Talk:Grunwald Swords

message: In popular imagination in Poland, the swords were brought by Teutonic Knights clad in white cloaks with black crosses. See this painting by Wojciech Kossak (unfortunately, still copyrighted) for example. It is important to show that this was not the case. Ironically, the red griffin of the duke of Stettin is now the coat of arms of Poland's West Pomeranian Voivodeship. — Kpalion(talk) 23:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? How is showing these arms relevant to the article and where is the proof they were actually wearing them? They do not pertain directly to the swords. Plus on top of that the images you are trying to use are speculative rough depictions and not necessarily correct. Gryffindor (talk) 05:15, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The swords were a gift. The identity of the givers is as important as the identity of the receivers. If it's not relevant, then what is? As for proof, all we know about how the swords were presented to Vladislaus and Vytautas comes from Długosz. We don't have any other sources. — Kpalion(talk) 12:51, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it relevant what dress the king was wearing that day? Or what horse the heralds arrived on? Or what arms they were bearing? Gryffindor (talk) 15:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What the king was wearing or on what horses the heralds arrived is probably not relevant, which is why Długosz didn't write about it. He did write about the heraldic symbols they were wearing though. Because it did matter: coats of arms weren't there for decoration, they showed the allegiance of those who wore them. — Kpalion(talk) 19:00, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why not display all the coats of arms of those who were present on that day? Why just those two? How is this in any way relevant to the swords themselves? Gryffindor (talk) 22:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They're relevant because they were relevant enough for Długosz to mention them. He didn't mention any other coats of arms in the same paragraph as the swords, only these two. — Kpalion(talk) 11:46, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: How is this really relevant to the swords themselves though? Długosz described many events on the day of the battle. Even if you still want to use the two images, there are many different versions of the image. How do you know how the arms looked like on that day? The images you provide in that case are purely speculative, as they could have looked differently in their variation by the heralds who had them. For example was the eagle one- or two-headed? Gryffindor (talk) 16:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this is a terribly big deal, but I also think this illustration is a valuable addition to the article for the reasons I mentioned above. But of course you are right that we can't know what the specific renditions of the coats of arms born by the heralds looked like. I changed the caption to reflect that. I'll be glad to know, if this is OK for you. — Kpalion(talk) 23:37, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The CoA of Pomerania can stay since you seem very keen on it. But on the eagle you need to find out if it is a one-headed or two-headed eagle. If that is not clear from Długosz, then it needs to be taken out because that would be too much speculation. Gryffindor (talk) 01:37, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is clear from Długosz: One of them, from the Roman king, had a black eagle on a gold field in his coat of arms, and the other, from the Szczecin duke, had a red griffin on a white field.  In heraldry, an eagle – or any other beast – is assumed to have one head unless specified otherwise. And Długosz was quite scrupulous in his blazons, so I doubt he would have failed to mention that the eagle was double-headed if it had been so. Besides, Sigismund was only King of the Romans at that time, so was only entitled to use a single-headed eagle. The double-headed one was reserved for emperors, and Sigismund adopted it as his coat of arms when he was crowned emperor in 1433 (see Reichsadler). So, I'm reverting your last edit, but will also add a citation (Długosz) to the caption. — Kpalion(talk) 11:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the arms born by the heralds are relevant