Koen & Diane,
Koen's questions:
1) Why is this Zodiac in the VMs? Because the creator of the VMs apparently put it there. Why is heraldry in the Zodiac? Because it's a good place to put it where it is not patently obvious. What is it's purpose? It is part of a hidden narrative.
2) Why is it hidden? If the VMs is intended to convey secret information, this is part of an intentionally disguised pathway for subsequent readers to access that information.
3) The sacrificial reference is relevant to historical tradition, not to current practice - at the time of the VMs.
::
Diane,
Glitches ahoy! When you mention "a certain pattern within the small profession of heraldry", how is heraldry a small profession? Didn't heraldry involve pretty much *all* of the nobility of Europe, and those who dealt with them? Heraldry in the Middle Ages, *at the time of VMs composition* was not small and insignificant.
I have called these patterns 'evocative' of traditional heraldic designs. And that is because, besides clear visual similarities, heraldry has given these patterns their names. It is not necessary to replicate any example perfectly in order to provide a basis for further investigation. Such a basis can also be substantiated by the number of relevant examples. What is important in these examples is the initiation and promulgation of heraldry as an idea. Is there some other discipline or enterprise (mosaics, woodworking, textiles) which can match any of the VMs patterns with its own set of names and definitions. Suggesting various hypothetical interpretations without *any* concrete examples is a pretty weak argument. [Heraldry is the discipline; paly, bendy, barry, chevrony, papelonny, etc. are the examples.]
I have suggested that heraldry is a discipline that can be used as a method of interpretation, and have given the example of a specific, paired armorial insignia, ecclesiastical heraldry, proper hierarchical positioning, favored heraldic placement and a combined celestial association to demonstrate an illustrated (f71r), historical reference to the origins of a chronologically relevant and on going religious tradition (the cardinal's red galero). Can the creation of such a complex construction be attributed to an uninformed and careless individual?
Not all the tub patterns are heraldic. Is it possible to create ambiguity and disguise, if everything matches perfectly? If some examples match heraldry and some do not, why is that a problem? If you can put a name to any pattern I have omitted, from any tradition, please do so. I prefer comparing VMs illustrations with other images of the *same* time period and naming them with contemporaneous terminology, before looking to more distant sources.
What is your familiarity with heraldry, prior to my investigations? Nebuly is a heraldic line of division, not an insignia pattern. And if you are thinking of the person who started calling any and every scale-like pattern in the VMs a representation of papelonny, after I introduced the term, that was someone else.
The glitch here, in my estimation, is the failure of investigators to recognize even the possibility of heraldic correspondences, which are both relevant and contemporary with VMs manufacture. And this is due to a lack of familiarity with the topic in general and the comparative obscurity of the specific, relevant details, like nebuly and papelonny in particular. Apparently this gives skeptics the opportunity to focus on the apparent ambiguities, without considering the underlying, traditional and historical realities, contemporary with VMs creation, with which they are otherwise unacquainted.
Koen's questions:
1) Why is this Zodiac in the VMs? Because the creator of the VMs apparently put it there. Why is heraldry in the Zodiac? Because it's a good place to put it where it is not patently obvious. What is it's purpose? It is part of a hidden narrative.
2) Why is it hidden? If the VMs is intended to convey secret information, this is part of an intentionally disguised pathway for subsequent readers to access that information.
3) The sacrificial reference is relevant to historical tradition, not to current practice - at the time of the VMs.
::
Diane,
Glitches ahoy! When you mention "a certain pattern within the small profession of heraldry", how is heraldry a small profession? Didn't heraldry involve pretty much *all* of the nobility of Europe, and those who dealt with them? Heraldry in the Middle Ages, *at the time of VMs composition* was not small and insignificant.
I have called these patterns 'evocative' of traditional heraldic designs. And that is because, besides clear visual similarities, heraldry has given these patterns their names. It is not necessary to replicate any example perfectly in order to provide a basis for further investigation. Such a basis can also be substantiated by the number of relevant examples. What is important in these examples is the initiation and promulgation of heraldry as an idea. Is there some other discipline or enterprise (mosaics, woodworking, textiles) which can match any of the VMs patterns with its own set of names and definitions. Suggesting various hypothetical interpretations without *any* concrete examples is a pretty weak argument. [Heraldry is the discipline; paly, bendy, barry, chevrony, papelonny, etc. are the examples.]
I have suggested that heraldry is a discipline that can be used as a method of interpretation, and have given the example of a specific, paired armorial insignia, ecclesiastical heraldry, proper hierarchical positioning, favored heraldic placement and a combined celestial association to demonstrate an illustrated (f71r), historical reference to the origins of a chronologically relevant and on going religious tradition (the cardinal's red galero). Can the creation of such a complex construction be attributed to an uninformed and careless individual?
Not all the tub patterns are heraldic. Is it possible to create ambiguity and disguise, if everything matches perfectly? If some examples match heraldry and some do not, why is that a problem? If you can put a name to any pattern I have omitted, from any tradition, please do so. I prefer comparing VMs illustrations with other images of the *same* time period and naming them with contemporaneous terminology, before looking to more distant sources.
What is your familiarity with heraldry, prior to my investigations? Nebuly is a heraldic line of division, not an insignia pattern. And if you are thinking of the person who started calling any and every scale-like pattern in the VMs a representation of papelonny, after I introduced the term, that was someone else.
The glitch here, in my estimation, is the failure of investigators to recognize even the possibility of heraldic correspondences, which are both relevant and contemporary with VMs manufacture. And this is due to a lack of familiarity with the topic in general and the comparative obscurity of the specific, relevant details, like nebuly and papelonny in particular. Apparently this gives skeptics the opportunity to focus on the apparent ambiguities, without considering the underlying, traditional and historical realities, contemporary with VMs creation, with which they are otherwise unacquainted.