So much mysteries about this mysterious church! Late Saxon wall painting is believed to be the earliest representation of the Trinity in this form. Used pigments include cinnabar, most expensive one in a tiny church used by Saxons 🤔
St. Mary’s Norfolk
All 279 surviving manuscripts from the library of the Dukes of Burgundy @kbrbe are now digitally available:
https://t.co/vgDtVqCfUt
(Ms. 9261, f. 1, miniature by Loyset Liédet: Philip the Good commissions the author to write the 'Recoeil des Histories de Troyes', c. 1464)
In this clever marginal illustration, the medieval artist has created the illusion of a piece of rope driven through the page and attached on the other side, to support an added line of text.
(Harley MS 612, f. 232r-v)
https://t.co/JME4dtFiNQ
Paolini d. Putintseva 6-3 6-4 at US Open
Jasmine has been the most consistent woman in Slams this year.
That’s not up for debate.
18 wins in Slams, more than any other woman.
✅Reached R4 of all 4 Slams in 2024
Brilliant player.
Lovely person.
What’s not to root for.
🇮🇹❤️
Gifting this article so more people can be aware of this. Incredibly rich of Western European countries to complain about immigrants considering the scale of destruction they've historically inflicted on the rest of the world. https://t.co/86dDys5s1X
Of course, secondary sources can be very valuable. But when you're citing a letter or some primary source... cite the actual source, not someone else quoting/referencing it. Because what if the secondary source is misquoting? What if they took it entirely out of context? Etc.
Too many authors are satisfied with citing secondary sources (which, if they cite, often cite secondary as well) instead of digging for primary source information. And too many authors cherry pick sources without exploring context or considering what else the source says.