Patrick Williams;64818 wrote:
This is a big, Big, BIG difference. Therefore, it was not (as we define it), I repeat; NOT heraldry.
My apologizes
Now… this was never in question:?
The question was:
If it could be possible that the Celts used a specific identifying Mark
(as a tribal/family mark)
approx. 3000 years ago which is still in use today as a Coat of Arms
if for a family or a state!
good that I checked
Quote
"Further, in order for your initial question (as I understand it) to be valid, you would have to demonstrate that:
a) The triskelion was used by Achilles,
b) Achilles was a real person,
c) The triskelion was used by this real Achilles’ heirs as a form of identificiation,
d) Nobody else, in any culture, used the triskelion as a form of identification,
e) The heirs of Achilles migrated to what is now the Isle of Man.
I somehow doubt that could be accomplished.""
Correct:!:
At least I tried
and was hoping for further help from here!
If pro or contra didn’t matter,
Because nothing is a fact until proven as such!
Frank Martinoff;64820 wrote:
The question was:
If it could be possible that the Celts used a specific identifying Mark
(as a tribal/family mark)
approx. 3000 years ago which is still in use today as a Coat of Arms
if for a family or a state!
Ah. Yes, it could be possible. Is it likely? That’s another story. 
We really have no idea where the designs on the earliest coats of arms came from or how long they had already been in use, to my knowledge. The stories of the 1066 invasion of England, however, mention that Harold had to remove his helmet so that his troops would know he hadn’t fallen. If true, they indicate that Harold, at least, was NOT using heraldry, otherwise he’d only have to display his shield for everyone to identify him. Add the Bayeaux tapestry to that list, as it shows Harold several times bearing shields with different designs. If Heraldry was in use at the time, one would think that the weaver would have known it and used heraldic devices thereon.
Frank Martinoff;64820 wrote:
At least I tried
and was hoping for further help from here!
If pro or contra didn’t matter,
Because nothing is a fact until proven as such!
Very true. And unfortunately, help from here is not really forthcoming. The fact is that until heraldry arrived on the scene we don’t really know how and/or if people used a form of proto-heraldry or not. There just aren’t any records that we have access to.
Patrick: "The stories of the 1066 invasion of England, however, mention that Harold had to remove his helmet so that his troops would know he hadn’t fallen. If true, they indicate that Harold, at least, was NOT using heraldry, otherwise he’d only have to display his shield for everyone to identify him."
Concept correct, but it was IIRC William, not Harold, who had to doff his helm.
A quick look at this thread puts me in mind of the old conundrum, "which came first, the chicken or the egg"—in evolutionary terms, the question would really be, when, over the eons, did the baby birds closely enough resemble modern chickens to warrant that label? And of course, any accurate answer would deal with varying levels of chicken-ness, not a clean break between non-chicken & chicken—"missing links" aren’t individuals, rather generations on an evolving gene pool.
I’ve seen the term "proto-heraldry" used for this concept in the pre-history of heraldry. Seems like a useful term, both for analysis and for avoiding sometimes amusing, but ultimately pointless, exercises in drawing lines in the sands of time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triskelion
"The Manx triskelion is documented since the thirteenth or fourteenth century at the latest, and is alternatively known in the Manx language as the tre cassyn ("three legs"). The symbol appears on the Isle of Man’s ancient Sword of State, which may have belonged to Olaf Godredson, who became King of the Sudreys (Southern Hebrides and the Isle of Man) in 1226."
So, the Manx triskelion may not be all that old.
Michael F. McCartney;64823 wrote:
Concept correct, but it was IIRC William, not Harold, who had to doff his helm.
Yes, yes .... William NOT HAROLD. Thanks for the correction!!! :D
Quote"""
invasion of England, however, mention that Harold had to remove his helmet so that his troops would know he hadn’t fallen. If true, they indicate that Harold, at least, was NOT using heraldry,"""
Not quite right ....
if I were your enemy or friend ....I rather have you remove your armor or helmet
than identifying you by your shield alone…because your armor, helmet, shield can be worn by anybody….
So ...we can’t conclude anything from this…...!
cc20181010
birkenstocks
hermes birkin
timberland boots
pandora charms
ugg australia
coach factorty outlet
burberry outlet canada
coach factory outlet
pandora outlet
supra shoes
kate spade outlet
fitflops sale clearance
pandora jewelry official site
moncler outlet
gucci outlet
canada goose outlet
swarovski crystal
hermes handbags
pandora charms
coach outlet online
kate spade handbags
pandora charms sale clearance
fitflops
yeezy boost
oakley sunglasses outlet
air max 90
supreme new york
nike air max shoes
kate spade bags
air jordan shoes
ray ban sunglasses
kate spade bags
michael kors outlet clearance
new york mets jerseys
pandora charms
air max 2017
nike dunks
canada goose
cleveland indians jerseys
dr martens
coach outlet
kevin durant shoes
coach outlet
coach outlet
michael kors outlet clearance
michael kors outlet
hermes handbags
canada goose outlet
asics outlet
kate spade outlet
oakland athletics jerseys
ray ban sunglasses
gucci outlet
canada goose jackets
uggs outlet store
pandora outlet
coach canada
coach outlet online
pandora jewelry
ultra boost
canada goose outlet
canada goose sale
kansas city royals jerseys
coach outlet
toms outlet
nike cortez
uggs outlet
swarovski outlet
lacoste polo shirts
michael kors outlet online
nike air max 1
dr martens boots
canada goose
new balance shoes
coach outlet online
uggs outlet
columbia sportswear
air jordan shoes
michael kors outlet
pandora charms sale
adidas shoes
polo outlet
ralph lauren
kate spade handbags
mlb jerseys
cc20181010
asdasdf