User talk:Effbr

Re: Geoffroi de Charny effigy

The brass depicts Charny's son (d. 1398), not the man himself.Effbr (talk) 18:05, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

My reference clearly states that the effigy is of the knight Geoffroi de Charny not his son. It further states that the subject of the effigy is the first known owner of the Shroud of Turin. That, too, can only be the father. I have found no writings which even mention his son in either of these contexts, though, if you have any reference which disputes my claim I am most willing to change it. Mugginsx (talk) 20:28, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The brass is noted to be Geoffroi de Charny (d. 1398) in Jean Adhemar's piece on François Gaignières' collection of drawings of monumental tombs in Gazette des beaux-arts, vol 84. Additionally, Kaeuper's writing on de Charny mentions his son and death year of 1398. Considering they bear the same heraldry and the death dates match, I assume it is the son. Hope this helps. I'm curious what your reference is. Effbr (talk) 20:29, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

One of my sources is: http://www.shroudofturin4journalists.com/geoffrey.htm . Another is this: http://www.nipissingu.ca/department/history/MUHLBERGER/2006/05/geoffroi-de-charny-speaks_10.htm . I have others but am about to go away for the day. Will provide the others tomorrow or Monday. I would like it to be correct. We can work together.

This particular brass (since lost) was at Froidmont Abbey. It was drawn by an unknown artist for Gaignières' collection of medieval tomb drawings, probably near the close of the 17th century. This image has since been reproduced from the original document and is the one we are discussing today. Both the inventory of his collection (Inventaire des dessins exécutés pour Roger de Gaignières et conservés aux départements des estampes et des manuscrits - which may be found on Archive.org) and the later work of Adhemar (mentioned above) record the year of death as 1398. I'm not an expert on tomb inscriptions, but if you read the one present on the brass, on the left border you can see the year. The last portion being "VIII", or 8. If it was Charny the elder, I would expect to see "VI". Lastly, the armour style depicted is that of the late 14th century, not the middle. One can not reliably date brasses by the costume displayed for many reasons, but it is worth mentioning.

Here is an additional source the supports my view: http://www.shroud.com/bstsmain.htm -> http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n66part5.pdf (newsletter article that has a picture of the tomb in question and the heading "Geoffroi II de Charny")

And another: http://www.amazon.com/Turin-Shroud-Unshrouding-Mystery/dp/1854795015 -> excerpt found here: http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/quotes/TSoT/stuc0904.html (third entry from the top).

Regarding your links: The second has no mention of the tomb. I don't dispute anything written there. I think the first link is simply incorrect. It cites no source for the claim, and uses an image labeled in multiple other sources as being Geoffroi II de Charny.

I too would like to definitively know the tomb's attribution. Effbr (talk) 14:28, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Let's try to contact Richard W. Kaeuper & Elspeth Kennedy. If there is no reply an alternate solution might be a heading that states it is either Geoffroi I or Geoffroi II, although it not preferable. I would rather find out which one and note it according. It is to me an enjoyable exercise whomever it turns out to be. What troubles me is that I can find no history of knighthood for Geoffroi II thus far and I believe the effigy is of a Knight. The second reference I gave you was only to show that Geoffroi I and his wife are one of the first recorded owners of the Shroud - not Geoffroi II. Further, as to that time period much is not translated into English or even modern French. The Dr.'s should have the most accurate answer, if one can be found. Websites are not really the best references anyway as I am sure you will agree. Have a nice evening. Mugginsx (talk) 22:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

1. I agree that Geoffroi I was the first owner of the shroud, but that has no bearing on whom the tomb is for.

2. Many member of nobility, regardless of their status as a knight have martial effigies (for example, esquires).

3. I agree that websites are not the best references. This is why I have given a selection of books that support my argument.

4. The only source that identifies the tomb as that of Geoffroi I is the first website you mentioned. As I have previously stated, I believe this to be an error, based upon the other (more reliable, I think) sources I have provided. That website's image caption is factually correct taken by itself, but applied to that image, I believe is incorrect. I have yet to see any evidence that further supports this view.

Effbr (talk) 23:26, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I Have sent an e-mail to Dr. Kaeuper and given him this link for full information.Mugginsx (talk) 12:31, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

I have just telephone Dr. Kaeuper at the History Department at U of Rochester. The e-mail produced no response thus far. The general operator gave me his voice mail.

I have not yet had a response. Perhaps it will come in the future. I will attempt to contact Elspeth Kennedy. Is there an internet link to Jean Adhemar's piece on François Gaignières' collection of drawings of monumental tombs in Gazette des beaux-arts, vol 84? It really seems to me to be a mistake but it clearly seems that we are at an impasse without another source either for the father or the son. I have found nothing to state the son was a knight and I cannot agree with you that effigys are so indiscriminate as to what the person's military status was. I have not found that to be true thus far. I have no problem with you being correct that it is the son, I just do not think there is sufficient evidence and I would like to see or hear a third source either way. If that is not agreeable to you then please state what you would like to do. Have a nice day.Mugginsx (talk) 13:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I have cited 4 sources that confirm my assertion. If this is not sufficient evidence, I'm not sure what is. I will list them here:

1. [Print] Jean Adhemar's piece on François Gaignières' collection of drawings of monumental tombs in Gazette des beaux-arts, vol 84.

2. [Print] Inventaire des dessins exécutés pour Roger de Gaignières (online: http://www.archive.org/details/inventairedesdes02pariuoft)

3. [Print] Wilson, Ian. The Turin Shroud: Unshrouding the Mystery. 2000. (excerpt viewable here: http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/quotes/TSoT/stuc0904.html, third entry down)

4. [Web] http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n66part5.pdf (from http://www.shroud.com/bstsmain.htm)

Of these 4 sources, three are credible, published, print sources and one is a website.

The support for your view is, as far as I can tell, based on a single website. The conclusion here seems pretty clear to me. Either all four of my sources have mistakenly identified the effigy, or your source has. I suggest we attempt to involve another editor to gain a third opinion, if you feel that the evidence presented is insufficient.

Let me address some other points. I will try to find a citation for my assertion that non-knights had martial effigies. Failing that, I can at least provide examples. I have a scan of the page from Gazette des beaux-arts. I can transfer this to you by whichever method you prefer. Finally, as supporting evidence, please consider my other two notes, a) the date of death inscribed on the brass, b) style of armour depicted. I think the first is pretty strong evidence, the second is of course more tenuous (see my previous comments for rationale). Effbr (talk) 15:19, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

I can not find anything other than the website to the contrary and I will not object to the change. I would love to see the Gazette des beau-arts, to keep for my own records. It would be great to have it if you would be so kind. I will enable my e-mail. Thanks. Mugginsx (talk) 18:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Received and thank you again.Mugginsx (talk) 10:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Have made change. Is there anything else you wish to add? Mugginsx (talk) 13:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

1. Is the image appropriate to keep in the article at all? I'm not sure it has much bearing on the subject. I believe non-notable relatives of people on Wikipedia are generally not mentioned or only in passing, but I will admit ignorance of the specific guidelines.

2. I promised a citation for my claim that non-knights had martial effigies. You will find discussion of this topic in English Church Monuments by Nigel Saul, pages 232-235. In summary - by the mid 14th century merchants, members of municipal authorities, etc had martial monuments. Saul states, "In the thirteenth century representation in armour had been associated with knighthood, an occupation; a couple of centuries later it was to be associated more with lordship, an institution." Effbr (talk) 00:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I could put a simple sentence stating there are no images presently available for Geoffroi I, but here is one of his son, for historical reference. As to the other reference, yes, it does seem that what you said it was true that later images were more symbolic that historically accurate. It would be a capital offense to do so in medieval times. I would like to research Geoffroi II when I have some time. Mugginsx (talk) 14:42, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I still think the image has little to no relevance to the topic. De Charny's son wasn't significantly involved (that we know of) in any of his life's events. It would be great for a page on Geoffroi II, but not this one. Effbr (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

If you browse the medieval-realted websites you will find many instances which show either family members, arms, or other art which depicts the family history or events, especially when there are no direct images available. It is not a unusual occurence. There have been no objections by others thus far, but if you wish to consult an administrator experienced in dealing with medieval sites I have no objection.Mugginsx (talk) 12:24, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not terribly opposed, I just thought I'd mention it. For what its worth, other medieval-related websites probably have a somewhat different goal from that of an encyclopedia entry.

Understanding the effigy

Effbr: I was just wondering if you understand the symbolism in the effigy. I understand some, but most (such as why he seems to be stepping on the lamb, etc) I do not understand and would be fascinated to know. You seem to have alot of knowledge in that area, would you share it? I know absolutely nothing of Geoffroi II and little about his father other than what he writes in his books and what I researched and put on the website. Mugginsx (talk) 13:30, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Symbolism in effigies is a difficult subject. Unfortunately I'm not very knowledgeable on it, my focus is on costume. I do know that the Victorians made many claims about the meaning of certain postures and other elements, later proven to be quite incorrect. The beast at the foot of many monuments evolved from the need to integrate a "footrest" for the deceased. Finally, keep in mind that funerary monuments of the medieval period were not personalized. It is thought they were produced from templates (especially brasses) to meet expanding market demand. They are not modeled upon the likeness of the deceased. Personalized features are generally limited to a) heraldry/crests and b) status symbols (collars, garters) - at least well into the 15th century (I don't profess to know anything about monuments past 1450).

One other note, effigy, in this field, normally denotes a sculpture, not a flat piece. Effigies and monumental brasses are of the class church monuments. There is a third common type, the incised slab (no page here on Wikipedia) that was popular on the continent but not England. Effbr (talk) 00:07, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much. It seems you know alot more than you credit yourself. Perhaps you might consider a website dedicated to costumes, effigys, brasses, incised slabs and what you know of their histories. I think it would be extremely interesting to many people, including myself. Again, thanks. Have a nice day 10:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I'm happy to discuss these type of monuments. My website on the subject may be found at http://effigiesandbrasses.com.

A great website! Will look at it in more detail over the weekend, when I have less distractions. Thank you for the reference to the website. Mugginsx (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Translation of the brass and other information

Do you, by any chance, have a translation of the brass of Geoffroi II? Mugginsx (talk) 11:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I have looked at your source http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n66part5.pdf (albeit an internet source; but one that seems to be attributed to Ian Wilson. This, of course further verifies what you said, i.e., this is Geoffroi II. It also adds 3 other interesting pieces of information, 1. that Geoffroi II was also a Knight, 2. The brass was thought to be an authentic likeness of the de Charnys, and 3. Geoffroi "caused great scandal when holding up the Shroud....". I am also enjoying you own website immensely. Thankyou for giving me the reference. Have a nice day. Mugginsx (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't. It is in French though, so it could be translated without too much trouble. Usually the inscriptions do not say much more than the person commemorated, year of death, and rank. Glad you found the site useful. I'm happy to discuss effigies & related monuments any time.

In Norman or Middle French perhaps, it does not work with the online translator, or, perhaps, I cannot read the letters correctly in their elaborate form. I e-mailed Ian Wilson http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Wilson_(writer) and he was very impressed with the brass effigy. He also gave me a translation, i.e., ‘Here lies the noble man Monsieur Geoffroy de Charny at one time seigneur of Thory, in the district of Beauvais, who died the 22nd day of the month of May 1398. Pray God for his soul.’. I also sent him your website because he was very impressed with the brass effigy that User:MarmadukePercy put on the page for me. Mugginsx (talk) 13:44, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for getting that translation and passing it along, its nice to know what it says. You're very proactive when it comes to getting answers.

Your welcome. Thank you for the information on Geoffroi II. Now I have a promise from Dr. Wilson to pass on more information. As to being proactive, I think you will find that if your information is not correct here, it is only a matter of time before someone catches it. Even when you think or (know) you are right, there are a few that won't give up getting rid of it. That is only a few and an unfortunate side to a mostly positive hobby. I have been known to be bull headed when I think I'm right, but, hopefully, I've learned my lesson. On the positive side, if you are open-minded you always learn something new, such as what you have shown me. Thanks again. Mugginsx (talk) 20:16, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

de Charny manuscript

Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention! They are absolutely beautiful! You are also a treasure for thinking of me and showing me how to access. Now, I wonder who can translate middle French? Remember, Ian Wilson translated the effigy of Geoffroi II. What do you think? Should I ask him?

Also, do you think we could put some of these images into Geoffroi de Charny ? Mugginsx (talk) 10:22, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem! I suppose this manuscript is a later edition of de Charny's work, since it is dated 1406. It was also apparently produced in Britain, along with bearing the English arms and depicting a Collar of Esses. This is a bit surprising, as the English had their own knightly order at the time (the arms of which are on pages that were not scanned), but I suppose the de Charny's principles were popular across the channel as well. It would certainly help to be able to read the document. If we can get some idea of the content, I think it would be a nice addition to de Charny's page. Effbr (talk) 20:50, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

William de Setvans and Elizabeth Stafford (wife to the 2nd Lord of Cobham)

Hello again. Can you add these to your wonderful website? I did a search and they did not come up but perhaps I did not supply enough information? Mugginsx (talk) 12:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

These are both listed already. A name search (enclosed in quotes) should bring them up.

http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments/william_de_setvans/

http://effigiesandbrasses.com/monuments/elizabeth_stafford/

Absolutely beautiful! There is a woman who is connected with the Felton family who corresponds with me. I went to your website and found Sir. John Felton 1400 for her. She was extremely pleased. What a great website you have! On another matter, do you think another pic of the manuscript in the Geoffroi de Charny article would be too much? I do so much love pictures in an article Mugginsx (talk) 10:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Effbr. You have new messages at Mugginsx's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

		The Special Barnstar
		for being so gracious in all of your help! Mugginsx (talk) 12:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)