R. Sale > 24-03-2021, 09:00 PM
And what about "galero-style" hats on religious figures? I don't find them that common. And as the definition says, there was a lot variation.
That doesn't mean all VMs hats are galeros. So there are examples of hats with knots, tassels, nobs or crowns (tops). No one can deny that. It's a 'what about that' argument. What about it? The point is moot.
The discussion of the red galero is focused on the examples of You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. White Aries. Here there are several examples of 'nymphs' with 'hats' who are shown from a perspective, looking up, so that only the underside of the 'hat' and none of the prospective top has been represented. Since none of the top can be seen, this allows the introduction of ambiguity. Ambiguity allows for alternative interpretation. Ambiguity is used to disguise alternative interpretations.
Alternative interpretations aren't all that great. They just fuzzy up the possibilities and add to the confusion. The difference is when one of the alternative interpretations connects to history. Doesn't that deserve consideration? Doesn't the next interpretation also deserve consideration? And the next, and the next? But always there is ambiguity and never a solid result. Ambiguous elements may not stand on their own, however, mutual support enhances their strength. This creates a situation where two or more ambiguities may share certain commonalities.
From all the VMs interpretations that connect to history, there is a set of connections from diverse sources that show a common history, and a clear historical connection. Blue stripes and red galeros connect to a common history. That common history is a part of Catholic tradition. And for the author and the prospective reader of the C-14 era, common history provides historical grounding. But in the VMs White Aries illustration, there is a built-in, two-way interpretation, two paths of investigation.
For the C-14 era, ambiguous information plus historical grounding yields the potential for recognition.
As always, ambiguous information without historical grounding gives nothing.
The problem with ambiguity is that ambiguity has become a problem. Ambiguity now, for some reason, apparently requires rejection. And in such a case, the investigation of VMs art work ends up signifying nothing in particular, because it is all ambiguous. I believe the White Aries page contains a historical and traditional reference well constructed and intentionally disguised - that has a purpose. Historical grounding is part. This does reflect a real event. And the combination (red galero + blue stripes) in a single 'nymph' is a clear physical association. All that is required is for the reader to make the historical interpretation. And that interpretation was the C-14 *valid* Genoese interpretation. Not the post-1912 *lost - Duh!* unknown interpretation. Lost in the dark mirror of history from the modern perspective and obfuscated besides. Obfuscation that was used to disguise, not to contradict any necessary factors.
So, the first blue-striped 'nymph'' is accompanied by a second blue-striped 'nymph'. Does anyone know that story? It's a sort of heraldic identification, like a plant ID, except it connects to cultural history, tradition, and real events.