an instruction manual for heraldry. Rather, I would argue that the illustrations are supposed to be evocative of heraldic patterns, sufficiently so that they convey the *idea* of papelonny, in this case, and that the reader is supposed to use that idea, rather than quibble about minor details. That is, if the evocative interpretation makes sense in context, the interpretation is likely to be valid, even if the actual image isn't perfect in every detail. And while that is certainly more difficult to accomplish in the construction of a visual pun. We do have the fact that the location of the two papelonny patterns clearly does mimic the placement of the two blue-striped patterns as to the intentional placement in a specific quadrant and a specific celestial sphere. How is it that pape and papelonny are aligned *in pairs?*
Incidentally, there is a historical connection between Chotard Chateaubriand, as suggested by the papelonny pattern, and Pope Innocent IV, suggested by the blue-striped pattern, through their mutual association with the French King Louis IX. And this is another factor that adds to the confirmation of the White Aries identification. The VMs creator knows the history and the heraldry that are relevant to the origins of the tradition of the red galero. The subtle and inventive use that has been made of this information is clearly unexpected.