Arcadia Discussion Zone

Ok, if a physical or verbal secret amongst family for family only, why include an outsider to paint clues to it. Unless of course he didn`t realize he was painting a clue to a secret. IMO I can`t imagine anyone cluing someone outside the family in on either of those counter arguments.

Good one Crow, I got a chuckle from that.

Glad it made you giggle, i sweated blood over that, blood!!

Great limerick Crow!

Thank you, one more destroyed topic.

Hans,
I'm not sure it's destroyed, as doesn't that interlude show you how the human 'brain' works (or not as the case may be)?
From Baldock, we went 'north' and Pictish with woad, then from bugger to Bogomil (I was actually thinking of Bognor inconnection with that) and to a limerick. And all of that could be seen to tie in with Templar.
Isn't the brains first act to look for patterns? It tries to make sense out of chaos, BUT it uses 'experience' to hone that pattern match, so typically people find different patterns in similar objects based on what their experience has taught them.
So back to Poussin and Bugarach. To 'see' two people riding a single horse and attribute any significance, you'de probably have to know about Templars. To even think that the mountain may be Bugarach, you'd have to know Bugarach (I won't then go into the number of angles that any location can be painted from - is it 360 degress * 90 degrees (elevation)?) looked like that from a specific point. So already the target audience then is limited. OK, so we're then saying that the painting was created for that audience - but that then tells them nothing 'new' - they have know Bugarach to understand that it's Bugarach. That means that Bugarach has been kept alive in the remnant Templars anyway for 300 years. They know two riders on a horse implies Templar. They associate the two and come up with the commanderie in the area - or do they? And?
I still don't see how or why Poussin would be painting and alluding to 'templars' 300 years after their demise - you imply that Poussin was then a Templar being commissioned by a Templar (am I right there?) - but under what guise? But, even accepting that - why 300 years later? Is there an earlier painting (ie circa 13..) that shows the same or a similar clue, where the Templars, realising that their 'secret' was to be lost due to the persecution of their order, commissioned a painting to encode the secret for posterity? And if there is such a painting, why would Poussin create another, given that no one had acted (or couldn't act) on the content of the first for 300 years?
I just can't see the transmission through 300 years - as to recognise both components, you must know both components anyway, so why then, encode them in a painting rather than just saying to the target audience (who have already been told about Bugarach/Two Riders) '...oy, and by the way, the Ark is buried under Bugarach - pass it on to the next generation.....'. Isn't that way far more efficient? It does away with guess work?

I doubt it...wrong type of rock

From that reply, I use my Sherlock powers to deduce that you're British. No wonder they brought in German miners into the area. They would just have invented a new drill bit and got on with it. The Americans would nuke the whole area - and then realise they picked the wrong mountain (can I say that?).

and I work for Network Rail?

Just a bit of light hearted humour Hans, that's all.

I'm interested to know why you think Poussin was a Templar or at least alluding to them in some way. I appreciate that at first glance there seems to be two riders on one horse, but closer scrutiny reveals two horses. As this painting was probably in a private collection (can someone verify this?) i doubt it was meant to be viewed from afar.

There's a room dedicated to Poussin's work at the National here in London, have you been? I reckon you'd enjoy it, but the wardens stop anyone taking photo's, even without flash.

Ouch!! But your most likely correct, sadly enough.

The black horse is painted on a dark background, what makes it nearly unvisible. This means that the painter had intended to hide the second horse. Continue the forward horse is quite a little bit too long. This must be, to let the illusion of two riders become real. Poussin could probably paint a horse but really, if he wanted. Thus, the error of the observer is intended.

If you look at the mirror pic in the water, you will see only one horse and one rider. This could mean, that the second horse and rider are not real, only a vision - a symbol.

The surviving Templars are only working with Templar painters. See Jan van Eyck.

..

In Paris at the Louvre there's also a room dedicated to Poussin's work, IIRC there are 8 paintings hanging there, and no one looked when I took pictures without flash.

The surviving Knight Templars have died during the decades that followed 1307. All gone, Hans. Come down to earth!

And who`s now going to liberate the Lord's grave in Outremer?

Egi, the surviving persons are dead now, but the group, the structure "Templar" have survived.
Dont pull me down to earth, I have just launched.

Hans, how have a Christian/catholic brotherhood formed to liberate and defend Christendom and the holy land survived?

The Louvre are good for taking pics, the curators don't bother you much but the Cluny museum is very very strict, they follow you around like the grim reaper and shout at you if you digress I was almost decapitated for touching the lady and unicorn tapestry.

Some of the surviving Knights Templars in 1319, helped to found the Knights of Christ in Portugal, there is evidence of an early (before 1390) stone masons guild in Scotland many believe was founded by surviving Knights Templars, and my own premise of Knights Templars building a castle on the Gold River in Nova Scotia. What is a fact is that joiners almost always remain joiners.---Bill

Add to that list the Order of Montesa in Aragon. Still, these were newly chartered orders which took in former Templars. The Hospitallers took in the majority of them.

TCP

Right. And that was a different kind of spirit.

I am reminded of a favorite photo I took a while back of "The Shepherds of Arcadia" at the Louvre. Unfortunately I can't post it as my ex still has all the prints and negatives, so you'll just have to imagine it - the image is as we all know it so well, but in the place of the pointing fingers and "Et In Arcadia Ego" is a small, glowing, ball of light...

What a great museum that is though - such an interesting and intimate combination of things.

Agreed, the Louvre is much less strict, and i really like the layout, lots of light.

Hans, bear in mind that the painting is very old, do you know if it's been cleaned in recent years? If it hasn't, that could account for the darkened background.

When I touched that canvas with my fingers my daughter was quite upset.

Could be, but then the whole pic must be dark. It is only the surface arround the horses, which is dark. This must be wanted by Poussin.