I have added a few comments in brackets for clarification when there was no simple translation that captured the idea, checking with Franco to be sure. He went over it and as usual was indispensable, but any errors are mine. There were a few words in the inventory that we could not translate; they are indicated in quotation marks.
The numbers on the left margin by themselves correspond to the page numbers of the page that follows in Franco's pdf original. The notes are in red and appear at the bottom of each page.
After the translation of the March 16 original there is an addendum Franco added on May 3, 2024. In addition, I have a few comments following related to that addendum.
Florence 1478 and 1479: Petrarch's Triumphs in private homes
Franco Pratesi
1. Introduction
That the Petrarchan poem I Trionfi [The
Triumphs] has something to do with the origin of the tarot is assumed
by the majority of historians. The problem is that the characters of the
Triumphs are six and the "triumphal"
cards added to the tarot deck are twenty-two, and how to go from the
first number to the second finds no concordant reconstructions among
scholars. I have in mind an entire book in which the suggested
connection is direct and immediate: the tarot was apparently invented by
Petrarch himself! [note 1] But
this, too, is only one of the many proposals for which it is very
difficult or even impossible to find any confirmation. However, two
fixed points remain: the six subjects of the poem are found in the tarot
and, perhaps even more importantly, in the tarot we find the fact that
the subjects are inserted in a series, such that the subsequent one
prevails over the previous one, just as in the poem.
Alongside the literary theme, the artistic-figurative one has
developed to the point of becoming prevalent. Research on the
illuminated manuscripts of the Triumphs
has been of particular interest. These manuscripts, however, spread with
a certain delay compared to the first copies, which lacked figures.
As often happens, there is a subdivision of experts: on the one hand, academics, writers, and art historians who study the Triumphs in
depth in their literary and artistic context without a particular
interest in the tarot; on the other, experts on tarot who,
independently, put forward their hypotheses on possible connections.
My impression, however, is that in no similar situation has there
been a rapprochement between the two camps as in this particular case. I
imagine that a notable part of the credit is due to the academic level
of Michael Dummett, who took a deep interest in the question from the
height of his chair as an esteemed professor of philosophy at the
University of Oxford, laying with his fundamental book [note 2]
the foundations for a kind of revolution in the sector. Today it so
happens that cartophile experts who discuss the topic are also following
the results of academic research step by step, so that the distinction
between the two fields has become much narrower. An example can be found
in discussion that has been ongoing for years on Tarot History Forum.[note 3]
In the opposite direction, it is possible to read works by art history
professionals who renounce the usual verbosity and, starting from The Triumphs, [note 4] arrive at the tarot.[note 5]
I am unable to participate constructively in person in the details of
the discussion. However, I would have liked to take advantage of my
greater proximity to possible Florentine sources to make new
contributions, in particular, in this case, on the presence in the homes
of fifteenth-century Florentines of both the manuscripts of the Trionfi and the card game of trionfi
[triumphs]. Up to now my search had yielded no results; I can now
report one, which unfortunately isn't early enough to be as useful as I
would have liked.
2. Documents studied and information of interest
I recently communicated the first results of the search for naibi and
triumphs in the inventories of household goods preserved in the
registers of the collection Magistracy of Minors before the Principality
of the State Archives of Florence (ASFi).[note 6] Of this large format series, I have already provided the principal
__________________________
1. R. Fusi, R. Pio, Tarocchi: un giallo storico. Firenze 2001.
2. M. Dummett, The Game of Tarot. London 1980.
3. viewtopic.php?p=13174#p13174
4. A. Labriola, “Da Padova a Firenze: l’illustrazione dei Trionfi,” in: F. Petrarca, i Trionfi (ed. I. G. Rao). Castelvetro di Modena 2012.
5. A. Labriola, "Les tarots peints à Florence au XVe siècle." In Th. Depaulis, Tarots enluminés. Paris 2020.
6. https://www.naibi.net/A/CURRADO.pdf; https://www.naibi.net/A/VECCHIETTI.pdf; https://www.naibi.net/A/NAIBTRIO.pdf
2
indications. I have now extended the study, in this case to a single
register: N. 174 Sample of inventories and revised regulations for the
neighborhoods of Santo Spirito and Santa Croce from 1475 to 1479.
I spotted two interesting objects. The first is certainly a manuscript of the Triumphs,
the first that I was able to find in these inventories - while, for
example, dozens of Dante manuscripts could be listed. I copy and
transcribe the relevant part of the inventory below; between quotation
marks are uncertain words, but the reading of the others can also be
improved.
This is a group of books that is part of a library much richer than average. The deceased owner was Francesco di Antonio di Tomaso Nori. The date on which guardianship was taken of Francesco's son Francesco di Francesco, approximately 11 years old, is May 23, 1478.1 Booklet covered in black with goatskin parchment of “chonsumi tudina”
1 Booklet of Messer Lionardo d'Umiltà in papyrus covered in red
1 Book of the triumphs of Petrarch [trionffi del petrarcha] covered in red
1 Book in French covered in red
1 Booklet of rhetoric by Tulio [Cicero] in vernacular (i.e. Italian] in goatskin parchment covered in purple
1 Booklet, little, with fixtures [locks?] [/i] covered in red
1 Book of "Dante and of. . .," very old in goatskin
1 Book of the Council of Basel, covered
1 Book, old, of French verses
1 Book without boards [/i][in the bindings] of historiated French verses
1 Book without boards covered as above
The second can be read on f. 309v among other various objects, and I again reproduce and transcribe the relevant part.
2 new towels
1 worn table knife
1 purple belt packaged equipped in white silver “per asse” and weight 8 oz. 12 denari [1/24th of an oz.]
1 pair [paio] of triumphs [trionfi] in parchment of messer Francesco Petrarca
2 purple articles of clothing worn-out and torn
1 good small white upper garment of Soventona
The starting date of the registration is August 5, 1479. The deceased is
Zanobi di Francesco di Nutto, goldsmith. Among the real estate, several
houses are listed in Tignano, in Val d'Elsa near Barberino, but it is
not clear from here whether the family lived permanently in that
village.
3. Comments on the two objects reported
There isn't much to comment on about the book. The case would have been
different if the book had been richly illuminated and provided with a
detailed description of the images for us; on the other hand, even in an
ideal case of this kind, the date, distant not only from the writing of
the Triumphs but also from the appearance
of the game of triumphs, would still weigh heavily [against providing
documentation of a direct connection between Petrarch and the game].
A comment is perhaps necessary on the rarity of such recordings. As I
wrote for the naibi in the studies cited, one should take into account
the possibility that other recordings of this kind have escaped my
observation, but the result is the same: the presence of other specimens
cannot be ruled out at all, but not many can have escaped. Instead,
there are two further possibilities for the absence of these objects.
The first is that the book of the Trionfi was listed as a book of poems,
or a book in Italian [as opposed to Latin] or similar, without
specifying its title and author; the second is that the Trionfi was kept
aside by the owners before the inventory was compiled. (The latter is
not my hypothesis, but that of an expert scholar of the period who
claims that a notable part of the books preserved in private homes was
later found to be absent in these inventories.)
Instead, “a pair of triumphs in parchment of Messer Francesco Petrarca”
is an inventory item that requires at least as many comments as there
are written terms. We start immediately with the "pair." If this term
had not been included, one would have thought of another book of the Trionfi,
written, or at least bound, in parchment. Now, however, we know that
writing “a pair” here was equivalent to “a pack,” and this is sufficient
to exclude any book of the poem. In short, we are faced with a real
deck of playing cards. We just need to continue the discussion on these
cards, to better specify their type.
Thus we encounter parchment, which was not at all predictable for
1479, when in its place we would have expected to find rag paper by
now. Why parchment that late?
4
All in all, the answer this time does not seem difficult. A new deck of
cards is not being recorded here, bought a few days earlier; it could
have been in the house for decades, because it was evidently an object
worthy of attention, respect and . . . conservation. However, not enough
to make it considered a precious object, because it is enough to
observe the environment where it was found and the objects with which it
was preserved to exclude any extraordinary value. In short, it seems
quite clear that the alternative arose, as often happens with old
objects, of whether to keep it or get rid of it.
We are left with "messer Francesco Petrarca," the well-known author of the Triumphs. Yes, precisely of the Triumphs,
not the triumphs, unless you believe the reconstruction mentioned at
the bottom of the page in the first note. I don't remember ever having
read, except in that book, about a Petrarch who was also the author of
the triumphs.
In the end, 1479 no longer seems to us so late: for such information,
that date still maintains great validity, because it can be compared
with the present day. In fact, here to associate, precisely directly,
the triumphs to the Triumphs is not an
exegete of our times, who is struggling to find plausible
reconstructions, but Florentines who had seen the appearance of the
first triumphs in the city only a generation earlier, or a little more.
Looking perhaps too closely, it remains for us to understand whether
that clarification should be read in a general sense, to indicate
precisely that the deck of triumphs dated back to Petrarch, or in a
particular sense, i.e. added to specify the type in question, in so far
as it could have been one of the various decks of triumphs then in
circulation. For me the former applies, at least now, but the question
will still require a brief discussion.
4. A confirmation after half a century
Several authors who have dealt with the history of playing cards, and
triumphs in particular, have repeatedly cited another inventory in the
same collection of the Magistracy of Minors before the Principality:
that of the haberdashery-stationery shop of Alessandro di Francesco
Rosselli. The document, from 1525, was identified in an enormous series
of inventories by the historian and archivist Gaetano Milanesi
(1813-1895),[note 7] who reported it
to Iodoco Del Badia. Del Badia transcribed part of the inventory and
published it in 1894 in the Miscellany he edited, together with another
document relating to the same inheritance.[note 8]
Unfortunately, finding the original in the ASFi is not an easy task.
From the title and the years indicated, the number of the series is
immediately deduced as 190, but there is no indication of the folios,
and it so happens that this enormous register has just over a thousand,
that is, just over two thousand pages, almost all of the inventories.
The fact that the dimensions are a little smaller than the royal sheets
usually used has little impact for the Revised Samples and Accounts
series. There would also be a repertoire at the beginning, on sheets of
parchment, and one would even read the name of Alessandro di Francesco
Rosselli, but the page indicated is number 52 and certainly does not
correspond to the content; moreover, the numbers of folios indicated in
the repertoire is just over one hundred and therefore it is clear that
it cannot be useful here.
Making the most of my free time, I finally identified the inventory
of interest on folios 395-399. With respect to the transcription of the Miscellany, I limit the inventory part to a few entries before and after the triumphs, which I reproduce and transcribe as usual.
_______________________
7. https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/ga ... ografico)/
8. Miscellanea fiorentina di erudizione e storia. Vol. II, N. 14, 1894, pp. 24-30 – reprinted Rome 1978.
5
61 large navigation map in 4 pieces of eight royal sheets
1 Florence on six "folded" royal sheets
1 large world map in 3 pieces of 12 half-sheets
1 large world map in 9 pieces of 16 common sheets
1 crucifix of a common sheet
1 crucifix of half a common sheet
1 crucifix of half a common sheet.
1 Saint Christopher 1 Our Lady on half a common sheet
1 print of half a common sheet of more saints
17 pieces of the sibyls and prophets doubled
1 game of the triumph of Petrarch in 3 pieces
1 game of planets with their friezes in 4 pieces
1 Saint Mary Magdelene of 1/2 common sheet.
10 forms of rosaries double printed of 1/2 common sheet
2 little heads of God the Father on ottavo sheet
1 little Virgin Mary on ottavo sheet
1 crucifix of brass on ottavo sheets with another
1 angel Raphael of tin on quarter sheet
It should be noted that the two games in this final part of the inventory are among other objects of which the type of paper is indicated, and not that of the material of the blocks used for printing, which could be wood, except for the few cases indicated of different materials. Reading the text as a conservation of entire sheets, they would seem to be kept as models for future productions rather than to be cut to obtain a single deck of playing cards (in the case of the triumph) or small religious figures.
Rather, the other two "games" present in the inventory are in a previous part, which follows a list of books and contains objects indicated as wooden - also for these two games - which also makes their prolonged conservation in the shop more easily understandable.
1 game of apostles with Our Lord in seven pieces of wood
1 Saint Mary of Loreto in two pieces of wood
1 Virgin Mary and Saint Roch and Saint Sebastian in two pieces of wood
1 game of seven virtues in 5 pieces of wood
Among other things, the not-new fact of the three pieces for the
triumphs remains to be discussed. Among the few known examples, a
possible basis for such a discussion are the Rosenwald sheets; I have
already had the opportunity to discuss these and similar cards in the
past.[note 9] I imagine that experts
have made significant progress in recent times, but I verified on Tarot
History Forum that by inserting Rosenwald the answer is "468 matches,”
and that number tired me before I started reading.
However, I must observe, with some regret, that if those pieces were of the Rosenwald block type, Petrarch's triumphs in the Inventories of the Magistracy of Minors were
not a deck of minchiate, which would have required at least four. On
the other hand, still in the hypothesis of blocks of that type, with
three pieces a 70-card triumph deck would be formed more simply than
with one of 78; but these are always deductions with weak underlying
hypotheses.
In summary, forty-nine years later the triumphs - here triumph - of
Petrarch are encountered again, but together with other "games" with
saints or mythological characters. This news has created a lot of
confusion over time, especially because some authors have interpreted
these "games" as possible decks of different playing cards. It should
also be considered that decks of cards that are both ancient and out of
the ordinary are known, especially from Germany, if only for the symbols
of the four suits.
In reality, in these inventories I have recently found the same term
"giuoco" several times with an uncommon meaning, but one which is well
suited to the case in question. For example, there are games of
containers or measuring cups to determine the quantity of wine or other
liquids, that is, not one but a series of measuring cups to be used
depending on the specific case (and presumably the "game" of that series
consisted in the possibility of placing them then one inside the
other). Or games of tools, always meaning small series of objects of the
same kind but of complementary size or type.
In conclusion, the information provided by Del Badia, instead of
introducing decks of playing cards with different characters into the
discussion, ends up being only a confirmation of what was discussed
here, namely that only the triumphs were particular playing cards and,
above all, always connected to the Triumphs, at least in the eyes of the
Florentines, which is no small thing.
Florence, 03.16.2024
_______________________
9. https://www.naibi.net/A/103-ROSENW-Z.docx; https://naibi.net/a/516-rosen3-z.pdf; https://www.naibi.net/A/526-ASSISI-Z.pdf; https://www.naibi.net/A/601-UMBRIA-Z.pdf.
ADDENDUM: When I examined the original document from the Rosselli
workshop, I had the Rosenwald sheets in mind for comparison. The fact
that we were reading triumph instead of triumphs did not impress me,
because even the card game was sometimes referred to in the singular. In
short, I had no doubt that even in this case “Petrarch’s triumph” was
related to the deck of cards, even if the term pair, which is really
decisive, did not appear here. The only doubt was initially whether
there could also be other decks of cards among the items indicated
together.
During the English translation, Michael Howard pointed out to me the
sheets present on the Internet of the triumphs of the Rosselli workshop,
to which I had not paid attention earlier on. These are approximately
26x17 cm images, and thus, by far, too large with respect to any known
playing-cards.
So, as in the other items present together in the Rosselli workshop,
even for this only one – the triumph of Petrarch – for which I supposed
to find playing cards, a different solution will have to be studied. It
is with this aim that Michael Howard is continuing the research.
Florence, 03 May 2024
(The addendum is added in English. By "even for this only one" Franco
intends that this comment is meant to apply to this one inventory and
not to the previous one about the "paio di trionfi.")
TRANSLATOR'S COMMENTS:
Art
historians generally consider that the "game of the triumph of
Petrarch" in the inventory refers to three metal plates from which a
popular series of six engravings of Petrarch's six Trionfi were made by
Francesco Rosselli in the 1480s. These plates were then inherited by his
son. The basic argument was made by Arthur Hind in his 8 volume series
Early Italian Engravings, in vol. 2 and 4. Here is how he puts it in the
list of items. They are number 72.
B.II refers to the series on paper in the British Museum later attributed to Rosselli, as opposed to another, inferior set, the A series, done a decade or two earlier by someone else. That the six engravings were done on the opposite sides of three plates is indicated by the dimensions of the resulting engravings (p. 131):
The dimensions of Love are, he says on p. 133, 260x173 mm. Chastity is 257x164. Death is 262x172. Fame (p. 134) is 262x172. Time is 256x174. Eternity is 260x173. The dimensions correspond as he indicates.
That they are plates and not woodblocks is inferred from the total weight of the items:
Not
all the items are metal plates, however. Hind recognizes many items as
the molds from which woodcuts he identified elsewhere were derived and
hypothesizes, based on these identifications, that the first 30 in the
inventory were blocks and the remainder plates, as indicated below.
It may be of interest that only two other items in the inventory are called "games", namely items 1 and 4, which Hind describes as "note packs of cards." But given their subject matter - Christ and the Apostles, the Seven Virtues - these are still not "games" in the usual sense today, but rather series around a common theme, the same as the Trionfi of Petrarch.
I have uploaded all the relevant pages of Hind's Appendix on the Inventory at https://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=26507#p26507.
We
might wonder whether the same interpretation of "series" might also
apply to the word "paio." In fact, the Grande Dizionario de la Lingua
Italiana, in its list of meanings for the word "paio",, p. 381 at
https://www.gdli.it/pdf_viewer/Scripts/ ... arola=paio (the continuation of the definitions of "paio" that started on the previous page), gives as its fourth meaning.
4. Disus. Complesso di parti o oggetti o pezzi che concorrono a formare un tutto unitario e organico.
Vasari [D’Alberti]: Far che la pittura paia più presto un tappeto colorito o un paro di carte da giocare che carne unita e panni morbidi. Crusca, IV Impress. [s. v.]: Talora si dice 'paio' a un corpo solo d’una cosa, ancorché si divida in molte parti, come un paio di carte da giuocare, un paio di scacchi.
I translate this as :
4. Disus. Complex of parts or objects or pieces that combine to form a unitary and organic whole. Vasari [D'Alberti]: To make painting look more like a colorful carpet or a set of cards to play than solid flesh and soft cloths. Crusca, IV Impress. [s. v.]: Sometimes we say 'pair' to a single body of one thing, even if it is divided into many parts, like a pair of cards to play, a pair of chess."Paio di scacchi" seems to me fairly parallel. Discussing this with Franco, he had no serious objection, but wasn't ready to support it himself, because unlike "giuoco," he had never seen the word "paio" connected with "trionfi" except as a pack of triumph cards.
No comments:
Post a Comment