Only two for today, because I'm struggling to sort out my dowwnloads.
Castello di Montemagno, 14th century.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Torre Troyana, Asti. Late 13th century. It was sold to the municipality in 1420 and roofed over in 1470.

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

I stumbled upon these earlier today: 
Castello di Ninfa, Lazio. The journal entry dates the merlons on all the structures to the first phase. Some of them have been added or removed in different interventions starting from the late 19th century.

Photo from the 1860s.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Entry into Jerusalem, Sacro Speco, 14th century.


 Funeral of Santa Lucia, Oratorio di San Giorgio, Padova. Altichiero, 1384

Queen Lupa before the body of the apostle James (San Giacomo) in the Cappella di San Giacomo, Basilica di Sant'Antonio di Padova, by Altichiero, 14th century.

Altichiero is known for the architectural focus of his paintings

Great additions. I'm surprised that so many new frescos are still showing up. These are at least as important as the buildings, since they show the artistic spread of the form.

Are you adding your new finds to the map, Pierre? This is probably the best to make sure that nothing is missed or misplaced.

I'm gonna start doing so if you have no objections.
I expect hundreds of new frescoes to show up. This is what my draft map of the Piemonte looks like: 

All the purple dots are church frescoes up to 1500, most of which depict Guelph merlons. Among them, there are dozens and dozens of examples in bumfuck nowhere, all painted by the great masters of the time (roadside chaples, moountain churches, frescoes in tiny hamlets).
 That's just one region, and not a particularly prosperous one.

No that's great, you take this serious so I trust you completely to add to the map as you see fit. As long as the ca. 1450 cutoff is followed to the extent that this is possible.

One important point: from my experience so far, some kind of merlons are most likely to show up in paintings of Saint George (San Giorgio), Archangel Michael (Arcangelo Michele), the Annunciation (Annunciazione), Crucifixion (Crocifissione), The Deposition/Pietà (Deposizione di Gesù), Martyrdom Scenes (Martiri), Passion of Christ cycles (Passione di Gesù), and other depictions of Jerusalem (Gerusalemme). It's rather shocking how often merlons appear in the Crucifixion and the Annunciation. Look for these when you google churches or read manuscripts.

(13-06-2026, 02:50 PM)Pierre Dumont Himself Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm gonna start doing so if you have no objections.
I expect hundreds of new frescoes to show up. This is what my draft map of the Piemonte looks like: 

All the purple dots are church frescoes up to 1500, most of which depict Guelph merlons. Among them, there are dozens and dozens of examples in bumfuck nowhere, all painted by the great masters of the time (roadside chaples, moountain churches, frescoes in tiny hamlets).
 That's just one region, and not a particularly prosperous one.

If you add them in the core, mine will pick them up automatically and provide the qualitative overlay..

That's remarkable indeed. In manuscripts, many of the merlons we find are also in places in the Holy Land. Did they have some exotic appeal, even for Italians?

Now on the other hand, it may just be that frescos are predominantly of religious scenes, so you're bound to get lots of merlons in religious urban settings? (Lots of the scenes you mentioned are set in/against Jerusalem, which is important to include in imagery).

(10-06-2026, 03:41 PM)DG97EEB Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Another little project You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

It takes a live view from the Google Map and then searches both the web and the forum (from my search engine) and adds any information.. That last bit isn't fully wired in yet, but the idea of useful is to try to give an augmented view compared to what Google maps alone can do, bringing together the best information we have on each and links to source materials, manuscripts etc... take as work in progress, but if helpful I can spend some proper time on it..

I find this subdivision a bit confusing to look at. All inclusions on the map are (potentially after a discussion) considered to have been present before 1450, which is the only thing that matters. If any of them are contested, they should be removed from the map.

This is the kind of thing where I would much prefer human curation and prioritize map legibility.

@Koen G, have you figured out where the Trinity MS O.2.48 comes from?
[url=https://mss-cat.trin.cam.ac.uk/Search][/url]