June 6, 2024 - white magic, card games

This translation begins a series of three notes (so far) by Franco on manuscripts detailing card tricks, all gleaned from Florentine public collections. This one is a translation of "La Magia bianca - Giochi di carte," posted at https://www.naibi.net/A/MAGIA.pdf on June 6, 2024.

Comments in brackets are mine, in consultation with Franco, for explanatory purposes. Page numbers in the left margins are those of Franco's Italian pdf, as are the footnotes at the bottoms of the pages.


White Magic – Card Games

Franco Pratesi

1. Introduction

I present here the first of three handwritten books of magic tricks which contain a notable part dedicated to card games [i.e. card tricks]; they are all preserved in the National Central Library of Florence, unlike a similar manuscript book, compiled in an earlier age, which I had recently found in the State Archives. [note 1] I will limit myself to briefly describing the contents on the basis of the titles of the various games, of which I report only a few examples.

Many years ago I published a study on ancient printed books, especially pamphlets of a few pages, dedicated to the topic. [note 2] I was in fact surprised that a complete book on the subject, with a rather extensive bibliography, cited very few. [note 3] The author, Carlo Rossetti, died in 1948, but his book has been reprinted several times without updates; I have not found more recent works that are more complete than this one, which, however, describes many games, but without presenting them in a historical perspective.

In fact, I don't feel the need for a more extensive collection of games with ways to play them, because already in this edition we often find more ways of playing the same game. What I'm missing is a historical overview of the evolution of these games. I have read indications of some old editions that seem useful, but I have not found copies in accessible libraries.

It is known that today the USA is the large country in which all these games have had the greatest diffusion and the most significant developments. Even the Italian book mentioned above, when it lists the literature and publishers, refers to the USA much more than to any other country. However, the USA did not exist when these games were born; when the first ones spread within Italy and Europe, in America there were only Native Americans, who didn't even know playing cards.

So a reconstruction of progress both in the introduction of new games and their diffusion from one country to another must begin in Europe, unless we want to look even further back to the Middle East or even ancient China. From a historical perspective, this specific literature is of considerable interest because when one finds early writings that describe card games in detail, the type of games illustrated is precisely this; only later did manuals on the traditional use of cards at the gaming table begin to appear.

In short, I lack a book written by a Michael Dummett on these games and this has the unpleasant consequence that if I encounter a new text, I never have sufficient basic knowledge to understand when it is a question of truly new and original games or if in some way tricks and procedures that have been known for some time are repeated.

So I felt I couldn't go beyond the simplest and most concise presentation possible, based on the game titles. If, for the individual game, the "rule" or solution is the same or different from other notes, it will have to be checked in the manuscript by those interested. In addition to the indices, I will report only an extremely small number of games.

2. The book La Magia Bianca [White Magic] [note 4]

In the Library Inventory, we read “White Magic, be they either games of sleight of hand with chatter, or an introduction to the game of bussolotti [the game of cups and balls], with various joking games for pleasure and enjoyment of conversations. Ms pp. 153. Gift of Prof. C. De Stefani.” In fact, the pages were subsequently numbered from 1 to 160.

Opening the book you will find the long title reported in the Inventory on the title page; the manuscript has its folios numbered like pages in a book, and the games are listed with successive numbers. Those that involve
_______________
1. https://www.naibi.net/A/CARPREST.pdf
2. L’Esopo, N. 50 (1991) 67-76. https://www.naibi.net/A/38-ESPREST-Z.pdf
3. C. Rossetti, Magia delle Carte. Milan 1958.
4. BNCF, Nuove Accessioni, 131. La Magia bianca o siano giochi di lestezza di mano con la ciarlata o sia introduzione al gioco dei bussolotti con vari giochi burlevoli per piacere e divertimento delle conversazioni.

Page 2
playing cards are found from the beginning and continue, interspersed with games of other types that I don't take into consideration.

In this case, the writing is very elementary, almost in block letters, and also in terms of vocabulary and grammar, there is minimal education. Compared to other collections of games [i.e., tricks], here we notice a more frequent use of the complicity of one or more companions, and even of the owner of the house in which the show takes place. Everything appears more amateur and familial [i.e, in a private house, with an audience of relatives and neighbors] in nature than usual. There are no illustrations in the book.

It is impossible for me to propose a date for the writing of this book, although I realize that this would be essential information. The handwriting could perhaps date back to the beginning of the 19th century, but it appears more likely to be from the 18th century; on the other hand, the credulity indicated by the "secrets" would suggest an eighteenth-century environment, or perhaps earlier. 

BNCF, New Accessions, 131. Title page (Reproduction prohibited)

 

Page 3
These "secrets" are found at the end of the manuscript, specifically on pages 132-148 and 157-160, and consist of strange drugs and remedies, but also recipes for paints, varnishes, and soaps. It seems useful to me to give an idea, simply indicating some ingredients of the various remedies proposed: root of the mallow, belly of the rooster, head of the lizard, dung of the chicken, skin of the hedgehog, and I think that is enough.

However, one of the secrets appears more important to us than the others, certainly not because of the prescription, but because it has a precise reference to the source: a Sienese author of the sixteenth century, Pietro Andrea Mattioli. [note 5] The story concerns a hermit in the Roman territory who, with a kind of spell, healed from afar anyone who had been bitten by a viper.

This quotation from a printed book does not serve us, as it usually does, to be able to affirm that the manuscript text of our interest could not have been earlier than this medical work, because there was already no doubt that it had to be later. The problem is: how much later? At most, one could even today find a curious episode like this in an ancient book like this and report it, citing the source. However, as the temporal distance increases, the probability of having an old edition at hand and wanting to use it decreases in parallel.

It would be normal to find such a reference in the seventeenth century, and already moving to the eighteenth century seems like a rather long leap. One could therefore reasonably think of the date in the first half of the eighteenth century. In particular, this collection could precede that of Pietro Rusca's book, printed in Milan in 1743, [note 6] which presents many more of these card games than are found in the older printed editions.

A comparison between the manuscript and Rusca's book has shown that there is certainly a close relationship between the two works. Parts of one correspond to the latter, or almost, to parts of the other. One must think that one author copies the other, or that both are based on a previous source. Certainly, both authors also write a part of the work that does not depend on the other. The indications that suggested an earlier date for the manuscript were rather weak, and one can therefore imagine that the compiler of White Magic had the printed book at hand, and in addition some previous manuscripts, perhaps notes of games introduced in person.

3. The card games [i.e. tricks]

On pages 149-153, there is a table of contents which, however, stops at the first 56 games. I use it to summarize the content of the book, completing it with the titles of the subsequent games, as present in the pages of the manuscript. Each entry in the titles and table of contents is actually preceded by "Game of,” which I do not reproduce in the following list, where the initial number is that of its place in the succession of games appearing in the manuscript. The number on the right in parentheses corresponds to the number with which the same game appears in Rusca's book. (It is possible that I have missed some of these correspondences and that the games in common are more numerous.)

4 making all the aces come together
5 divining all the cards in a deck
7 making a card disappear from your hand or deck
9 making a card appear inside an egg (51)
11 divining the cards in someone’s pocket as many as you like
12 divining the cards drawn from the deck
14 making a card transfer to under someone’s hand or foot
15 divining how many points are under 3 stacks of cards

 _____________

5. I discorsi di m. Pietro Andrea Matthioli sanese, medico cesareo, ecc. Venice 1568. Among the numerous sixteenth-century publications, this is one of the few with page numbering that includes the cited p. 1513 (as folio) in the manuscript. But others also report the episode in question. Some old editions can be found digitized online, and the entire work has been reprinted several times, even recently.
6. P. Rusca, Il maestro de’ giuochi piacevoli. Milan 1743.


Page 4

16 calling three cards whichever you want and having them be the ones you call
17 saying his card will be at such a number
18 divining what number a card in the deck will be at
19 3 tokens and divining who took them
22 divining how many cards remain on a table
23 divining how many points are under six piles of cards
24 making a card remain on a table
25 divining a card that is seen by 4 or 6 or more people
30 making a handful of sweets or something else appear in someone’s pocket instead of a deck of cards
31 making a card disappear from the deck by placing your hand on it
33 making a deck fall to the ground and whichever card you want remains in your hand
34 throwing a deck of cards onto a table and making sure that the one you want jumps out by itself
35 finding a card blindfolded with the tip of a sword
36 making the card pulled out come to be written on a white sheet with a pinch of tobacco [note 7]
39 making the imprint of a card come onto a white sheet or a [someone’s] cheek
40 making it that they all come out primiera [four cards of different suits, as in the game of that name]
41 throwing a deck of cards in the air and taking the one you want with a blow [note 8]
42 divining which ones are court cards and which ones are not in the dark
46 making a card from the deck disappear with a breath
50 knowing if they have placed a card yes or no by smell
51 divining a card by means of banderoline [little flags?]
59 making court cards become other suits
60 making 3 piles of cards, and at the time you make said piles, tell them to think of a card. and divine what card they thought of
61 having them touch any card and let the one they touch be theirs
62 divining a card they think of during the time various piles of cards are made
63 making 4 rows of cards of 10 in each row, going away, and having them touch a card and knowing which they touched (74)
64 giving 4 or 5 cards or as many as you like to several different people, but always one by one, then putting on a table a sign [some small object, such as a key, a coin, a pen, etc.] going away, and divining who took it
73 of the Clock
75 divining a card taken from the deck (19)
76 divining more cards taken from the deck (20)
77 having a card removed, and divining it without seeing or touching it (21)
78 finding a card in 3 cards placed on a table (22)
79 finding the top or bottom [?] card of the deck (23)
80 to remove a card from the deck, allowing the deck to be shuffled, and find it with as many cards as you want (24)
81 making a card turn over in the deck (25)
82 having only one card be drawn by three people (26)
83 having some person think of a card, then have another person take one, and that card taken be the same one that was thought of by the other (28)
88 how actually one card is changed into another (42) [note 9]
89 how to change a single card into three cards different from each other (43)
90 how to change four 3s into four aces (44)
91 making the cards of two persons change so that the one has that of the other (45)
92 divining a card before it has been drawn (46)
93 joking game of changing a king of clubs into a donkey [note 10] (47)

__________________
7. Used as an alternative to the usual magic powder for the sole purpose of setting the scene.
8. Blow from a whip or strap, but from the context [in the solution], it turns out to be a gunshot.
9. Games 29-39 of Rusca are not card games [i.e. tricks].
10. Card with a donkey drawn on it.


Page 5

94 having one person divine a card drawn by another without seeing it (53)
95 divining 3 cards at the bottom of 3 piles before taking them out
96 making a card to be found inside a lemon
97 divining how many points are under different decks of cards, however many you want
98 divining a card just touched (74)
99 to throw a deck of cards in the air and take back the card that had been drawn in the time they are in the air
100 to throw a deck of cards onto a table, and two cards drawn go into someone’s pocket
101 to find all the decks of cards that may be in a house missing one card
102 from a deck of cards, making 3 piles and in each one find the card that has been drawn
103 in two decks of cards making the card come out of one deck and go into the other
111 finding 3 jacks together with a queen
123 arranging 30 cards on a table and divining what is imagined by two people
126 divining the point value of a card, and the card itself, which someone has drawn from an entire deck of cards
128 making cards come out by themselves from a deck of cards
131 divining a card that someone has imagined from an entire deck of cards
132 to find two cards that two people have taken from two decks of cards
133 divining 20 cards that more people will have taken
134 tearing a card into tiny pieces and then having it found whole
137 divining where a coin has been placed there being multiple cards arranged on the table (54)
138 divining from a deck of cards which of those will be a court card without observing them (91)
140 arranging 16 cards into a table and in each row there is a king, a queen, a jack, and an ace of different species [suits] in a row vertically, horizontally, and diagonally (84)
141 divining a card by means of a needle placed in water (40)

As you can see, there are several numbers missing from the list, corresponding to games in which playing cards are not used. The numbered games are 146 in total and the card games are just over half.


4. Examples

19. Game of 3 Tokens. [In the ms., the number is set off in the left margin: see the sample pages shown later.]
Take 24 cards and give to 3 people: to the first one, to the second 2, and to the third 3; then you put 3 different tokens on the table and have them taken one by one by all 3, giving them the name tacitly, to the first token A, to the second [token] E, and the third [token] I. Then whoever has taken the token A is told to take from the cards that are left as many cards as are in his hand, whoever has token E takes twice as many, and whoever has token I to take 4 times more, making sure to name the tokens, and not the letters which must be used by you as a rule; however, you must keep them silent, and from the number of cards remaining on the table, find whoever took the [who took which] tokens. The remaining cards must not be more than 7 nor less than one [note 11]. If for example one card is left over you will take the vowels from the first word [in order]; if two are left over you will take the vowels from the second word, and so on until as many as there are of them, which vowel letters let you know which [of them] took [which of] the tokens, and the words are. Allegri Beati Ardire Respira Merita Stivale Minerva.
59. Game of making court cards become of other suits.
Take 4 cards, and they are arranged half court cards and half cards of other suits [number cards], that is, one card is half of one sort and half of another in this way [small drawing in the figure below] that when leafed through on one side they represent one thing, and turned [and leafed through] from the other side

_________________
11. The two limiting cases of the 24-6 remaining cards are in fact 18-(1x1+2x2+3x4)=1 and 18-(1x4+2x2+3x1)=7.


Page 6

show another, and keep them arranged like this for when you want to do the game, making sure to keep another card on top, face down so that they don't see the others, which are half of one sort and half of another.

BNCF, New Accessions, 131, p. 45 (Reproduction prohibited)

62. Game of Divining a card that they think of in the time that you make several Piles of Cards.
Take the 40 cards and make piles, starting by placing one card at a time in a row, then starting again by placing another one on top of the first, and so as a rule, there will be 4 in each pile; and in the time that said piles are made, they are said to think of a card, and to say which pile it is in, and that pile is placed at the last, and you start again from the beginning making 10 other piles; with the same rule as before, ask them which stack their card is in, and knowing that it will remain on top of one of those piles, then take all the cards and shuffle as much as you want, so that since you have seen the card you will find it again whenever you want, being able to direct the game even in greater confusion.

Page 7

BNCF, New Accessions, 131, p. 5 (Reproduction prohibited)

91. Game of changing the Card in the hands of two people so that one has that of the other.
Take v.g. [note 12] the two Kings of Clubs and Hearts. The King of Hearts is covered with a Club, and a Heart is placed on top of the King of Clubs, as has been taught on other occasions. Composed in this way, the two cards are placed at the bottom of an ordinary deck so that one is the fourth and the other the second. The King of Clubs and hearts are then extracted from the other deck by two people, the two

______________________
12. Verbi gratia: for example.

Page 8

Kings of Clubs and Hearts are then mixed, one after the other. Having done this, place the deck in a beautiful manner, taking the other [deck] and showing the first person the card that remains underneath it, saying: this is the card you removed, and, feeling that it is not that one, you pretend to put said card on the table, but in its place, the second card is placed, said first card is quickly removed and placed in the middle of the deck, then the other card which will be underneath is shown to the other person, and asking him: and this is your Card? He will say no, it will be pretended as above to put said card on the table, however placing the second one instead of the first. Then the two people are asked what their cards are, and the first answering, it is the King of Hearts, the first card on the table is taken and shown to be the King of Hearts; the other will say that his card is the King of Clubs, then the second card is taken and shown to be the King of Clubs. Having done this, take the first card again, showing it again and saying: so is this your card? You take it and put your hand on it, and when you receive said Card, you must carefully remove that Artificial Heart, and you must do the same with the second card. This done, you add, would it be nice, my Lords, if without touching those Cards anymore, I commanded that the King of Hearts be changed into that of Clubs, and the King of Clubs be changed into that of Hearts? Observe. To you, Lord Cards, by virtue of my [magic] powder, and by force of my Command, quickly change the figure of both the King of Hearts to the King of Clubs, and the King of Clubs to that of Hearts, and having said this you will say, let each one see the Card that he holds under his hand, that the game will be done.

138. Game of divining within a deck of cards, which of those will be a court card without observing them.
To play this game it is necessary to have a deck of cards already prepared in this way, that is: After two number cards there is a court card, [note 13] then 5 cards and two court cards, then six cards and two court cards, then 7 number cards and two court cards, and finally a number card and a court card. this arrangement must be memorized, then you pretend to shuffle the deck of cards well, which you put down with ease while walking and take the adjusted one, then you have your eyes blindfolded and placing your deck on your forehead you will play your game by rubbing the cards with your fingers then smelling the fingers as if you could sense the cards by touch or even by smell.

Florence, 06.06.2024

_____________________
13. In this position Rusca adds three [number] cards and two court cards. In both cases, it seems that the deck used has fewer cards than a complete deck of 40 or 52. Of interest is Rusca's comment that it is a valid finding “because if one does it, as is the custom for some, either in front of a mirror or by means of a companion, it Is easy to discover [learn] it.”

June 1, 2024 - autograph note of Paul Minucci

This translation is of a second manuscript version of Minucci's Note, this one by Minucci himself, apparently a first draft of the printed version. On naibi.net, Franco puts the two side by side for comparison purposes. This forum does not have the software for such presentation, that I am aware of, so instead I put them after each other, paragraph by paragraph, with the manuscript paragraph in italics and the printed version in normal Roman. This printed version should be exactly the same as the printed version transcribed in the note immediately before this one in this thread.

Franco's original is "Minchiate – Nota autografa di Paolo Minucci," posted on June 1, 2024, at https://www.naibi.net/A/MINUCCI.pdf. As usual, comments in square brackets are mine in consultation with Franco (often simply transcribing his suggestions, or translating them into English) for clarification purposes. The numbers by themselves in the left margin are the page numbers of his Italian pdf, and his footnotes are at the botttoms of these pages.

Minchiate – Autograph note by Paolo Minucci

Franco Pratesi

1. Introduction

In a recent study I presented a manuscript copy of Paolo Minucci's Note included in Lorenzo Lippi's Malmantile racquistato. [note 1] That copy had minimal differences from the printed one, and ultimately both the copyist and the purpose of the copy itself remained unknown. This time I present another manuscript version of the same Note, which, however, has a very particular merit: it was inserted by Paolo Minucci himself into his manuscript copy of the Malmantile, in two volumes, in which his own handwritten annotations are present. The work is preserved in the Central National Library of Florence, in the Magliabechiana collection. [note 2]

So I can use the printed text from 1688 again [note 3] (the second edition after that of 1676, but the first with Minucci's Note), comparing it this time with its original manuscript version. I can immediately anticipate the result: the comparison was rather disappointing, because the manuscript does not bring us additional information, and indeed appears to be a significantly reduced version.

Despite this, I considered it useful to copy and transcribe the handwritten note, also because it documents an initial variant of it. The additions to the manuscript version can thus indicate clarifications deemed necessary at a later time and inserted, most likely with the assistance of other game experts who were friends of Minucci himself, starting with Filippo Baldinucci. [note 4]

2. Copy of the handwritten note compared with the printed version [In what follows, the paragraphs of the handwritten note are in italics and the paragraphs of the printed version, following the others, in normal Roman type]

 Florence, BNCF, Magliabechi, Cl VII 207, f. 71r.
(Reproduction prohibited)

____________________
1. https://www.naibi.net/A/UGHI.pdf
2. BNCF, Magliabechi, Cl VII 207.
3. Malmantile racquistato. Poema di Perlone Zipoli con le note di Puccio Lamoni. Florence, 1688, pp. 408-411.
4. https://www.google.it/books/edition/Poe ... frontcover, p. 247.


2

Minchiate.

It is a very well-known card game, also called Tarocchi, Ganellini, and Germini. But for the sake of understanding the present Octaves, I consider it necessary to know that this game of minchiate is played with 97 cards in the manner shown below.

MINCHIATE.

It is a very well-known game, also called Tarocchi, Ganellini, or Germini. But because it is little used outside our Tuscany, or at least differently from what we use, for the sake of understanding the present Octaves I consider it necessary to know that the game of Minchiate is played in the manner shown below. This game is made up of ninety-seven cards, of which 56 are called Cartacce [suit cards, but also a term in other contexts meaning “waste paper”; so here, worthless cards, except the kings], and 40 are called Tarocchi and one that is called the fool.

This deck of cards is made up of 14 cards of coins, 14 of cups, 14 of swords, and 14 of batons, and in each card of these suits starting from one to ten, then the jack, the knight, the queen, and the Kings, and such cards are called suits, that is, suit of cups, suit of swords, etc.; and they make the number 56.

The 56 Cards are divided into four species, which are called suits, which in fourteen are depicted with Coins (which Galeotto Marzio said were ancient peasant loaves of bread), in 14 [with] Cups, in 14 [with] Swords; and in 14 [with] Batons; and in each card of these suits it begins from one, which is called an ace, up to ten and in the eleventh a Jack is depicted, in the 12th a Knight, in the 13th a Queen, and in the 14th a King, and all these suit cards outside the Kings are called cartacce.

The other 40 cards are called germini, or Tarocchi, and this term Tarocchi, in which various hieroglyphs and celestial signs are expressed, and each has its number from one to 40, and in addition to these there is one inside of which the figure of a fool is imprinted, and this is not numbered, because it fits with all the cards and every number.

The 40 are called Germini or Tarocchi, and this term Tarocchi, according to Monosino, comes from the Greek Etarochi: which word, he says with Alciato, denotantur sodale illi, qui cibi causa ad lusum conveniunt. But I don't know what that word is; I know well, that Heteroi and Hetaroi means sodales; and from this word diminished by the Latin custom, they can be called Hetaroculi, that is, Companions. Germini perhaps from Gemini, a celestial sign, which among the Tarocchi with num. is the highest. In these cards of Tarocchi are depicted various Hieroglyphs and celestial Signs: and each has its number, from one to 35, and the last five up to 40, have no number, but their superiority is distinguished by the figure impressed upon them, which is in this order Star, Moon, Sun, World, and Trumpets, which is the highest and would be number 40.

The allegory is that since the stars are overcome in light by the Moon, and the Moon by the Sun, so the World [Mondo, also = Cosmos] is greater than the Sun, and Fame, represented by the Trumpets, is worth more than the World; so much so that even when a man has left it, he lives in it by fame, when he has done glorious deeds. Petrarch similarly makes in the Triumphs like a

3

game, because Love is surpassed by Chastity, Chastity by Death, Death by Fame, and Fame by Divinity, which eternally reigns.

Card 41 is not numbered, but the figure of a Fool is imprinted on it, and this fits with every card, and with every number, and it is passed, from each card, but it never dies, that is, it never passes into the opponent's pile [of cards won], who in exchange for said Fool receives another cartaccia from the one who gave the Fool, and, if at the end of the game, this one who gave the Fool has never taken cards from his opponent, it is appropriate that he give [up] the Fool to him, having no other card to give in its place, and this is the case in which the Fool is lost.

Of such cards, others are called noble because they count; that is, whoever has them in his hand wins those points that they mark, and these are the nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, of which the one counts five, and the other four count three each.

Of such Tarocchi, others are called noble because they count (that is, whoever holds them wins those points that they are worth), others ignoble, because they do not count. One, two, three, four, and five are Nobles, [of] which card One counts five, and the other four count three each.

The no. 10, the 13, the 20, and from the 28 up to the 40 inclusive, count five each, except the last five which count ten and are called arie, and the 29, which does not count except when it is in the verzicola. The four kings, and the fool five each.

The numbers 10, 13, 20, and 28 to 35 inclusive count five each, and the last five count ten each, and are called Arie [Airs]. The Fool counts five, and each King counts five, and they are also among the noble cards.
The number 29 does not count except when it is in the verzicola, [in] which [it] then counts five, and one time less than its companions respectively.

From these noble cards Verzicole are formed, i.e. sequences of at least three cards, such as one, two, and three, etc. The one, the fool, and the 40 is a verzicola. The one, the 13, and the 28 is a verzicola. The ten, the 20, and the 30, or the 20, 30 and 40 is a verzicola. Three kings, or four, are a verzicola.

From said noble cards, the Verzicole are formed, which are orders and sequences of at least three equal cards, such as three Kings or four Kings; or of three low-level [andanti] cards, such as the One, two, and three, four, and five; or composed, such as one, 13, and 28; One, Fool and forty, which is the Trumpets; Ten, 20, and 30; or 20, 30, and 40. And these verzicole must be shown before the game begins, and placed on the table, which is called declaring the Verzicola.
The Fool fits into all the verzicole, and counts double or triple, as do the others that are in a verzicola, which exists without fool and never forms a verzicola, except in the one, fool, and trumpets.

These verzicola cards are counted three times in number, when they are not taken by the opponent with a superior card, which is called killing, and when they are killed, those

Of these verzicola cards, the number that they are worth is counted three times, when, however, the opponent does not spoil it for you by killing one card or more with superior cards, which in this case,

4

cards that remain of that verzicola are counted twice, and the fool does the same effect with all the verzicole.

those that remain count twice; if, however, they do not remain in a sequence of three, for example: At the beginning of the game, I show 32, 33, 34, and 35. If the 33 or 34 dies to me, that breaks the sequence of three, the verzicola is spoiled, and those that remain in it count only twice for one, but if the 32 or 35 dies, the sequence of three remains for you, and consequently, it is a verzicola, and their value counts three times for each one.

If the fool or other cards enter more than one verzicola, it will count twice more per verzicola, in addition to the three mentioned, when, however, they are in one’s hand at the beginning of the game, because the verzicole made in playing are only counted two times.

The Fool, as has been said, does not make a sequence but its value always counts twice, or three times, depending on how the verzicola’s value counts, whether damaged or saved; and when there is more than one verzicola, the Fool goes with all of them, but only once counts three, and the rest counts two; and this means the verzicole declared [accusate] and shown before the game begins, because those made with the cards killed by the opponents, as would be, if, having the 32 and 33, I killed the opponent’s 31 or 34, and made the verzicola, and this counts twice.

When one of these noble cards is killed, each of the players scores, or wins, for the one that was killed, as many points as the dead card counts, except for those that are in the verzicola, of which, being killed, the companions are not marked [non si segnano], nor do they win anything.

When one of the noble cards is killed, each opponent marks [segna, i.e. scores] as many marks [segni], or points to the person to whom it died as the card was worth [for a fuller explanation see the quotation at the end of my previous post in this thread]; except, however, those which have been shown in verzicole, of which, being killed, nothing is marked (except by the one who by privilege does not play), because such marks come from the adversaries gained in the reduction in the value of that verzicola, which should count three times, and dying, counts two: and the 29, the verzicola dying where it entered, counts only five.

The other cards are called ignoble cards, and do not count but only serve to rigirare [move the cards in a way that controls] the game; which game cannot be played with more than four people, who then are given 21 cards; and if there are two or three players playing, 25 are given to each.

Then the other cards, which are called ignoble cards, and cartacce, do not count (although indeed they sometimes kill the noble ones, which count as tarocchi; from the number 6 onwards, they kill all the little ones, that is, the 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5; from the 14 onwards they also kill the 13, and from the 21 onwards they kill the 20, and every tarocco kills the Kings), but they serve to rigirare [move the cards in a way that controls] the game; which game is not used among us, except in four people at most, and then 21 cards are given to each: and when two or three people play, 25 are given. And playing in four people, the first who follows on the right hand after the one who has shuffled the cards (who is said to have the hand) has the right not to play, and pays thirty marks to the one who

5

in the game takes the last card, and this one who takes the last card (who is said to make the last) earns from each of those who have played ten marks. The one who does not play still gains from those of the dead; that is, he also marks the value of the card to the one to whom said card is killed.

If this first player plays, the second has the right not to play, paying 40 marks; if the second plays, the third has said option, paying 50 marks: if the third plays, he passes the option to the fourth, who pays 60 marks, as above. But if there are only three people playing, there is no option not to play.

Having shuffled the cards, one of the players, who is next to the one who shuffles, cuts a part of them [alza, literally “raises”], and if turning it over at the bottom of the pack [the raised part] one of said noble cards, or a tarocco from 21 to 27 inclusive, is revealed, he takes it, continuing to take them all until he finds an ignoble card, and likewise the one who shuffled the cards, who finally turns over one of the noble cards, or a tarocco from 21 onwards, continues to take from it as the one who cut [or raised] did; and if they are noble cards, both the one and the other [player] mark the points to each [of the players], whatever that and those cards which he has removed count, and this is called robbing; and the one who robs must discard, that is, he throws away [puts in the residual pile, the mountain] as many cards as he robbed, to be reduced to the number appropriate to the opponent's cards.

Once the cards are shuffled, one of the players, who is on the left hand of the one who shuffled cuts [alza, literally, “raises”] a part of them: and if, turning to the bottom of that part of the deck which remains in his hand, there is one of the noble cards, or a tarocco from 21 to the 27 inclusive, he takes it, and continues to take them until he finds an ignoble card there. The one who has shuffled the cards, after having given the first turn twelve to each person and to himself, and the second turn thirteen, and having revealed the last card to everyone, reveals it to himself the same, and then looks at that which follows, and takes it, if it is a noble card or a tarocco from 21 to 27, and continues to take as above, and this is called robbing, and these cards, which are robbed and revealed, being noble, earn the person to whom they are revealed, or who robs them, as many tokens as they are worth; and those who rob them must discard, that is, take away from their hands as many cards of their choice as they have robbed, so as to reduce their cards to the number adequate to that of the companions; and whoever does not discard, or due to another accident of badly counted cards, ultimately finds himself with more cards, or with fewer than his opponents, due to his mistake does not count the points they are worth, but goes out of play.

The one who deals the cards always reveals everyone's last card, and if it is noble, the one to whom it is revealed marks to each one what it counts. Whoever does not discard, or is ultimately found with one more or less card, does not count the points of his cards, but goes out of play due to his mistake:

The one who deals more or less than the established number of cards pays 20 points to each of his opponents, and whoever has more in his hand must discard the ones he has more; but he cannot make a void, that is, some must remain of that suit which he discards; If he has less, he must take it from the residual [dal monte, literally, from the mountain] at his choice, but without seeing inside, that is, asking for the fifth or sixth, etc. of those that are in the residual [monte], and that one, who

6

Whoever deals the cards badly, either more or less than the perfect number, either to himself or to his opponents, pays 20 marks [points] each.

shuffled the cards (which is called making the cards) made the cut, gives him that which he asked for.

The game begins by showing the verzicole that one has in his hand, then the first person after the one who has shuffled the cards to his right hand puts a card on the table (which is called giving), the others who follow must give of the same suit, if they have any; and if they do not have any, they have to give a tarocco, and this is called not responding, and giving of the same suit is called responding.

Whoever does not respond, that is, in playing does not throw on the table the suit if he has any such card that the first player gave, pays 60 points to each of them, and returns those that he has killed to whoever it was.

Whoever does not respond, and has in his hand the suit that was placed on the table, pays sixty points to each, and returns that noble card which he had killed; for example, the first gives the King of coins and the second, although he has coins in his hand, gives a Tarocco, above the King, and kills him; discovered that he has coins in his hand, he returns the King to whoever it was, and pays his adversaries sixty points each, as has been said.

Every tarocco takes all the suits, and among them the larger number takes the smaller, and the fool never takes, and is not taken, except in the case mentioned above.

And so the game is played, giving the cards on the table one at a time, and each one tries to take from his companion the cards that count, and this taking is called killing, and at the end of the game, that is, when all the cards that count have been given that each one had in his hand, he marks the points which he advances to the companion, and every sixty points one mark [or token] is set aside [si mette da parte un segno], which is called a sixty. And this seems to me to be enough to facilitate the understanding of the present octaves.

So it goes on, giving the cards, and the first to give is the one who takes the cards given, and everyone tries to take the cards that count from his opponent, and when they have finished giving all the cards they have in their hand, each one counts the cards they have taken: and having more than his 25, he marks as many points to the one who has less as many cards as he has more; then he counts his honors, that is, the value of the noble cards and verzicole found in his cards, and marks as many points to his opponent as he counts more with his honors, and every sixty points one token [or mark] is set aside [si mette da banda un segno], which is called a sixty, and these sixties are valued according to the agreement.

3. Comments on the comparison

Some additions in the printed edition which are of some interest can be found immediately at the beginning with two short asides; the first “is little used outside our Tuscany or at least differently from what we use”: it broadens the horizon to consider minchiate outside its area of origin, and it is important to point out to us that the vogue for minchiate had not yet begun in Rome, from where it then took off across the whole of Europe. The second is the simple addition that the lowest cards of the deck

7
“are called cartacce,” a generic term useful for distinguishing them, but which was not present in the manuscript.

Of another type of interest, so to speak humanistic, are three subsequent additions which with short intervals present us with information of an academic type, clearly added by some scholar ready to exhibit his culture, both in the case of a suit of “Coins that were said by Galeotto Marzio to be ancient peasant loaves of bread,” and above all for the name of tarocchi, “Monosino says it comes from the Greek Etarochi” and everything that follows. Shortly afterwards, this time without resorting to citations from ancient authors, our erudite commentator also ventures to explain the order of the Arie: “The allegory is, that since the stars are overcome in light by the Moon,” and so on. I imagine it is the same academic commentator who, after these interventions, feels satisfied and leaves the field free for further additions of only a technical nature.

The first such addition concerns the Fool's properties. The different ways of playing it are better specified and the particular condition that occurs when it remains with the player until the last hand is added. After a brief addition that clarifies the particular role of tarot 29 (the details of which were not available in the autograph version), we find other information on the Fool relating to its inclusion in the verzicole. Then, speaking about the verzicole, we find the definition of damaged verzicole, also clarified with a specific example.

Very important is the subsequent addition on the conditions for not playing, first mentioned in passing and then described in detail (after a further clarification on the characteristics of tarot 29), with the points being lost, depending on the position at the table, in favor of who makes the last trick. Obviously, these conditions are only important in the everyone-for-oneself game, which is the one covered in the Note. The rules for penalties in case of errors in the discards are then added.

We then move on to examine the course of the game, starting from the distribution of the cards, and here we find some additions on initially declaring verzicole and on the definition of responding to the suit played. Unusually, there is additional information in the manuscript version on the way of dealing the cards, which only here is indicated "one at a time" [a una per volta] which is also in contrast with other ways of dealing indicated in subsequent manuals. [This was a wrong reading, due to the verb “dare” that is only used for the initial deal.--FP. The correct reading: Unusually, Minucci calls the process in a trick where each player puts down one card that of “giving [dare] the cards on the table one at a time.”--MH] Conversely, the number 25, of cards that each player is entitled to, is only present in the printed version, but we know that this number corresponds to the game with three players and not four players.

The indications on the course of the game are completed, in particular on how the tarocchi are played and how the Fool is played. As might have been expected, we encounter the last significant addition when explaining the final count, with several more details than the manuscript version.

In addition to these differences that emerge from the comparison, there is some information present in both the printed and manuscript versions that require some further comment. We begin immediately with the initial definitions in which, rather unusually, we find the name Germini associated with that of Tarocchi (and not that of Minchiate as usual) to indicate only the superior cards.

Another point concerns the ignoble cards, for which it is rightly specified that they are used to rigirare [move the cards in a way that controls the game], and the difference between the scoring value and the order of taking is clarified, such that an interesting characteristic of the card game derives from the fact that the worthless ones are able to capture noble cards.

You may also notice absences of rules that would be useful but are not found in either of the cases. For example, strangely, no mention is ever made of the fola, who would be responsible for looking at it and withdrawing the counting cards present. Another significant absence is the indication of the game of four in pairs, which in the Florence of the time had probably fallen into disuse, before a subsequent revival.

8
4. Information on the author

The main source for finding information on Minucci is the Biographical Dictionary of Italians. [note 5] You can thus find all the essential information you are looking for. 

Portrait of Paolo Minucci [note 6]

Paolo Minucci was born in Florence in 1626 into a family of patrician origins from Volterra. From a branch transplanted to Radda in Chianti, the grandfather emigrated to Florence, obtaining citizenship for himself and his descendants, and therefore access to political offices. Paolo followed in the footsteps of his father (deceased in 1642) who was a doctor of laws and notary: he studied in Pisa and graduated in law in 1647. Upon returning to Florence, he was part of an academy protected by Cardinal Giovan Carlo dei Medici founded by Salvator Rosa, who together mainly with Lorenzo Lippi became a great friend of Paolo.

In 1656 he entered the service of Prince Mattias dei Medici, governor of Siena, to whom he sent reports and notices from Florence in connection with diplomatic offices. His position led him to relations and missions with Poland, because Prince Mattias was one of the candidates for succession to the Polish throne. In particular, between 1658 and 1659 he was entrusted with a mission to Poland which lasted several months, allowing him to establish personal relationships with court figures with whom he maintained relationships even later.

After returning to Florence he married Clarice Nelli in 1662, with whom he had at least four children. In the following years, he held various public offices, and after the death of Prince Mattias (1667), he continued to carry out secretarial functions with Grand Duke Ferdinand II, still using his experience in relations with Poland. In addition to this specific diplomatic competence, his humanistic erudition and interest in scientific experiments were also appreciated at court.

His annotations to his friend Lippi's poem, commissioned by Cardinal Leopoldo dei Medici, were much appreciated. He then retired to Radda in Chianti, where he died in 1695.
______________
5. https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/pa ... ografico)/
6. Dal Malmantile, edition of Florence 1731.

9
From other sources (perhaps too malicious) we get an image of his less busy life, which continued the youthful habits of his lifelong friends.

He was a great eater and drinker, and frequenting taverns and wine shops, he was unable to advance in his career as his fine intelligence and learning required.
Secretary of the Medici Princes, he was forced, due to his many debts, to abandon his honored office and retire with his entire family to Radda, from where his grandfather had emigrated.
Paolo Minucci was tall, fat, with black hair, an olive complexion, and easy to get into sacris, since every little thing that didn't go his way made his eyes wide and he became red like scarlet. [note 7]

As often happens, these will be different and contrasting aspects of the same truth, to be reconstructed in a balanced way.

Florence, 01.06.2024
_______________
7. https://www.google.it/books/edition/Gen ... frontcover

May 19, 2024: Florence, late 19th c. - gambling accounts

This post is devoted to a translation of Franco's note, "Firenze fine Ottocento – Conti di gioco," posted May 19, 2024 at https://www.naibi.net/A/ALESSANDRI.pdf. It is a study of wins and losses at various games, all studiously recorded by the player himself. The "Conti" of the title refers to his accounts, preserved over the past 125 years and more in the Florentine archives. There might be a pun here, since "Conti" could also be translated as "Counts of Games," meaning noblemen of a certain title, as it turns out this individual was.

As usual, comments in square brackets are mine, in consultation with Franco, who was also consulted about various points in the translation. That is not to say it is perfect, or even as good as can be, and any errors are on me. These translations are corrections of what Google Translate spits out, often time-consuming but at least not wearing out the fingers; there may be erroneous but plausible wordings that I don't notice. As usual, numbers by themselves in the left margin are the page numbers of Franco's pdf, and the notes are found at the bottom of these pages.


Florence, late nineteenth century – Gambling accounts

Franco Pratesi

1. Introduction

Let us imagine a passionate card player who can dedicate a few hours every day, or almost so, to his favorite pastime. Let's imagine we can follow him from behind while he plays cards. Imagine being able to record all his wins and losses for about twenty years. What would be the result of our fantasy? Before concentrating on imagining the scene, a preliminary distinction is necessary: what kind of games and players are we talking about?

It is clear that, if our player limits himself to tavern games with the win or loss of a few glasses of wine, the result, even if it were skewed towards an overall loss, would not lead to the ruin of the family. If, however, he were strongly unbalanced towards winning, this could perhaps lead him to exaggerate towards cirrhosis; however, these would be exchanges of money of minimal size, which would not even justify their registration.

However, there are, and have always existed, card players who did not play as a pastime, or just as a pastime, but who paid great attention to the aspect of possible income deriving from the game. In this case, the passion for gambling could push behavior to be destined to certain losses beyond reasonable limits. There were then recommendations on the destinies of some games: suitable only for princes or rich aristocrats, able to withstand enormous losses without having to change their lifestyle, by the simple fact that they had extraordinarily high fixed incomes. At the other extreme, there were professional players who, even without reserve capital, managed to earn at the gaming table, thanks to superior experience, and perhaps with incorrect practices, which also required a certain professionalism.

Let us then set limits to our imagination, and to facilitate the task, let us imagine an intermediate case closer to our times. Let us imagine a gentleman from a rich Tuscan family in the last quarter of the nineteenth century who lived on an income and took every opportunity to dedicate himself to the pleasure of gambling. We can then glimpse him playing in city clubs with the same companions, and also playing in similar environments every time he is in different cities. Wherever he is, he does not give up his almost daily occupation. We would like to guess which game he plays in particular and what his balance of losses and winnings is. Well, as much as we can reflect, we struggle to reconstruct the situation in a convincing way.

Here, however, we find an incredible booklet with all this precise data, systematically recorded by our gentleman for all that time, and then we really have to follow his activity.

For now, we are only missing one important piece of data, the certainty about the name of our player, who certainly belonged to the noble Florentine family of Alessandri, or Degli Alessandri, but he could have been called Carlo or Giovanni. His account book, preserved in the State Archives of Florence, [note 1] is a kind of agenda or diary of limited dimensions (about a current A6 format [roughly 4” x 6”]) and, above all, with very thin sheets, so much so that in a small thickness the written pages exceed one hundred.

Not only that, a twin diary is preserved in the same archive unit; Copies de lettres is stamped in gold on the spine of the first, and Notes on the second, which is reserved for recording travel expenses; even the most minute are listed there, such as some tips and barber expenses. Furthermore, the two twin diaries are written by the same hand, and the dates of the trips correspond exactly to the places and days that we find recorded in the first diary, the one of the games, on which I will focus my attention.

If we are not certain of the player's identity, we have a lot of information and archive documents on the Degli Alessandri family. In reality it would not be included among the oldest noble families of
______________
1. ASFi, Alessandri, 2066.


2
Florence, but this is simply due to the fact that it was a new branch of the prestigious Albizzi family, as we read in Spreti's Encyclopedia. [note 2]

In the year 1372 Alessandro and Bartolommeo di Niccolò degli Albizzi renounced the Consorteria, changed their coat of arms and called themselves degli Alessandri. From the assumption of the new surname, they gave 21 Priors and 8 Gonfaloniers of Justice to the Republic, and two Senators to the Principality.

. . . Gregory XVI wanted to confirm the comital title (mf.) to GAETANO di Simone and his descendants in 1845, and the Grand Duke recognized this concession with a rescript dated 28 February 1846. The Alessandri family wore the habit of Malta in 1628; and in 1752 there was described in the Golden Book of the Patricians of Florence (mf.)
a) GIOVANNI di Cosimo and desc.[descendants] (Patr. Di Firenze [Patrician of Florence] mf.).
b) CARLO di Gaetano and desc. (Count, mpr, Patr. Di Firenze, mf.).

The ASFi Alessandri collection contains 2082 archival units and 218 parchments. A large part of the collection is dedicated to the administration of the family's farms, located in several parts of the Tuscan territory, but documents from other families that arrived in the Alessandri archive following marriages also appear.

In the relevant inventory N/486, the archival unit in question, among the latest in the collection in the Miscellaneous section, is cataloged as follows.

2066 - (fn 1601) 1. Travel expense diary presumably of Cosimo di Gaetano Degli Alessandri (1859-1883); 2. Gambling expense diary presumably of Carlo di Gaetano or Giovanni di Cosimo Degli Alessandri (1875-1891); Travel expense diary presumably of Carlo di Gaetano or Giovanni di Cosimo Degli Alessandri (1878-1892)

  1859-1892 [first and last years of entry]

Of course, the element of greatest interest to us is No. 2.  

Florence, late nineteenth century – Gambling accounts ASFi, Alessandri, 2066, 2 and 3. The two agendas studied  (Reproduction prohibited)

____________

2. V. Spreti, Enciclopedia storico-nobiliare italiana Vol. 1. Milan 1928.


3
Of the two personages suspected as authors of the diary of our interest, we read that Giovanni di Cosimo di Gaetano Maria (1852-1894) married Anna Maria Palffy Daun de Erdöl (1864-1927), who was guardian of their children Cosimo and Ginevra after her husband's death. Inheritance documents are various. Instead, for Carlo di Gaetano Maria di Simone (1829-1895) only a book of income and expenditure of the estate for the years 1894-1908 is listed, therefore actually relating to his inheritance (a check, however, showed that it was not his estate but that of Giovanni di Cosimo, bequeathed to his minor children, initially under his administration).

At this point we run into the problem that if the death dates given for the two characters are correct, neither of them can be our player, because the diary entries continue until 1897, by which time both candidates would have been long dead. If there was an error in the death dates indicated in the Inventory, this error would only be possible for Carlo, because Giovanni's widow was active as guardian of his children in years prior to 1897. The alternative, if the dates are correct, moves towards the search for a third candidate. We will then see that, thanks to the numerous documents preserved in the Alessandri collection and what can be found on the internet, it will eventually be possible to trace precisely the identity of Carlo Degli Alessandri for our player.

2. Summary of the game accounting

The numbers recorded are in such quantity that it is impossible for me to reproduce them in full, and therefore for the time being, I will limit myself to inserting a table with the final results of the balance sheet of this activity, year by year, recorded as in Florence, for centuries, all commercial activities and farm administrations were.
 

       _________YEAR_____WINNINGS____LOSSES____BALANCE____

 

4

ANNUAL BALANCES

3. Principal details

Registration begins on 1 October 1875 and the gaming venue is the Casino Borghese (a stone's throw from the family palace in Borgo degli Albizzi) and remains so until the entire month of the following February with two exceptions: a stay in Rome from 10 to 18 December with Caccia indicated as the playing venue, and then from 17 to 31 January in Monte Carlo. On February 27th the Club Ecarté appears, and in the following months we see it regularly alternating with the Casino Borghese as the Florentine gaming venue. In this case, we have information on the game as well as the place, and it is not strictly a gambling game. From 10 to 14 March we find Monte Carlo again, where the daily figure is not recorded but that overall. In the first visit, he had recorded a loss of 18,000 lire; in the second he reports, let's say unexpectedly, a win of the same amount.

In April another game, Goffo, appears in several different places in Florence: we mainly read about a Club Goffo, but Strozzi Goffo and Riccolellis Goffo also appear. Also Roma Goffo, the first two days of May. In the middle of the month two more days appear with Rome: the first Ecarté, the second Goffo. However, the main venue is again the Circolo Borghese. On 7 August, he lost 1,400 lire in Livorno at B. Am.no; in December, a win appears, at the unusual billiard club, and from the 19th to the 28th we find our player back in Monte Carlo with daily records of wins and losses often exceeding ten thousand lire, but with an overall win.

In February 1877, he recorded a total loss of 30,000 lire, again in Monte Carlo. New games appear in May, in particular Club baccarat, and Montughi macau. For Christmas and the following day he loses 8,000 lire at the Casino Risorti.

January 1878 he began in Monte Carlo from the 10th to the 19th; he won 1700 lire on the first day but lost more than 20 thousand on the following days. The Club whist appears at the end of February. In which – as with Ecarté, also a trick-taking game – wins or losses are less important. The fixed gaming venue in Florence becomes the Accademia dei Risorti, sometimes indicated with the specification of baccarat, and continues for 1879 and 1880. In July 1880 we find, without indication of the days, a loss of over 2,000 lire in Paris at Cercle International. From 1881 to 1885 the Ecarté Club prevailed, but with frequent appearances by the Baccarat Club as well.

In 1886 the Goffo joined the Ecarté with a few exceptions of other games. In July we read of a loss of 400 lire in Lucerna-Baraque. In 1887, mixed records appeared, i.e. with the win or loss figure for the same day divided into two games, such as for example a loss of 10 lire explained as Ecarté +100 and Goffo -110. Goffo, especially, and Ecarté prevail; among the exceptions there is a loss of 950 lire on August 20th in Lucerne - Baccarat.

In 1888 even Ecarté rarely appears, while Bezique appears several times, always with Goffo the main game. On September 3, a win of 644 lire was recorded at Lausanne Baccarat.

In 1889 Bezique and Goffo continue to dominate at the beginning of the year, with also mixed recordings such as

5
a win of 120 lire divided into Bezique -145 and Goffo +265. Then Baccarat prevails, also in Florence after the experiences abroad, which begin on July 18th in Lucerne, to continue from August 21st in Spa and from September 4th in Paris, almost two months of Baccarat which continue in November and December at the Club Borghese, after and before the Florentine practice of other games, Goffo especially.
 

  ASFi, Alessandri, 2066, 2 (Reproduction prohibited)

1890 continues with Goffo and Baccarat, and Pharaoh also appears a couple of times. In 1891 Baccarat found itself in Lucerne from 17 July to 7 August with four days of play and four losses, but less strong than usual. In Florence, Ecarté reappears as a secondary game alongside Goffo in addition to Baccarat. In 1892 Baccarat seems to become the main game followed by Goffo, which however takes first place again in the years 1893-95 when there is greater alternation between various clubs and games.

In 1896, an unusual series of entire weeks dedicated to Ecarté and Whist appear, which are not gambling games, and in which our player seems to be able to assert superior gaming practice, so much so that winnings are the rule; Unfortunately for him, they are usually not as big wins as those that were possible at the betting and banking games.

1897 is the last year present in the register and continues the trend of the previous year with Ecarté as the main game. The last date of registration is March 6, 1897.


6 

  ASFi, Alessandri, 2066, 2 (Reproduction prohibited)

4. Comments

The first comment goes not to the game and the player but to the accountant. In Florence, keeping daily account books was a universally widespread practice in shops and families, already in the late Middle Ages. All citizens, or almost all, were able to keep these accounts, because the abacus schools of Florence were very good and very popular, on par with or perhaps better than the schools where reading and writing were taught. Later, most of these account books were recycled or destroyed, but even today more are found in Florence than in other Italian and foreign cities. Only this traditional habit, continued in the family with the administration of the farms, can explain the care with which our player recorded and preserved the information written in his diary.

Still with reference to accounting, it seems necessary to understand how heavy the losses and winnings recorded were. Today we are no longer familiar with the value of the lira at the time, but the necessary information can be found on the internet. The period of time considered is large enough to suggest significant variations in the value in question. The approximate today value of one lira of the years indicated is shown in the following table. [note 3]
___________
3. https://inflationhistory.com/it-IT/?cur ... &year=1875


7

YEAR - EURO

As can be seen, the variation over time is negligible, because a rough approximation is more than sufficient for our purpose. Then, as an indication, it will even be enough to evaluate one thousand lire of the entire period concerned as five thousand euros today; which brings the numbers involved to a high level, but not such as to be reserved only for a few princes, or characters of similar importance and wealth, as had been the case in the past for games of this kind.

A comment should be reserved specifically for card games. It seems clear that the selection of games recorded is affected by two different forces: on the one hand the personal choice of our player, and on the other, the temporary fashion for the diffusion of the various games in urban clubs. It is not too surprising that we never find the most popular trick-taking games indicated, those which were played by the majority of Florentines and which belonged to the families of Tressette, Briscola and Scopa. In these environments, reserved especially for citizens of above-average education and wealth, even games had to have something superior, better if they arrived as a fashion that came from abroad, or from France, especially, or more recently from England, and Whist (which no one would play in taverns) eventually became the favorite game. So they played Ecarté, and to a lesser extent Bezique (and that wasn't Bazzica) and finally Whist, just as a couple of generations later we would play Bridge.

As far as betting games are concerned, here Goffo reigns supreme. Many years ago I studied the literature in Italian and saw that books with instructions for this game had been published in various seaside cities, Genoa first. [note 4] The fashion for Goffo has some unusual characteristics, because it was not a new game. In particular, it is not clear whether there were substantial differences between Goffo, already remembered in the Renaissance era, and the Goffo that appears, or reappears, in a series of games apparently derived from Primiera. It seems that players, as soon as their favorite game was banned, changed some of the rules and the name, so as to be able to claim that it was a new game that was not banned; and so Bambara, Buia, and then Goffo saw the light, among others.

The fame of each of these games was erased by the next one, and it happened to our Goffo, too; later the same fate occurred when one or another form of Poker was imposed on an international scale, in years when the USA was now dictating the law on the matter.

Last, we encounter the banking games, which in reality should be the first in the ranking for an assiduous player of this type. Especially with these games you can play hard, with bets at the limit of what is bearable for a gentleman and completely unacceptable for an ordinary citizen. To try to win you have to be ready to lose significant sums without losing your composure, and this requires above-average personal assets and strength of character. An invitation to get involved comes precisely from this ability to feel among the few capable of "playing" at these levels. This type of game can no longer be considered a pastime but only maintains the character and tension of a challenge, a challenge above all to one’s luck but also to one's own experience and specific knowledge, which is often overestimated.

The long history of banking games seems to begin with Lanzichenecco or Zecchinetta, which would give rise to the Bassetta, and then to Pharaoh [Faro], the first of the series to appear in the case in question. Pharaoh had introduced at least a couple of advantages compared to Bassetta: instead of the thirteen cards for each better, there was the dealer with a single series of thirteen cards of one suit in front on which to place the bet, which was decided by each bettor and could also be split across two or more cards. Pharaoh had its greatest diffusion in the eighteenth century and by then [Alessandri’s time] had been forgotten almost everywhere.
_______________
4. L’Esopo, No. 41 (1989) 65-74. https://www.naibi.net/A/23-ESGOFF-Z.pdf

8
Baccarat was a further element in the series, evidently the most popular at the time considered here. There was Monte Carlo, the Mecca for players of this type, but gaming venues where one could play Baccarat existed in all the main cities, and even in Florence there was more than one of them, including those that one would not have imagined, at least in times with greater rigor in controls on gambling.

Baccarat has only been documented since the 19th century in France and has split into multiple variations, some of which are still played in casinos around the world and even online. The main rules of the form played in the nineteenth century are the following. Two or three decks of 52 cards are used, which count only for the numerical value, going from 1 to 9 for the numeral cards and becoming 0 or 10 (which is the same thing because in numbers with two digits only the second is considered) for the 10 and the three figures. The bettors are divided into two groups, one to the left and one to the right of the dealer, but the game takes place between the dealer and one bettor per group, then moving on to the next pair of bettors. The dealer usually deals two cards to two players and the same number to himself. At the time, it was possible to ask for a third card, and in any case between the dealer and the bettor, the one who gets closest to 9 wins. The dealer only sees the possible third card of the two bettors and the bets made, which are clues capable of guiding his decision whether or not to ask for a third card. The sum of the bets of all the players cannot exceed that put into play by the dealer. It is possible to ask for Banco, that is, a bet equal to the total put into play by the dealer, and this bet has priority over the others.

If you want to better understand the game and its variants, you can find many details in the specific literature, [note 5] including the pages of pagat.com on the Internet, [note 6] which can also be used for all the other card games named. You can also find an extensive discussion of gambling games in a historical perspective, up to the Second World War, with special attention to the environment of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. [note 7] For more recent times, the literature becomes extensive, the principal origin is in the USA, but it goes beyond the period of interest here.

5. Identification of the Alessandri involved

A final comment is needed for the player himself. He was evidently a real enthusiast of playing cards. It is astonishing that he was able to move without distinction from one environment to another and from one game to another, even of very different types. As far as the environments are concerned, however, this is not unusual, because we never imagine him in a tavern gambling away a glass of wine. The company in which he found himself playing was still that of gentlemen, capable of welcoming fellow citizens, or even foreigners, as long as they were decently dressed and perhaps introduced by some members of the group. Even abroad one could find the right environment, just as passing foreigners and foreign residents who were of a fairly high social class could play in Florence.

In Florence, different environments of this kind could be found, often with centuries-old traditions, starting from the ancient academies which sometimes excluded, nominally at least, games (and gambling ones even more so) from their activities, which were mainly theatrical or literary. and artistic in general. Only the Lorraine grand dukes fought an open war against gambling, with notable results; before and after, the relevant laws, however severe, often remained on paper.

My impression is that he was a member of the noble Alessandri family, but from a cadet branch or something like that, so that he had a good income, but few obligations and commitments and therefore had been able to dedicate a large part of his thoughts and time to satisfy his passion for games. However, not to the point of dispersing his assets, but always with satisfactory control over the limit of the losses.

However, I wanted to make sure by carefully examining an enormous file of documents preserved in Carlo's name in the Alessandri collection. [note 8] I must admit that the surprise was great. It is
___________________
5. D. Parlett, The Oxford Guide to Card Games. Oxford 1990.
6. https://www.pagat.com/banking/baccarat.html#banque
7. M. Zollinger, Geschichte des Glückspiels. Vienna 1997.
8. ASFi, Alessandri, 308. Documents relating to Carlo di Gaetano Maria degli Alessandri: confraternities, charitable works, diplomas, political elections 1870-1885.

9
not possible to indicate all the commitments, positions and titles of this personage. Certainly count, commander of the order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus, (and so far one could have foreseen), but also member of the national Parliament, major of the National Guard, fighter in Trentino with Garibaldi, vice-president of the Banca del Popolo of Florence, president or honorary member of a huge number of institutes, associations, bodies with active participation in their respective proposals and decisions. Something truly incredible.

A notable part of the documents concerns the national elections for Parliament, in which he was a candidate for the constituency of San Casciano (which also included the municipalities of Greve, Barberino, and Montespertoli). He was elected twice, in 1874 and 1876, while in 1880 he withdrew his candidacy in favor of that of Sonnino. In this regard, there are many letters both of congratulations and of supplications and requests for intervention to support local needs. There are also documents on some fraud that occurred in the elections, with much more detail than what appeared in the Parliamentary Acts later, in which it was discussed whether or not to annul his 1874 election. [note 9]

Searching the internet we find that as a boy, he was present among the pages of the grand ducal court [note 10], while we will later find him among the conspirators against the grand duchy. An important piece of data that we find on the internet [note 11] is his date of death, March 17, 1897, so the initial dilemma is resolved in Carlo's favor, and there will be no need to look for a third member of the family.

In a folder with a few documents in the same archival element 308, with the title “Personal curiosities,” I identified a loose sheet of paper that resolves all doubts; a true unicum that establishes a connection between the player's diaries and the parliamentary documents. It is a copy of two short letters in French from June 1878 [note 12] in which it is clarified that the rumor was incorrect that a player (not Alessandri, but a certain Wurtz Wuncler or a similar name) had been excluded in Paris from the Cercle de la rue Royale, while the one-month deadline for his permission to access the games as a non-member foreigner had simply expired, and at the same time his irregular way of playing had been explained only by an insufficient knowledge of the rules, so his winnings were confirmed.

In conclusion, we can now unify the two separate documents and recognize that this important and famous personage, extremely active in the social field of every circle (at least political, military, administrative, philanthropic, sporting, theatrical, musical and who knows how many others), was exactly the same personage who, surprisingly, found time to play card games so often, up to ten days before his death.


Florence, 05.19.2024

9. https://www.google.it/books/edition/Att ... frontcover
10. https://www.google.it/books/edition/Alm ... frontcover
11. https://www.google.it/books/edition/Gio ... frontcover
12. Lettres de Mr. Le Duc de La Trenouille à Mr Wurtz Wuncler. Copies.

May 17, 2024: a jealous husband

The poem on ombre presented earlier spoke occasionally about the "Zerbini" knights that would stand behind the seated ladies playing ombre - named after an elegantly and ostentatiously dressed character in Ariosto's Orlando Furioso. The current note documents an occupational hazard of such creatures, namely, the jealous husband watching from a distance. While in former days the incident recorded here would have certainly led to a duel, in these more civilized times it leads to an adjudication by one whose profession is the "science" of chivalry.

The following translates "Un marito geloso," posted by Franco on May 16, 2024, at https://www.naibi.net/A/FATTO.pdf. Page numbers are those of Franco's pdf. Comments in square brackets are mine, added to explain some of the terms in Italian that don't quite translate into modern English. It was certainly a different world from today's.

Florence 1713 - A jealous husband

Franco Pratesi

1. Introduction

I recently presented a poetic composition on the game of ombre found in a manuscript of the Moreniana Library. [note 1] From another manuscript of the same library, [note 2] I now intend to present a text of a different type, but which refers to the same environment in which the noble ladies flirt with knights while playing cards. In this case, it is a scene in which a jealous husband and an obliging knight become offended in such a way that it can only be resolved with the intervention of a well-known expert on chivalric matters.

Archival unit No. 11 contains three volumes. The part of interest is issue 8 of Vol. I, Writings and Opinions on Chivalry by Signore Abb.te [Abbot] Pietro Andrea Andreini, with the title written in a modern hand. (I don't think that the author was also an abbot, although there were many abbots without abbeys in circulation at this time.) On the file, in the Inventory [note 3] we read the following.

8. Opinion. dated 1713/14, around the settlement of a dispute arising from the behavior of a knight towards a lady at a gaming table. Folios 130a -131a contain the Agreed Fact, which is immediately followed by the 2nd Opinion, finally signed by Pietro Andrea Andreini. (ff. 131a -141b ).

 

Moreniana Library, Bigazzi, 11 vol. 1, f. 130r
(Reproduction prohibited)

____________

1. https://www.naibi.net/A/OMBRE.pdf
2. Biblioteca Moreniana, Bigazzi, 11 vol. 1.
3. I manoscritti della Biblioteca Moreniana di Firenze, Florence 1903 et seq. On p. 418.


Page 2

2. Report of the fact

Fortunately we can use the entire report of the event as compiled by the judge, who undertook to write it in such a way that it was approved by all the parties involved. It is not excessively verbose, it is completely clear, and therefore it seems appropriate to me to copy a part of it and transcribe it in full.

Agreed fact

A Lady playing where there was a large gathering of Nobility, a young Knight, Florido, stood at the back of her chair, every now and then extending his hands over her cards, whispering in the Lady's ear, making jokes, and laughing. And as her husband Pompeo remained at a distance, observing for quite some time these acts of excessive domesticity, it seemed to him that others were similarly observing them. [note 4] Burning with indignation, he begged Lucido, his relative and a friend of Florido, to let him know that these are not terms from a knight, and from a friend of his, that he should instead stand aside from his wife.

Lucido, after various apologies, realized that if he didn't get Florido out of there, the jealous Pompeo would easily embark on some upheaval, unsuitable on that occasion; he thought it better that he make an embassy to invite Florido to go with him to another, happier gathering, but seeing that Florido did not want to accompany him and that he persevered with the same domesticity towards the Lady, he pulled him aside, begging him in the most discreet manner to get out of there, since at a more opportune time he would have told him the cause.

Florido replied that, for the same reason, he intended for him to specify this cause at the same time. But Lucido, after prolixly begging him in vain to get out of there, and there would be no lack of time, found himself forced to say that since he wanted to hear it, he should know that it seemed to him that Pompeo was all apprehensive and unsettled, because he [Florido] took care to remain with some extraordinary domesticity next to his wife.

Then Florido, in a voice so loud that two Knights not far away could hear him well enough, said “Sig. Lucido, if you tell me this as yours, it will be one thing; if you instead have a commission from Sig. Pompeo to speak to me in this way, please be content to answer him from my side, that he does not know what he is saying, and therefore he mente [word with the modern sense of “lies,” but here more that of “speaks with falsity,” in a very generic but accusatory sense, as in “he’s out of line”, i.e. not in accord with prevailing custom]. [note 5] Then observing that those two Knights had heard, turning to them he said, "Gentlemen, you have heard the reply that I am sending to Pompeo." And having said this, he returned to the side of the Lady.

Lucido, considering that such an answer and [accusation of] mentita had been made public, begged these two Knight witnesses to give him their word not to speak about it, and warned Pompeo, who held, and holds, that he was badly accused [mentito], civility, purity, and modesty, with which each Knight must behave with a Lady, being for him [i.e. being in his favor].

In response, Florido replies that the common custom of Knights conversing with Ladies in this City of Florence (postponing these sophistical moral subtleties) gives him the right to be able to serve in this way, with the candor of a true Knight, and remain next to a Lady. And in proof, he gives the examples of such and such Ladies with such and such Knights of what they did and do, with their husbands being present or absent; and of having with this same Lady with the same feelings of honor, practiced acts of greater confidence and consequence, without Pompeo, even if he was present in his own house, or in conversations, having ever given any sign of displeasure; now he [Florido] doesn’t know why

__________
4. This is a fundamental point; in addition to the direct influence there is also, and perhaps above all, the indirect one, because public ostentation raises fears of possible malicious judgments behind the husband's back.
5. It should not be overlooked that, as we will see, the accusation of mentire was the most serious that one could inflict on the opponent, so much so that as a rule in previous years it led directly to the duel.

Page 3

he [Pompeo] should be offended by it; but when he [Pompeo] wants to use it as a pretext, he [Florido] will clarify it, Pompeo being freed [first], however, from the mentita [the accusation of falsity] given [by Florido] to him [Pompeo] in defense of his [Florido’s?] honor.

It is asked what could be the most prompt and honorable expedient to put to rest this Complaint, which in word of honor is still buried between the Principals, and the two Knight witnesses, Lucido, and two others invited on each side by Florido and Pompeo, to support their respective rights on a point of honor.

 

3. Legal opinion and comment

The legal expert summarized the event as it had happened and reported by multiple people, in order to obtain a complete and impartial account. The situation is clear but perhaps requires some highlighting. Why is the intervention of the expert necessary, who, with the assistance of witnesses and a person summoned to defend each of the two contenders, must resolve the issue? Because society has progressed to the point that the traditional way of resolving disputes of this kind is no longer acceptable, which was only one and did not require a legal expert but only two seconds to assist in the modalities and procedures of the inevitable duel. So you can also appreciate the social progress that was emerging. But up to a certain point. Because medieval chivalry still retained a substantial part of the strength of its rules.

Among the various aspects here there is one that is most striking of all, and that is what they call the mentita, which appears to be something more than lies or slander, a very serious thing and on this particular, I intend to quote the words of this expert who is entrusted with the role of judge. I will do so exceptionally, because I have not the slightest intention of copying that judge's entire opinion, both because it is very long - tiring even just to read - and because it is very rich in technical terms and quotations from the texts of treatise writers of all eras. So, starting from the mentita, I will try to transcribe some short, more significant passages, adding just a few additional words.

It will therefore be true that Lucido's talk not only had more than enough color, but the right impulse to provoke and then justify Florido's [accusation of] mentita. It happens that all the propositions that could make a man appear to be dishonest force him to defend himself by demonstrating that he is not lacking in the thing repugnant to the honor of the Knight who is accused of it. This is so true that for the sake of pretension [appearance] and for the sake of one's honor, it is permissible to give [respond with] a mentita, even though the injury is doubtful.

However, I rather follow the common opinion among all Knights, who in writing of the most noble Science consider the mentita to far surpass in atrocity any other insult, since it is greater in measure than wounds, slaps, spitting in the face, the club, the cane, the cruet, being covered in filth, owing to the fact that a man is insufficient without having Truth, which is the strongest pillar of honor;
. . .
To confess the truth on my own (without others kindly saying it) I cannot presume to make judgments in this sublime science, and especially where mentite are involved; a very difficult subject for the most elevated spirits, and hateful to me due to the fact that it makes me continually pray to Heaven to keep me away from hearing about it.
…
Since Florido's [accusation of] Mentita was neither Conditional nor Verified, but rather disdainful, insulting, disorderly, and so vain, and devoid of the power to charge, the entire complaint is reduced to Insult alone; so since I need to go and investigate the importance, I will see if I will be able to derive it from degrees of contempt, since these are the scales that are commonly used there.

The judge's final opinion is rather Solomonic; after finding behavioral defects in both parties, he ends up proposing that Pompeo let Florido know that his presence in his home will no longer be welcome, and this slight renunciation will have to be accepted without

 

Page 4
too much regret from Florido, as it was enough to put an end to the complaint and all the discussions. The judge's very long opinion ends as follows.

And if anyone is still not willing to understand the naivety and respect with which I have attempted to proceed, let him at least remember that the Seconds, Lawyers, Confidants, or whatever the term may be that you please me to give, must inflame the causes of honor, not out of bad intention but in order not to accede (as I have done) in the slightest thing that is in the interest of honor to his Principal; so that without respect he defends it by giving reasons, giving exceptions, protesting, removing difficulties, clarifying doubts and doing whatever else is appropriate for the benefit of the cause, with the aim, however, of not exceeding in postures and ways prejudicial to the other Principal, and his Second, if he does not want to give an account of it to the Lord of the Field or steccato [word applying to any fenced-in area, including arenas], as was customary in the times when the Duel was held. However, it is not already so when exceptions and reasons are brought as a just defense, even if they pierce the adversary and the Second, but with the truth; otherwise, he would be failing in his office and in his conscience.
Pietro Andrea Andreini

4. About the author

A portrait of Pietro Andrea Andreini (Florence, 1650-1729) can be seen in a medal attached to his name on the Google Images site. The main source of information about him is found in the Funeral Oration spoken in the Etruscan Academy in Cortona on 1 December 1729 by Ranieri Tommasi. [note 6] 

R. Tommasi, Funeral Oration, title page

__________________
6. R. Tommasi, Delle lodi dell’abbate Pier’ Andrea Andreini nobile fiorentino accademico etrusco. Florence 1730


Page 5
Stripping this very rare text of the rhetoric of the time, it seems to me that we can derive not only a long life for Andreini, but also one divided into several successive phases. Born in Florence in 1650 of a noble paternal family and even more so on his mother's side, the patrician Busini family, he was soon orphaned. He married and had two daughters, but was widowed soon after and devoted himself to his studies full-time throughout his life.

After his wife's death, he surprised friends and acquaintances with his behavior: everyone thought he had reached the height of erudition.

He spent entire days and nights with this study; this was his entertainment and most attentive occupation, and this, in short, was what, having made him appear so pale and emaciated, finally demonstrated that the love of study and varied erudition had made Andreini forget about caring for himself.

. . . Not content with having filled his mind with varied and considerable knowledge, he abandons the homeland where he was born, and following the example of Plato, Pythagoras, and Democritus, he travels to various distant cities with the sole object of acquiring new [knowledge]. Now what do you think? Would you have ever believed that since he was capable of teaching rather than learning, there was so much belief in him that he had little or no knowledge?

In short, Andreini still deeply felt the need to learn, despite all that he had gained from prolonged reading, and wanted to see with his own eyes other environments of elevated and stimulating culture. So he spent many years away from Florence, seeking other educational stimuli in cities rich in history that were also capitals with a very advanced social and cultural life, also enriched by the presence of foreign scholars who dedicated long studies to Italian art. It is therefore not surprising that once he left Florence, his attention subsequently turned to Naples, Venice, and Rome.

In these cities, his deep studies of antiquities and meticulous exploration of the cities and their surroundings in search of ancient relics resulted in transforming him into an active collector and connoisseur of antiques. The thing developed in both directions: the main one was the collection of ancient finds and in particular of artistically worked gems, cameos and similar objects, so much so that years later he was able to create a real museum in his palace in Florence, which attracted visits by illustrious experts, including foreign ones. After his death, the precious collection was purchased by the Grand Duke and became a notable part of the collections of the prestigious Grand Ducal museums.

His competence as a connoisseur was appreciated in Rome, even by illustrious figures such as Queen Alexandra Christina of Sweden who "from then on did not want to purchase any Gem or Cameo to enrich her Royal collection that she had not first subjected to the opinion of Andreini." In particular, he was able to immediately unmask countless counterfeits. “Nor was it ever an easy thing to put before his eyes adulterated Medals, or modern works, by many very arrogant desecrators of authentic memories - who with impunity, deserving of every punishment, strive to upset the truth of history and deceive the most attentive Scholars – of which Andreini did not distinguish the fraud."

But his activity did not stop there, because (it would seem after his return to Florence - at least in the most widespread form for which he became famous) his erudition in general and his expertise in particular on matters of chivalry meant that more and more people requested his judgment to resolve the disputes that were commonplace among nobles. Even the Grand Duke relied on him to resolve such matters. We must not be fooled by the fact that only two pamphlets have been printed in his name, which have become very rare. [note 7]

An interesting page of commentary on our author was then written by Atto Vannucci (1810-
1883) for whom, also director of the Magliabechiana then National Library, it was easy to consult his numerous writings that had not reached the press. What you read can be considered an objective
________________
7. P. A. Andreini, Parere cavalleresco intorno al rifacimento de’ danni dovuti dall’offensore all’offeso. Florence 1721; P. A. Andreini, Risposta ad una lettera cavalleresca d’incerto autore. Lucca 1724.


Page 6
presentation expressed at the distance of a century. [note 8] Essentially, Vannucci reverses the situation: only a few experts had been aware of his activity as an antiquarian, which however was very valid, so much so that he still deserved to be remembered for this; on the contrary, his legal opinions on the most complicated questions of chivalry had great resonance at the time, which when read after a century showed the underlying emptiness of the rhetoric of the time. The same Vannucci gives a peremptory opinion on these legal opinions. “He left voluminous manuscripts on these subjects which by good fortune were never printed.”

In short, our author was famous as an expert in chivalry, considered capable of deciding any chivalric question. Perhaps he should be defined as a specialized legal expert, that is, on the laws of chivalry, but in his time there was even talk of the chivalric "science." Today, the association of science with this subject sounds decidedly curious, and reading his prose, we get the impression that we are very far from science. But after all, even today there are institutes and faculties of theological "sciences," for example, and so we must be ready to truly accept the term in a broad sense.

We can certainly say that even Andreini's expertise in matters of chivalry was not improvised, but was based on a profound study of the most important texts on the subject, which he cites at every step in support of his thoughts, also in the particular case examined here.

Florence, 05.17.2024

__________
8. E. De Tipaldo (ed.) Biografia degli italiani illustri nelle scienze, etc. Vol. VI. Venice 1838, pp. 448-449.