If you wonder how Charles V, a Black man, could have a relative so light
Mike no one is wondering about Charles V having a distant black relative 40,000 years ago. Look at his mother and father
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, Charles V was not Black you stupid Black supremacist,Anti-White racist moron. All the paintings of him are White & none are modern fakes.Really Mike who cares what color of hair a racist Anti-White Black woman & her Jew looking husband's child had. See that's where they get ya hehehe, you think ya done snagged yourself a nice White man/or woman but what you really got is a Jew,ja ja Jew Jew,Jew ja ja ja ja Jew ROTFLMBO. What has that got to do with anything anyway? Mike how could there be paintings of Whites if according to you Whites were the lowest of the low, the serfs,peasants,& servants?
Posts: 3257 | From: Madisonville, KY USA | Registered: Nov 2011
| IP: Logged |
The long jaw of the painting of the so called rich African merchant who was living in Holland or the Holy Roman Empire (Germany) looks like the Habsburg Holy Roman Emperor and King of Germany Charles V but I think he could have been a rich Black European merchant and bankers because of his North African or West Asian headdress and his pearl earrings.
The Netherland or Holland was a center of Sephardic Jewish bankers and merchants wh were expelled from Spain and Portugal who later financed the Glorious Revolution of England and created the Bank of England. I am speculating the so called rich African merchant could be a Sephardic Jewish banker whose Jewish Moorish ancestor migrated from Morocco to Spain centuries ago. The HRE or Germany was also a center of Jewish banking.
I think the so called African merchant painting could be a painting of a rich Black European merchant, banker or a Sephardic Jewish banker.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
It looks to me like some Egypt Searchers are fixated on their narrow world view, not willing to look further than their obsessions and preoccupations, but I will be tolerant of that and give them that latitude. In fact I might indulge them, but permit me to carry on with my argument.
On looking at the boy, let us assume that the boy was a real life model, and likewise the man.
Here are their paintings again for comparison.
Note in particular the open mouths (whether it reflected an inability to close them or some kind of peculiar habit), the similarity of the high square foreheads, and the similarity of the ears, which may or may not be of some relevance.
Would it be farfetched to say that as an adult the boy would probably bear some resemblance to the man? Not that I am actually saying that the man is the boy as an adult, but is there some resemblance?
Perhaps Lioness could do us a favour and present them in a side by side comparison.
And don't forget the young girl in the painting and the baby as well. They are of some interest here.
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
Well if it is not there I must have gotten it from somewhere else, but I am pretty sure that is where I found it.
Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by A Habsburg Agenda: What do you make of both the boy and girl, and the baby?
We would need to see the whole scene to see the male figure's height relative to the other figures.
It's a typical Adoration of the Magi scene. You have the African magi king with a chalice gift offering to the infant Jesus and Mary. The only thing that seems atypical to me is that it appears as if the black magi is making direct contact with Jesus and Mary. It is usually a white magi in direct contact with them and the other two magi are nearby. Kind of racist but that is more common.
The date would be also relevant for comparsion to the other portrait painting
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: It's a typical Adoration of the Magi scene. You have the African magi king with a chalice gift offering to the infant Jesus and Mary. The only thing that seems atypical to me is that it appears as if the black magi is making direct contact with Jesus and Mary. It is usually a white magi in direct contact with them and the other two magi are nearby. Kind of racist but that is more common.
At least you are consistent lioness - constant Nonsense.
When people are making sh1t up, AS THE ALBINOS DO, there is no such thing as "TYPICAL".
Most of the original Adoration of the Magi scenes had no Blacks.
posted
German Jewish banker Jakob Fugger wearing a Kufi like cap. German banker Jakob Fugger wearing a kufi like skull cap. The so called rich African who might be Habsburg Emperor Charles V, a rich Black European merchant or a Black Sephardic Jewish banker is wearing a an oriental or a Kufi skull cap adorned with jewelry.
Posts: 5374 | From: sepedat/sirius | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lioness is either a complete idiot or disingenuous, why entertain them this with so much effort in regards to the images? There is enough evidence that there is definitely dishonesty with restoring images and image authenticity for this time period.
What's worse is that they admit that they had a period where they were "restoring" the iconoclastic destroyed images. Of course how could people generations later be able to accurately restore destroyed images (that were fanatically destroyed and over-painted)?
Iconoclasm and Whitewash and other papers; published 1885
"In Protestantism and Puritanism against the gauds of the Catholic Church, hard -headed and heavy handed ascetics went about knocking Off the noses and limbs of the statues which peopled the dim old cathedrals. A subsequent generation piously restored or renewed those works, and did their best with paint and whitewash to repair the ravages of the greater spoiler, time. Similar iconoclasts and whitewashers go about in literature."
What’s more damning is that modern day albino restorers seem to have a precaution in place to keep instances of overpainting undocumented. Unfortunately for them, they didn’t figure out that they needed to actually do this from the get go:
A family of decent folk, 1200-1741, Published 1922 (page 100-101)
Painting in question is for Lady Uknown.
Miss Crutwell analyses this painting with the intent to determine its attribution in somewhat trenchant terms. “Only a very close examination she observes reveals the excellence of such parts.. as have escaped the brush of the repainter. The face has been so thickly repainted as to have nearly lost its original character….. the heavily stippled red of the cheek…, hair and flesh are overpainted, the iodine of the face perhaps once as delicate as the Milan portrait has been lost. The nose especially has been coarsened and modernized… the ribbons which bind the fair hair have been edged with a different colour, the strings of pearl are glassy and obviously modern. Only on the throat and the neck the repaint allows the original lines to appear; while the face and hair and crude blue background have been thus overpainted the white and gold brocade sleeve and deep violet velvet gown are in excellent state of preservation”.
Last part implies the person was changed but not the majority of the clothing. By now its probably been reworked and screwed to high hell.
Iconographic forgeries are unfortunately not unknown in Grand-ducal Florence, Baldinucci indeed records one, the overpainting and renaming of Spini portraits, with his own Feroni relations, by the purchaser of that extinct family's palace (Piazza Santa Trinlta). Whilst Miss Cruttwell is doubtless well justi- they sound express the deception felt at " restoration ", behind which the painter's identity can only be conjectured, since as she points out, no Jocumentarilly attested portraits male or female painted by Antonio del PoUaiuolo are in existence to-day.
Lost mosaics and frescoes of Rome of the mediaeval period Published 1915 (page 57)
The apse and arch of the tipper chapel are decorated with frescoes which are in sad condition, due chiefly to a ruthless overpainting. Apparently done toward the end of the seventeenth century, which has transformed the attributes of the saints and obliterated details to such an extent that Sinthern. The latest writer to describe the church, was unable to identify some of the figures.
The martyred towns of France; Published 1919 (page 192)
The Republic of France has never taken any considerable pains to obliterate the "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity 1 ' signs wherewith, in 1793, the people took possession of the churches; it is faintly rubbed off or overpainted, but nearly everywhere quite legible — with a purpose probably.
Tsk, tsk, tsk.
Some more recent documents of albinos describing their restoring practices with paintings seems to imply that they actually have little to no respect for original art, when they are given art, they simply turn it into whatever they please. There is no telling what they’ve done to the original images in Europe over centuries. They’ve done so much damage that at this point its just a game to them.
A collection of papers read before the Bucks County Historical Society. Published 1909 (page 538)
The age of a picture, its genuineness, or whether it has been overpainted, can often be determined by a quartz lamp which changes the colors in certain ways. For example, old white is affected differently from modern white (zinc white). The X-ray will also assist, for, as I said before, old pigments are hard, like minerals, and show up like the skeleton of the body, while the new paint is soft and faint, through which the rays easily penetrate. The X-ray has frequently revealed a different painting underneath the surface of another one.
This leads me to mention one or two interesting cases in my experience. Restorers often have surprises; sometimes they are pleasant to the owners, often not! Once I had a so-called self portrait of van Dyke put in my hands to restore. It was of a young man in a grey cloak. When I cleaned it, much of the resemblance to van Dyke came off, and a part of the cloak, revealing a splendidly painted hand holding a long halberd! It was a study, undoubtedly by van Dyke, not of himself, but of a halberdier.
Another time I cleaned a painting by Carlo Dolci. It represented a beautiful young woman holding a huge salver of fruit.
The fruit seemed suspiciously new. Carefully I cleaned it, discovered finally that underneath was a gory human head. The subject was Salome with the Head of John the Baptist. A former owner had disliked the gruesome head and employed an artist to paint a bunch of fruit over it.
The most startling case was that of a three-quarters length portrait of a lady with a child in her lap. It was supposed to have been painted by a famous French painter about 1775, and to represent the ancestress of one of our most distinguished families. But obviously it had been considerably damaged and restored by a botcher, who had muddled the hair and costume in a frightful way. I was commissioned to take off the previous restoration, and to bring back the original quality of the great master's work. I began at one corner and found that underneath the red curtain background was a stone wall with ivy. Then I stopped, and, for the sake of record, had it photographed.
This accomplished, I went ahead. The clothes of the baby came off, then the costume of the lady and her jewelry. At last I uncovered a perfectly preserved and marvellously painted Madonna and Child. An ancestress and a baby ancestor had been lost, but a masterpiece recovered! Why the outrage had been done to so fine a picture is still a mystery. Fortunately the family was pleased with the result.
Not always are results such a shock to family pride, and often the restorer is able to discover signatures, dates, inscriptions, coats of arms, and other data which identify the portraits as long-lost ancestors. One such case revealed a coat of arms in the upper right hand corner of the picture, and below, near a skull, which stood on a table, the date 1646, the artist's monogram and an inscription, "Hie gloria mundi," while on a Bible, "Hie gloria aeternum" was written. Subsequent genealogical research proved that the arms were those of the Lawiey family and that the portrait was of Sir Francis Lawiey, baronet and D. D.
I’m assuming there is a reason a lot of the art books are so unreasonably expensive for what they offer, you can easily tell some were painted over. Very amateurish; I recall one from a book I bought that painted over afro hair, but it was such a pathetic job, for the locks or clumped bushes of hair, the re-painter moronically made the clumps individual patches of straight wavy hairy like miniature heads of straight hair were growing out of the main one. It wasn’t lazy, so much as stupid or incompetent. They must have been desperate to sign off on that one for their historic comic book.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: [QB] Lioness is either a complete idiot or disingenuous, why entertain them this with so much effort in regards to the images? There is enough evidence that there is definitely dishonesty with restoring images and image authenticity for this time period.
What's worse is that they admit that they had a period where they were "restoring" the iconoclastic destroyed images. Of course how could people generations later be able to accurately restore destroyed images (that were fanatically destroyed and over-painted)?
Fencer, we are dealing with this painting so your remarks are totally irrelevant unless you think this was over painted to make his skin darker.
Try dealing with any of the examples in the thread instead of the crying and whining, thanks
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: [QB] Lioness is either a complete idiot or disingenuous, why entertain them this with so much effort in regards to the images? There is enough evidence that there is definitely dishonesty with restoring images and image authenticity for this time period.
What's worse is that they admit that they had a period where they were "restoring" the iconoclastic destroyed images. Of course how could people generations later be able to accurately restore destroyed images (that were fanatically destroyed and over-painted)?
Fencer, we are dealing with this painting so your remarks are totally irrelevant unless you think this was over painted to make his skin darker.
Try dealing with any of the examples in the thread instead of the crying and whining, thanks
Illiterate and amnesia mode eh? Try some new tools for a change.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
Most of the original Adoration of the Magi scenes had no Blacks.
So why were black introduced into these scenes later?
. You are asking me to understand the pathetic mind of an Albino who is just getting used to having total power.
As we see with our modern-day example - Donald Trump, it is devoid of logic, built mainly on feel and instinct.
My guess is that initially they wanted their world to be completely free of Blacks (see the Benjamin Franklin essay). Then over time, they realized that was impractical, so they started adding surviving Black Royalty and Nobility to their religious scenes. .
. This piece is of course from the Black Ruled "Holy Roman Empire".
And the Black Noble or King on the right is of course identified by Albinos as St. Maurice.
See the related next post.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: My guess is that initially they wanted their world to be completely free of Blacks (see the Benjamin Franklin essay). Then over time, they realized that was impractical, so they started adding surviving Black Royalty and Nobility to their religious scenes.
. Over the years, I have often mused over what it will be like when the Albinos can no longer maintain their lies, and have to tell truth about what happened.
One thing I was always certain of, was that it will be devastating for Albino youth to learn that everything they were taught relating to race was a lie, and that they were in deed Albinos.
The British seem to have been thinking along with me, and have decided to lessen the shock with some early leaked truth. . . Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
By now you must have noticed that when you ask troll questions, I ignore you. Go away, come back when you have something to contribute, or at the least, learn not to ask troll questions.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Damn you're stupid.
By now you must have noticed that when you ask troll questions, I ignore you. Go away, come back when you have something to contribute, or at the least, learn not to ask troll questions.
Mike you are copping out here. When we start going in depth you run off, tail between legs.
Hans Baldung - Three Kings Altarpiece, 1507
Maybe somebody else knows who the figure on the left is stepping on the dragon
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: ^Damn you're stupid.
By now you must have noticed that when you ask troll questions, I ignore you. Go away, come back when you have something to contribute, or at the least, learn not to ask troll questions.
Just doin what they do, like a dog barks; just using their trusty tool kit: The classic lioness "post shuffle" (a personal favorite). Pretending to "stay on topic". But not long before spamming with a large long post of images with no comment or context. Eventually people will get confused, tired, distracted, uninterested in weeding through posts for refrences on subject matter and the thread will die.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: You are asking me to understand the pathetic mind of an Albino who is just getting used to having total power.
My guess is that initially they wanted their world to be completely free of Blacks (see the Benjamin Franklin essay). Then over time, they realized that was impractical, so they started adding surviving Black Royalty and Nobility to their religious scenes.
. I find it very interesting that one of the very few Authentic "Seeming" Adoration of the Magi Tryptich's has a Black King with Crown - paint not as old as I first thought. The dress is European, except for the earrings. But bare feet??? Damn, those Albinos were all over the place!
There is no way to claim St. Maurice was a King, so I am curious as to how modern Albinos will explain this one.
Perhaps anticipating my questions, the Albinos will not allow the entire Tryptich to be shown. (I tried V&A museum by the number, but they claim not to have it.
Unknown Artist - Portable Tryptich (Adoration of the Magi), Spain (c.1540-1560) Engraved silver and oil painting on copper. Victoria & Albert Museum (Museum number 93-1865)
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: My guess is that initially they wanted their world to be completely free of Blacks (see the Benjamin Franklin essay). Then over time, they realized that was impractical, so they started adding surviving Black Royalty and Nobility to their religious scenes.
. Over the years, I have often mused over what it will be like when the Albinos can no longer maintain their lies, and have to tell truth about what happened.
One thing I was always certain of, was that it will be devastating for Albino youth to learn that everything they were taught relating to race was a lie, and that they were in deed Albinos.
The British seem to have been thinking along with me, and have decided to lessen the shock with some early leaked truth. . .
.
.
^^^ The article is not referring to the actual GCSE course outline which pertains to a thousand year period 1000 AD to 2000 AD but is referring to one quote they mention from Peter Fryer's book pertaining to an earlier period
.
.
^^ "English" here refers to Anglo Saxons. So the Africans being referred to are Moorish mercenaries who migrated to England within the Roman occupation, so the author and the course are not talking about the or Neolithic Britons or Celts before the "English" of Germanic origin. He says ""The very words 'black' and 'white' were heavily charged with meaning long before the English met people whose skins were black." meaning that once the Anglo Saxons came in there no more Moors there from the Roman armies
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mike111: You are asking me to understand the pathetic mind of an Albino who is just getting used to having total power.
My guess is that initially they wanted their world to be completely free of Blacks (see the Benjamin Franklin essay). Then over time, they realized that was impractical, so they started adding surviving Black Royalty and Nobility to their religious scenes.
. I find it very interesting that one of the very few Authentic "Seeming" Adoration of the Magi Tryptich's has a Black King with Crown - paint not as old as I first thought. The dress is European, except for the earrings. But bare feet??? Damn, those Albinos were all over the place!
There is no way to claim St. Maurice was a King, so I am curious as to how modern Albinos will explain this one.
Perhaps anticipating my questions, the Albinos will not allow the entire Tryptich to be shown. (I tried V&A museum by the number, but they claim not to have it.
Unknown Artist - Portable Tryptich (Adoration of the Magi), Spain (c.1540-1560) Engraved silver and oil painting on copper. Victoria & Albert Museum (Museum number 93-1865)
You're asking why an African king supposed to have lived in the 1st century would have bare feet?
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Most of the original Adoration of the Magi scenes had no Blacks.
So why were black introduced into these scenes later?
. You are asking me to understand the pathetic mind of an Albino who is just getting used to having total power.
As we see with our modern-day example - Donald Trump, it is devoid of logic, built mainly on feel and instinct.
My guess is that initially they wanted their world to be completely free of Blacks (see the Benjamin Franklin essay). Then over time, they realized that was impractical, so they started adding surviving Black Royalty and Nobility to their religious scenes. .
. This piece is of course from the Black Ruled "Holy Roman Empire".
And the Black Noble or King on the right is of course identified by Albinos as St. Maurice.
See the related next post.
Fencer, we need your help. Mike says white people identify the figure at right as St, Maurice.
What about the figure at left stepping on the dragon?
Who is he?
It's a reasonable question, Mike posted this not me. We should look at the most context we can on this painting. You say the figure at left was over-painted to change his skin color. O.k. fine, but who the hell is he ???
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness,: The article is not referring to the actual GCSE course outline which pertains to a thousand year period 1000 AD to 2000 AD but is referring to one quote they mention from Peter Fryer's book pertaining to an earlier period
"English" here refers to Anglo Saxons. So the Africans being referred to are Moorish mercenaries who migrated to England within the Roman occupation, so the author and the course are not talking about the or Neolithic Britons or Celts before the "English" of Germanic origin. He says ""The very words 'black' and 'white' were heavily charged with meaning long before the English met people whose skins were black." meaning that once the Anglo Saxons came in there no more Moors there from the Roman armies
. Damn you Albinos are such degenerates that being caught lying means nothing to you, because you have no morality.
Anyway c. means Circa: which means an approximate date.
c. 1000 - c. 2000
means Circa 1000 B.C. to 2000 A.D.
Because 1000 A.D. would make no sense, as the Anglo-Saxons arrived in Britain in about 450 A.D.
Roman Britain was the area of the island of Great Britain that was governed by the Roman Empire, from 43 to 410 AD.
The Daily Mail - 9 January 2016 GCSE (U.K. - General Certificate of Secondary Education: a public examination in specified subjects for 16-year-old schoolchildren): Pupils to be taught that the nation's earliest inhabitants were Africans who were in Britain before the English. GCSE students are to be taught that some of our nation’s earliest inhabitants were Africans who arrived here long before the English.
Most of the original Adoration of the Magi scenes had no Blacks.
So why were black introduced into these scenes later?
. You are asking me to understand the pathetic mind of an Albino who is just getting used to having total power.
As we see with our modern-day example - Donald Trump, it is devoid of logic, built mainly on feel and instinct.
My guess is that initially they wanted their world to be completely free of Blacks (see the Benjamin Franklin essay). Then over time, they realized that was impractical, so they started adding surviving Black Royalty and Nobility to their religious scenes. .
. This piece is of course from the Black Ruled "Holy Roman Empire".
And the Black Noble or King on the right is of course identified by Albinos as St. Maurice.
See the related next post.
Fencer, we need your help. Mike says white people identify the figure at right as St, Maurice.
What about the figure at left stepping on the dragon?
Who is he?
It's a reasonable question, Mike posted this not me. We should look at the most context we can on this painting. You say the figure at left was over-painted to change his skin color. O.k. fine, but who the hell is he ???
It can be whoever you want it to be. Anything is fair game after a civil war. In fact there was business in making fake portraits. Family of nobodies? Need a Shakespeare, how about a Charles the V? Everybody is doing it. I will say that the "Jesus" is quite the rage these days as well. Perfecto for brainwashing.
Have some text on a researcher when portrait study was in its infancy admitting that too if you want it. But you don't want that. I don't want another post shuffle.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
1b. Why choose OCR GCSE (9–1) History A (Explaining the Modern World) (J410)?
One of the ways that we are addressing this is by working with BASA on our new migration options in paper 2 and paper 3 (J410/08 and J410/11). BASA explain: “This course will enable students to learn the long history of how the movement of people – European, African and Asian - to and from these islands has shaped the story of this nation for thousands of years. The history of migration is the story of Britain: in 1984 Peter Fryer wrote ‘There were Africans in Britain before the English came’1 and thirty years later the University of York’s England’s Immigrants project has shown that ‘in the Middle Ages no one in England was more than 10 miles away from an immigrant’2. This course – informed by the very latest research – ranges from a close focus on the struggles and experiences of individuals and families to an understanding of our complex relationship with each other and the rest of the world. We are delighted to be working with OCR to offer a course which will both open up an analysis of Britain’s place in the modern world and allow every student a personal connection with our shared history”.
.
.
England
The region has numerous remains from the Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Bronze Age, such as Stonehenge and Avebury. In the Iron Age, England, like all of Britain south of the Firth of Forth, was inhabited by the Celtic people known as the Britons, including some Belgic tribes (e.g. the Atrebates, the Catuvellauni, the Trinovantes, etc.) in the south east.
In AD 43 the Roman conquest of Britain began; the Romans maintained control of their province of Britannia until the early 5th century. Hadrian's Wall was built along this line in 138 AD Archaeologists suggest that there is evidence that a 500-strong unit of Moors under command of the Roman Empire manned one of the forts along Hadrian's Wall near the town of Carlisle in the 3rd century AD.
In the wake of the breakdown of Roman rule in Britain from the middle of the fourth century, present day England was progressively settled by Germanic groups.
The entire region was referred to as, "Hwicce" and settlements throughout the south were called Gewisse. The Battle of Deorham was a critical battle that established the Anglo-Saxon rule in 577.
The end of Roman rule in Britain facilitated the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Britain, which historians often regard as the origin of England and of the English people. The Anglo-Saxons, a collection of various Germanic peoples, established several kingdoms that became the primary powers in present-day England and parts of southern Scotland.
In 1066, a Norman expedition invaded and conquered England. The Norman Dynasty established by William the Conqueror ruled England for over half a century
___________________________________________
In other words the Telegaph article is mentioning a GCSE course description that mentions a Peter Fryer quote from his book Staying Power " ‘There were Africans in Britain before the English came" That sell news papers. That statement was made in the course description to sell the course. However the actual course begins with 11th century and the statement is actually talking about 3rd Century North Africans who were part of the Roman empire's occupation. That is why this comes under the theme of migration rather than first peoples.
So these Africans were there as part of the Roman occupation, a period that is prior to the period covered in this history course. Was this a dumb way for Oxford Cambridge to try to use sensationalism to sell a history course when the course doesn't even cover the period? Yes
-but you have to do the research to know this
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Have some text on a researcher when portrait study was in its infancy admitting that too if you want it. But you don't want that. I don't want another post shuffle.
Let's see it
Posts: 42919 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fencer: Just doin what they do, like a dog barks; just using their trusty tool kit: The classic lioness "post shuffle" (a personal favorite). Pretending to "stay on topic". But not long before spamming with a large long post of images with no comment or context. Eventually people will get confused, tired, distracted, uninterested in weeding through posts for refrences on subject matter and the thread will die.
. I will simply try to repost the important stuff.
Posts: 22721 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
NOTES ON THE AUTHENTIC PORTRAITS OF MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS (pages 5-6)
Until the Stuart Exhibition in 1889 the various Exhibitions in which the portraits of Mary Stuart had been collected together had only served to make confusion worse confounded. Ladies with black, brown, or red hair, with black, brown, or blue eyes, with aquiline noses or r&roussds, tall or short, thin or plump, all appeared in numbers, asserting themselves to represent the Queen of Scotland. Of all this medley but the merest fragment could really claim to have any authenticity. The interest in historical portraiture is of comparatively recent awakening.
The dilettante enthusiasm aroused by Horace Walpole and his friends, and other antiquaries of the same inclinations, had brought what was at first a mere collector's caprice into a fashionable craze. Portraits of historical personages were sought for high and low. Family history, county history, heraldry and genealogy, all became a necessary adjunct to the libraries of the noble and the rich. Where portraits were not forthcoming, there was ever, as now, a horde of needy copyists ready to supply them. Shakespeares, Miltons, Elizabeths, Raleighs, Nell Gwynns, began to bloom in every broker's window. Every Cavalier family found itself mysteriously possessed of important portraits of Charles I. and Henrietta Maria, bestowed either by them or their son upon the family hero for services rendered during the Civil Wars. For similar reasons Cromwell lowered from every parlour wall among Puritans and Nonconformists. Every family in Scotland, which could produce or invent the slightest excuse, revealed some portrait of the ill-fated Mary, Queen of Scots, which for various mysterious reasons had up to that time remained unnoticed. Most of these were endowed with apparently unimpeachable pedigrees. In all these matters the critical faculty was conspicuous by its absence, being replaced, adequately in the owner's opinion, by enthusiasm.
Thing about this is that it was apparently so bad that they aren't 100% certain on the paintings they claim are authentic of Mary, the subject of the very book. On Mike's website there is a sketch of her in a white morning garnment. If I remember the passage, they reported on it first in france but there it was described as "defaced".
-Actually found description In Van der Doort's catalogue of King's collection of Limings. "No. 14. Item a defaced picture of Queen Mary of Scotland in her white morning habit. given to the King by the Lord Marquiss of Hamilton";
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
As this thread is threatening to go off topic I have opted to add more information to keep the attention of the partipants focused on the original topic.
Here is a painting of Charles V and his sisters in their early years. I don't want to get dragged into arguments about its authenticity, but we will assume that it is an "authentic" painting, whatever that means.
quote:Originally posted by A Habsburg Agenda: As this thread is threatening to go off topic I have opted to add more information to keep the attention of the partipants focused on the original topic.
Here is a painting of Charles V and his sisters in their early years. I don't want to get dragged into arguments about its authenticity, but we will assume that it is an "authentic" painting, whatever that means.
Here is a close up of the girl in the Adoration painting
Any observations to be made?
Mena's view are welcome. She seems to be one of the few open minded persons on this forum.
Taking into account whether the painting is legitimate or not IS a form of observation and people who observe the paintings in its presence take this into account. And it seems hypocrotical to claim to be open minded but only ask for one interpretation or presumption (giving the benefit of the doubt in a situation where it is unwise), with no insight to the historical events surrounding the subject matter or its medium.
Point being, if your desire is to really have a meaningful discussion on the pieces you should observe it in person at the least and study first hand sources of the events and the people the painting claims to portray at the most or maybe even the average.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
Alright guys, what do you make of this? Here is the girl from the Adoration, with Charles and his two sisters. They are arranged better for comparsion.
What can you observe from it?
Scrutinize them and tell me what you can see.
Free ice cream for anyone who makes some noteworthy observations.
-------------------- The Habsburg Agenda - Defending Western Christian civilization Posts: 890 | From: London | Registered: Apr 2014
| IP: Logged |
There is no evidence it's fake. Therefore there iS a point in discsussing it
Need a primary source on its creation and distribution up to this point in history. Repeating your stupidity does not validate it.
Just as an example, if we have historical accounts of paintings being destroyed, and items in this time frame being confiscated in large amounts across the country of Europe, people descrbing the destruction in various locations as eyewitnesses, people commenting on the inaccuracy of their own portraits during this time, what are we to conclude following a pattern?
Of course if you're an idiot, its easy to take a crack pots word for it if they hang it in a museum and call it real, as long as you pay for the chance to view if, who cares?
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
posted
Before we can even begin, you must first show us a single reference from an old source that says Charles the V was "black" (negro) before we can start talking about pictures or paintings
Posts: 861 | From: usa | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the questioner: Before we can even begin, you must first show us a single reference from an old source that says Charles the V was "black" (negro) before we can start talking about pictures or paintings
You've invalidated yourself by using "negro", you must show me where all nations agreed on the use of the term negro to define all blacks of a specific phenotype, this documentation must be IN that time.
Posts: 310 | From: US | Registered: Jun 2015
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic