Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

Yes, they do look similar - and the source of the title is "manoscritto sul verso" - good question!

Here is Ponte's Allegorical Impress with Stemma:
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot
PonteAllegoricalImpressStemma.jpg (118.81 KiB) Viewed 2721 times

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

You lost me, Steve. Where did you get the phrase "manuscritto sul verso"? What title? "Dante and Petrarch"? And where does that picture you just posted come from?

It is definitely Dante and Petrarch. I will transcribe and translate Sbaraglio's blurb when I get a chance.

I do not know if dal Ponte did manuscript illustrations, Phaeded. None are in the catalog, so probably he didn't. And just the one drawing, of the two youths, 215 mm, so close to the same size as the cards (189mm). Yes, we have to allow for the smaller format of cards. But these cassone panels aren't that large, 41-44 cm high. That's only twice the size of the cards. The predellas are 53 cm. We would expect less detail in the cards. But I can't see that there is all that much detail, at least in the points of comparison, in the larger works. They are meant to be seen from a distance. If the artist made an effective use of perspective in the buildings, landscape, etc., it might make a difference. But he doesn't. So I don't see the problem.

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

mikeh wrote:And where does that picture you just posted come from? ... +-+insieme ... =1&slide=9

Attributed title Giovanni da Ponte. "Dante and Petrarch"
Source of title manoscritto sul verso ... +-+insieme
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

I'd long searched to get info about Antonio di Dino, who played a big role for the silk dealers, who sold playing cards. It seemed a long time, that it should be Antonio di Dino Canacci, but at the final stage it looked, as if this would be wrong. As an alternative another Antonio di Dino, who was involved in painting around 1441, should be the better match. Possibly this was identical to a "garzone" Antonio di Dino in the service of Giovanni del Ponte (around 1427-30).

In the list of documents related to Giovanni del Ponte I saw the name "Antonio di Dino" related to some money in 1433.

It would make some logic to assume, that a "garzone" would learn from his master and painted similar as his master.

We have no evidence, that Giovanni del Ponte made playing cards. For one Antonio di Dino we're sure about this condition.

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

Thanks for the links, Steve. I don't know quite what to make of the "Impresa"; it doesn't look like dal Ponte's style, and I'd have thought it would be included in the catalog.

Here is the catalog's blurb on the painting of Dante and Petrarch (p. 44):
Dante e Petrarca, uno di fronte all'altro, sono in piedi su di un prato fiorito, sormontato da uno sfondo dorato. Il primo è identificabile per il caratteristico profilo e il copricapo bianco e rosso utilizzato dai membri dell'Arte dei medici e speziali; è sorvolato da un putto alato che sembrerebbe indicarlo, o forse indirizzarlo. Petrarca, inarcato in un lieve hanchement che Io distingue dalla colonnare figura di Dante, ha una corona d'alloro che gli cinge la testa in ricordo dell'incoronazione poetica che lo vide protagonista nel 1341 a Roma, sul Campidoglio. Un altro celebre poeta laureato fu Virgilio, con il quale infatti alcuni studiosi hanno identificato la figura di destra.Tuttavia, in tal caso, sembrerebbe strano l'atteggiamento poco deferente di Dante di fronte al suo maestro. Inoltre la sua veste, col cappuccio simile a quello di un abito religioso, è quella tradizionalmente indossata dal poeta aretino (sull'iconografia di Dante e Petrarca, cfr. Donato 2006, pp. 9-47). La tavoletta frammentaria era in origine visibile sul lato frontale di un cassone. Era posta sull'estrema sinistra della scena, come documentato dalla fila di piccoli punzoni tondi — coi quali Giovanni dal Ponte decorava spesso i margini delle tavole — che corre a sinistra e in alto, ma non lungo il lato destro che è stato segato. Della stessa fronte di cassone faceva parte un altro frammento, la cui ubicazione è oggi sconosciuta, ma che all'inizio del Novecento si trovava in collezione Paolini a Roma (r. 87) e che raffigura anch'esso una coppia di letterati (o filosofi). Il dipinto, ben noto agli studiosi, è sempre stato attribuito a Giovanni dal Ponte, a partire dall'intervento a esso dedicato di Frederick Perkins (1921). Gli studiosi sono quasi del tutto concordi nel collocarlo nella tarda attività del pittore. La sua vicinanza stilistica alle figure vigorose del Polittico di San Pietro (cat. 33; r. 37) porta tuttavia a pensare che non si tratti di un'opera della fase più estrema di Giovanni; una datazione verso il 1430 è perciò — a mio avviso — la più probabile.

[Dante and Petrarch, facing each other, are standing on a flowery meadow, topped by a golden background. The first is identifiable by the distinctive profile and red and white headgear used by members of the Art of doctors and apothecaries; flying above it isa winged cherub that would seem to indicate or perhaps direct it. Petrarch, buckled slightly hanchement that stands away from the columnar figure of Dante, has a laurel wreath encircling the head in memory of the poetic coronation that saw him a protagonist in 1341 in Rome, on the Capitol. Another celebrated poet laureate was Virgil, with whom in fact some scholars have identified the figure on the right. However, if so, the hardly deferential attitude of Dante in front of his master would seem strange. In addition, his clothing with a hood similar to that of a religious habit is that traditionally worn by the famous poet (iconography of Dante and Petrarch, cfr. Donato 2006, pp. 9-47). The fragmentary panel was visibly in origin on the front side of a caisson. It was placed on the far left of the scene, as documented by the row of small round punches - with which Giovanni dal Ponte often decorated the edges of the boards - which runs to the left and at the top, but not along the right side, which has been sawed. In the same cassone front was part of another fragment, whose location is unknown today, but that at the beginning of the twentieth century was in the Paolini collection in Rome (r. 87) and which also depicts a pair of literati (or philosophers ). The painting is well known to scholars; it has always been attributed to Giovanni dal Ponte, starting from the intervention on it dedicated to Frederick Perkins (1921). Scholars are almost unanimous in placing it in the late period of the painter. Its stylistic proximity to the vigorous figures of the San Pietro Polyptych (cat. 33; r. 37), however, leads one to think that this is not a work of the most extreme phase of Giovanni; a dating of around 1430 is therefore - in my opinion - the most likely.]

Lorenzo Sbaraglio

Bibliografia: Perkins 1921, pp. 137-148; Sbaraglio 2007, pp. 41-44; Sbaraglio 2009, pp. 319-326 (con bibliografia precedente).
So the laurel refers to a specific event in Petrarch's life but not Dante's.

I will get to Huck's post later.

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

Older post:

Antonio di Dino, not Antonio di Dino Canacci by Huck on 19 Mar 2014, 14:00
There's a new information about the person "Antonio di Dino" ... this person ... ... D+50008445

... not identical to Antonio di Dino Canacci, who was mostly researched in this thread.

Franco Pratesi got an information of Elisabetta Ulivi, likely author of ...
"La matematica dell'abaco in Italia: scuole, maestri, trattati fra XIII e XVI secolo."

The short note presents the known fact, that this Antonio di Dino is not identical to Antonio di Dino Canacci, but additional to the already earlier known details we find from her the expression "tavolaccino" in context to this second Antonio di Dino.

Franco had independently in his earlier research (silk dealer articles) noted in context of the Antonio di Dino, who made playing cards:
"He was then mentioned as a maker and supplier of abaci, or counting frames (l. 2r – April 1442). Later on, we find him indicated on one occasion as a "tavolacciaio", maker of tables (12793, 25r – 1449)."

The note about "abaci" had led to the person of Antonio di Dino Canacci, but the additional "tavolacciaio" leads to the second Antonio di Dino, who additional has the quality, that he in 1441 was called a "dipintore".

The odds seem now much better for the assumption, that the second Antonio di Dino is the right man for the well documented playing card production (silk dealer articles)...
... , and NOT Antonio di Dino Canacci.


... :--) ... For the research of Giovanni dal Ponte this condition (if the assumption is true) would mean, that he had a "garzone" Antonio di Dino (* 1402), who owed him some money (around 1427-30), and who later started a business as a playing card producer (first noted in 1439) and then also as Trionfi card producer (first involved in a Trionfi card deal 1445 and later since 1452 clearly the producer).


Work of Giovanni dal Ponte


Card of the Rothschild cards, possibly Trionfi cards

A similarity between a Tarocchi card with unknown author and an object created by a known artist might mean, that the artist had been producer of both works.
But it naturally could also mean, that the playing card producer imitated this other artist. "Garzone" and other pupils often imitate their masters. In this case Garzone Antonio di Dino had been later (likely) confirmed playing card producer, and a deck has in fragments (Rothschild cards) survived, possibly produced by Antonio di Dino.

Antonio di Dino produced "expensive decks" in 1441, twice mentioned in the lists of the silk dealers. Both deals speak of "24 soldi", so much higher than later cheap Trionfi deck prices.


If Giovanni dal Ponte himself was already active in the playing card business, then Antonio di Dino would look like a natural follower.

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

It's good that you posted the most relevant summary of your previous research, Huck.

Huck wrote,
It would make some logic to assume, that a "garzone" would learn from his master and painted similar as his master.

We have no evidence, that Giovanni del Ponte made playing cards. For one Antonio di Dino we're sure about this condition.
He also wrote (2014, reproduced immediately above this current post)
If Giovanni dal Ponte himself was already active in the playing card business, then Antonio di Dino would look like a natural follower.
It is good that you allow this possibility. However it is not yet clear that this Antonio di Dino ever was in a positon to learn to paint from dal Ponte, as we shall see.

You have put quotes around "garzone", Huck (meaning "boy" or "apprentice"). True, it is not your term, but it also is not in the documents. It comes from H. P. Horne, "Giovanni dal Ponte", Burlington Magazine for Conoisseurs, Vol. 9, No. 41 (Aug., 1906, in JSTOR), p. 335, in the context of his July 10, 1427 "Denuncia", a list of people who owe dal Ponte money. Horne quotes the line, then comments in his own voice:
'Antonio di Dino, who worked with the said Nanni, 20 florins.' This 'garzone' of Giovanni's was born in 1402, and after became a 'maestro di tavole di gesso.' His name occurs in the old Roll of the Compagnia di San Luca, fol. 3 tergo, thus: Antonio didino dipintore mccccxxxxi.
Our current catalog gives the Italian from which Horne is translating (p. 228):
Antonio di Dino stette col detto Nanni fiorini 20
"Garzone" is Horne's term, based on the 1441 information, I assume. He assumes that this 1427 Antonio di Dino is the same as the 1441. It seems an assumption that has not been discredited, although "Antonio di Dino" is a common enough name. If so, he is 25 in 1427, hence a "garzone".

But Horne also says that he is a "garzone of Giovanni's", in other words his son or apprentice. I find no implication in the document that Antonio works for dal Ponte or is his son or apprentice. He "works" (stette, meaning "is" or "stays") for "said Nanni". Horne says nothing about who this "Nanni" is. Also, despite the word "detto" (said), I find no "Nanni" stated earlier in this 1927 document, which is given in full in the catalog. But near the end we find:
E più debbo dare Nanni detto Bartolomeo di Tado linaiuolo fiorini 4
Mariotto di Nardo dipintore fiorini 14
Benedetto di Francesco orafo fiorini 9
Nanni di [...] choiaio de' dare fiorini 6
Piero di Nanni del charnaiuolo fiorini 9 lire 1 soldi 6
a Monna Margherita d'Antonio de' Nanni suo figliuolo lire 9
A linaiuolo is a linen worker or merchant. A dipintore of course is a painter. An orafo is a goldsmith. A choiaio is a leather-worker or seller. (I get these terms from Nerida Newbigin's very helpful glossary that starts out the index in vol. 2 of Feste d'Oltrarno: plays in churches in fifteenth-century Florence, 1995.) The last entry is "son of Monna Margherita d'Antonio de' Nanni 9 lire". They are not dal Ponte or in his family.

Otherwise, we do see, in 1421:
Antonius Nanni Spigliari banderaio pro factura pertica et nastro et maglie in totum lire 1, soldi 15.
Antonius Nanni Spigliari banner-maker for making a pole and our and wife [?] in total 1 lire, 15 soldi.
Here we have "nastro et maglie", which I would guess means "for our wife". If so, it is something done by this Nanni for dal Ponte's wife.

The catalog essay on dal Ponte's workshop ("Giovanni di Marco e la sua bottega: Clientela e produzione artistica", by Annamaria Bernacchioni, pp. 42-51) says of him (p. 45):
Fra i plasticatori, oltre a un suo collaboratore Antonio di Dino, maestro di «tavole di gesso» e «tavole da abacho», incontriamo lo scultore Michele da Firenze detto Scalcagna e Lorenzo Ghiberti, impegnato in quegli anni nella messa in opera della seconda porta del battistero (13)
14. Jacobsen 2001, pp. 498-499; Bellazzecca 2010.

[Among the workers in the plastic arts, other than one of his collaborators Antonio di Dino, master of "tables of gesso" and "abacus tables", we encounter the sculptor Michele da Firenze called Scalcagna and Lorenzo Ghiberti, committed in those years in the implementation of the second door of the Baptistery (14).
14. Jacobsen [Die Maler von Florenz zu Beginn der Renaissance], 2001, pp. 498-499; Bellazzecca ["Michele da Firenze" in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani LXXIV, pp. 165-166], 2010.]

I didn't know this work by Jacobsen. We already have heard about Antonio di Dino. Franco mentioned him as a producer of abacuses, tables generally, and, yes, apparently, playing cards, 1442 ( I am not sure what his sources of information were, or whether he would still say the same, particularly the designation "abacus-maker". Has that been refuted, so that it describes the other Antonio di Dino? I do not know what Bernacchioni's evidence is.

Horne also said he was as a worker in gesso, i.e. whitening or plaster of paris, which was used both as the initial coating on panels to be painted (and walls) and as a source of decorative molded reliefs (Grove Encyclopedia quote at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1005&p=14969&hilit=zanobi#p14974). It would be nice to know the source of this information, and when it relates to. Again, it seems to be later, the 1440s. So far, no mention of playing card production before 1439 (or is it 1441, or later?)

This Antonio di Dino, for Bernacchioni, does not seem to belong to the Canacci. The next paragraph of her catalog essay reads (my emphasis):
Fra le professionalità collaterali che servivano alla filiera della produzione del manufatto artistico sono presenti il battiloro Bastiano di Giovanni, il cofanaio Luca di Matteo, che aveva bottega presso il duomo, il forzerinaio Salvestro di Dino attivo in borgo Santi Apostoli, lo speziale Cinozzo di Giovanni Cini, il merciaio Nofri di Salvestro Cennini, i setaioli del Benino e una folta schiera di famiglie di legnaioli attivi per l'Opera del Duomo, come i Borsi e i Canacci (15).
15 Guidotti 1984; Bernacchioni 2010; Ristori 1981; Molho-Sznura 2010, p. 33 nota 20; Mack 1980.

[On the professional side that served the chain of production of the artistic production are the gold-leaf maker Bastiano di Giovanni, the cofanaio [strong-box maker?] Luca di Matteo, who had a shop near the cathedral, the forzerinaio [chest-maker] Salvestro di Dino, active in the Holy Apostles district, the apothecary Cinozzo di Giovanni Cini, the haberdasher Nofri di Salvestro Cennini, the silk dealers/manufacturers of Benino and a large group of families of legnaioli [cabinet-makers, carpenters, timber merchants] active in the Opera del Duomo [work of the cathedral], such as the Borsi and Canacci (15).]
15. Guidotti 1984; Bernacchioni 2010 [A. M. Bernacchioni, "Forzerinai, cofanai e dipintori: le botteghe nei documenti", in Virtu d'Amore. Pittura nuziale nel Quattrocento fiorentino, catalogo della mostra (Firenze, Galleria dell'Accademia; Museo Horne, 8 giugno - 1° novembre 2010), edited by C. Paolini, D. Parenti, L. Sebregondi, Florence 2010, pp. 97-183), pp. 97, 100; Ristori 1981; Molho-Sznura 2010, p. 33 nota 20; Mack ["A Carpenter's Catasto with Information on Masaccio, dal Ponte, Antonio di Domenico, and Others", in Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz XXIV, pp. 366-369], 1980.
I quoted extensively from Mack at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1005&p=14969&hilit=zanobi#p14969. A carpenter would naturally make abacuses and tables. If so, this paragraph seems to count against the one before it, unless there is more evidence. (A "Catasto", for anyone just joining us, is a tax assessment, of a sort done only a few times, to raise money for war, I think.)

It also seems important to see in what context the Antonio di Dino of 1433 is monetarily related to Giovanni dal Ponte: was he debtor, creditor, worker, landlord, or what? While this material was all previously published, it was not accessible to me except in Horne's Burlington Magazine piece, which does not mention Antonio di Dino in 1433 (but does, as we have seen, for 1427, but not in a way that says much about him).

Here is all the documentation for 1433, on pp. 232-233 of the catalog. Line spacing and brackets as in the catalog. My highlighting. I give the whole thing because it gives me no clear answer to my question:
XV) ASF, Catasto 445, Santa Croce, Carro, 1433, c. 305, 306 e v

[31 maggio 1433]

«Iscritta di Giovanni di Marcho dipintore Gonfalone Carro

In nome di Dio a dì XXXI di magio 1433

A voi Signori Ufiziali del Chatasto si dà la sustanza e beni e charichi di Giovanni di Marcho dipintore ghonfalone Car[r]o à di chatasto soldi III
Una chasa dove abito co' maserizie a uso di me e della mia famiglia co' uno palcho e n'è d'Agostino di Giovanni banchiere dal quale debo avere fiorini settantasette ghodomi detto palcho e 'llui detti a lato e tutto ànno uso della mia famiglia la detta chasa e palcho posta nel popolo di Santo Stefano a Ponte da primo via, da secondo Aghostino di Giovanni detto, da terzo Ghuasparre Cingholi e Bernardo di Bertoldo orafo e piaza di Santo Stefano dina[n]zi
Una chasetta posta di dietro alo Spedale delle don[n]e di Santa Maria Nuova la quale éne a vita di me e della don[na] mia da primo via, da secondo Bartolomeo di ser Na[r]do, da terzo lo Spedale di Santa Maria Nuova
A' pigionata a tetto di ... mercaio e '1 fratello dane l'an[n]o fiorini sette fiorini 7 l'an[n]o
Una chasa senza palchi e senza mura dina[n]zi la quale fo a chomune per poterla apigionare che no ve se no ne il tetto e de chasolare posta in Borgo Allegri popolo di Santo Ambrogio da primo via, da secondo forno della rede di Neri Fioravanti, da terzo le done del Munistero di Lapo, da quarto Maso tesitore di drappi della quale non tengho utile nesuno ma volendola apigionare mi choviene fare e palchi e altre spese che vi ispederò assai danari e a me al presente è danosa

A presso debitori buoni e tristi de' lavorij fatti loro più [anni] fa Rede d'Antonio di Cristofano vaiaio è morto più anni sono de' dare fiorini 7
Angnolo d'Anzano e sua rede e beni fiorini 16
Giovanni di messer Orlando Malavolti fiorini 2 lire 1 soldi 5
Pagholo Bigliotti e Giovanazzo di Cristofano Bigliotti fiorini 32
Antonio e Lorenzo di Giovanni di Ceccho setaiuoli per resto fiorini 12
Angino Pesta e Ronzini e 1' figliuolo è morto fiorini 5
Meo del Ciercina de' dare lire 3 soldi 2
Francescho di Tomaso di Giovanni fiorini 2 lire 1 soldi 5
Il Serpe Quaratesi per resto di dipintura [d'] una chapella ...
Segue de' lavorij
Mano di Bonachasa legniaiuolo de' dare lire 4
Antonio di Dino stette mecho ò fare ragione co 'llui circha fiorini 28
Antonio d'Angnolo speziale lire 3
Salvadore di lacopo di Bino e Astore di Nicholo fiorini 10
Zanobi di Gherardo Cortigiani e fratelli per resto di forzieri fiorini 7 lire 2
Bochaccio di Salvestro di messer Alaman[n]o Adimari fiorini 2
Bernaba di Pietro di Bartolo Cini per resto lire 5 soldi 5
Bartolo Ruciellai per resto di lavorio ebe fiorini 5
Antonino tavernaio per resto di lavorio ebe fiorini 5
Chambio di Domenicho e 'lla madre lire 11 soldi 6
Messer Bartolomeo di ser Giorgio di ser Chaciotto esitò con Dio più anni ffa fiorini 8
[start 233]
Chorsso di Lapo Corsi per resto di lavorio ebe più ffa lire 5
Matteo di ... fante de' Singnori fiorini 6
Giovanni di ... dipintore da San Miniato fiorentino fiorini 6
Ser Lodovicho da Sa' Miniato fiorentino lire 4 soldi 19
Giovanni di Filippo da San Ansano de' dare staia 6 di grano
Sono co[m]pangnio di Smeraldo di Giovanni dipintore e truovomi i[n] sulla botegha quest'ò di traditori e merchatantia abatato e creditori in tuto lire 127 soldi 18 denari 10 come apare nel nostro librone lire 127 soldi 18 denari 10

A' paghati più chatasti deve avere dal comune circha fiorini 4

E passo a charichi e sustanze del detto Giovanni di Marcho
Bastiano di Govanni battiloro de' avere lire 30
Filippo di Salvestro calzolaio fiorini 17
Marcho del Granaccio fornacaio lire 16
Lorenzo di Michele maestro per lavorio à fatto circha fiorini 6

Tengho una chasa a pigione abbaso alla botegha mia posta in sulla piazza di Santo Stefano a Ponte la quale ène di Bernardo di Bertoldo speziale, paghone l'an[n]o fiorini 9
Giovanni di Marcho dipintore d'età d'anni 48
Monna Chaterina sua don[n]a d'età d'anni 45.» 12.
12. Documento pubblicato da Horne 1906a, pp. 175-177 n. 3. Il Campione del Catasto (cfr. ASF, Campione del Catasto dei Cittadini 491, Santa Croce, Carro, 1430, c. 135v) è stato pubblicato da Horne 1906a, p. 177 n. 3. L'artista è menzionato anche nelle portate al catasto di Bastiano di Giovanni (cfr. ASF, Catasto 441, Santo Spirito, Drago, 1433, c. 386; documento citato da Jacobsen 2001, p. 574. Per la denuncia di Smeraldo di Giovanni cfr. ASF, Catasto 438, cc. 566 e 575v (documento parzialmente pubblicato da Horne 1906a, pp. 180-181 n. 7).

Rough translation (I will keep working on it):
"Enrolled Giovanni di Marcho painter Gonfalone [district?] Carro

Written in the name of God XXXI of May 1433

To you gentlemen Officials of Catasto is given the substance and goods and charichi of Giovanni di Marco painter, ghonfalone [district?] Car[r]o, to catasto III soldi
The house where I live with maserizie [furnishings?] to use with my family and is of one palcho [floor?] and is of [=belongs to] Agostino di Giovanni banker of whom I owe seventy florins ghodomi to said palcho and that one said to the side and year-round use of my family said house and palcho and placed in the parish of Santo Stefano at Bridge [Ponte] from first street, from second said Giovanni d'Aghostino, from third Ghuasparre Cingholi and Bernardo di Bertoldo goldsmith and piazza Santo Stefano in front.

A small house placed behind the Hospital of the Ladies of Santa Maria Nuova which ene life ["is held for the natural lives", Horne says] of me and my Wife from the first way [via], from the first Bartolomeo di ser Na[r]do, from the third the Hospital Santa Maria Nuova
for renting tetto [part of a house] of ... mercaio [merchant], and brother per year seven florins 7 per year
A house without floors [i.e. more than one] and no wall in front which I make in common [am having repaired, Horne says] to be able to rent, if not the roof and of isolated house situated in Borgo Allegri of Saint Ambrose from the first street by second furnace of the heir Neri Fioravanti, from the third of Munistero di Lapo, from the fourth Maso tesitore [weaver or seller] of drapes which are not useful to anyone but wanting to pay for my children and palchi [rooms? floors?] and other expenses that will cost much money and to me this seems dangerous.

Among good and sad debtors from work done for them many [years] ago
Heir of Antonio di Cristofano vaiaio [squirrel furrier] who died many years ago 7 florins
Angnolo di Anzano and his heirs and goods 16 florins
Giovanni Messer Orlando Malavolti 2 florins 1 lire 5 soldi
Pagholo Bigliotti and Giovanazzo Cristofano Bigliotti 32 florins
Antonio and Lorenzo di Giovanni di Ceccho setaiuoli [silk weavers or merchants] rest for 12 florins
Angino Pesta and Ronzini and 1 deceased son 5 florins
Meo Ciercina from giving 3 lire 2 soldi
Francescho Tomaso Giovanni 2 florins 1 lire 5 soldi
Serpe Quaratesi for the remainder of painting of a Chapel ...
Following from work
Mano of Bonachasa legniaiuolo [cabinet-maker, carpenter, timber merchant] of giving 4 lire
Antonio di Dino, with whom it remained for me to reason with him (?), about 28 florins
Antonio d'Angnolo apothecary 3 lire
Salvadore di Jacopo di Bino and Astore di Nicholo of 10 florins
Zanobi di Gherardo Cortigiani and brothers for the remainder of chests 7 florins 2 lire
Bochaccio di Salvestro from Messer Alaman[n]o Adimari 2 florins
Bernaba di Pietro di Bartolo Cini for the rest 5 lire 5 soldi
Bartolo Ruciellai for the rest of the work had fiorini 5
Antonino tavernaio [tavern keeper] for the rest of work had fiorini 5
Chambio di Domenicho and his mother 11 lire 6 soldi
Messer Giorgio di ser Bartolomeo di ser Chaciotto left with God for many years ffa 8 florins
[Start 233]
Chorsso di Lapo Corsi for the rest of the work more ffa 5 lire
Matteo ... Page of the Signori 6 florins
Giovanni di ... painter of San Miniato 6 Florentine florins
Ser Lodovicho of San Miniato 4 Florentine lire 19 soldi
Giovanni di Philippo da San Ansano, of giving 6 bushels of wheat
I am co-worker of Smeraldo di Giovanni painter and finding me [in] on this workshop of traitors [traditori] and cast down merchants and creditors in all 127 lire 18 soldi 10 ducats as appear in our big book 127 lire 18 soldi 10

To pay more, catasti must have from the commune (?) about 4 florins

And passed by charichi and substance of the said Giovanni Marcho
Sebastian Giovanni battiloro [gold-leaf maker] of having 30 lire
Philippo Salvestro calzolaio [shoemaker] 17 florins
Marcho del Granaccio fornacaio [furnace or kiln worker] 16 lire
Lorenzo di Michele master for work done about 6 florins

And kept house to rent at base of workshop placed on the Piazza Santo Stefano in Ponte of which that one Bernardo Bertoldo apothecary, to pay a year 9 florins. 9
Giovanni di Marcho painter at the age of 48 years
Mona Chaterina his wife at the age of 45 years » (12)
12. Document published by Horne 1906a [H. P. Horne, "Appendice di documenti su Giovanni dal Ponte", Revista de l'Arte IV, 10/12, pp. 169-181], pp. 175-177 n. 3. Il Campione del Catasto (cfr. ASF, Campione del Catasto dei Cittadini 491, Santa Croce, Carro, 1430, c. 135v) published by Horne 1906a, p. 177 no. 3. The artist is also mentioned in the course of the catasto of Bastiano di Giovanni (cfr. ASF, Catasto 441, Santo Spirito, Drago, 1433, c. 386; document cited by Jacobsen [Die Maler von Florenz zu Beginn der Renaissance] 2001, p. 574. For the denunciation of Smeraldo di Giovanni cfr. ASF, Catasto 438, cc. 566 and 575v (document partially published by Horne 1906a, pp. 180-181 n. 7).

The name "Antonio di Dino" appears in a list of people, some of which are quite wealthy, such as the Adimari. It says at the beginning they owe him for work done. On the other hand, the end speaks of "creditors", so I remain confused. Horne simply refers to "debtors and creditors", without saying whether there are two lists or just one that combnes them. I am also confused as to why another painter, of "San Miniato", would owe him for something. Perhaps painters in different towns sold each other's work. But Antonio is not in a different town.

Is it likely that Antonio produced the Rothschild cards? We have no idea. The evidence is: (1) Antonio di Dino, born 1402, produced cards of some sort by 1441. (2) The Rothschild cards are in the style of Giovanni dal Ponte. (3) There is an Antonio di Dino who did business with dal Ponte in 1427 and 1433. From that, which is more likely, that the Rothschild cards were painted by Antonio, or by dal Ponte (or his workshop, we have to assume, but under his supervision)?

We have evidence that dal Ponte painted many cassoni. We have evidence that producers of cassoni also did cards. And we have the cards. After that, it's a matter of which evidence you value more--(1) documents (for di Dino) at a later time, with no idea of what the cards that producer made actually looked like; or [2) other works (by dal Ponte) in much the same style, at a particular other time that corresponds closely to art of that time period and to a kind of deck--one with emperors but no other distinguishing characteristic--produced at that time in that place by a workshop that makes the kind of things (cassoni) that card makers also produce.

The upshot is that I see no reason to suppose that the Rothschild cards are Antonio's. They are products of a different era, that of 1425, than when Antonio is documented, 1441 (I am not sure where you get 1439, Huck). We know nothing about Antonio's cards. Thanks first to Masaccio, then to Uccello and others, figures look more three-dimensional. Generally speaking, if a work of art is done in the style of a particular artist at a particular time, enough so that experts in that artist can detect no irregularity, it is probably done by that artist or at least his workshop at that particular time (of which there is no indication that Antonio is a member).

That seems logical, but there is much I do not understand, including a full picture of the available data. The catalog has a bibliography. I will keep on, hoping that an art historian somewhere actually mentions particular documents to back up what they say, instead of just referring to other art historians' books. At least the catalog had the good grace to give the documents for dal Ponte.

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

Jacobsen ... (selected) ... ying-cards

Jacobsen ... (all) ... j4363969j8


Antonio di Dino 1439


ADD = Antonio di Dino

There is the problem, that ANT (= Antonio) might be also Antonio di Dino ... in a later time of the silk dealer activities "Antonio di Simone" had appeared in the books and then it was necessary to differ between Antonio di Dino and Antonio di Simone.
Antonio di Simone appeared in 1442 for some months and then again more massive since 1447. ANT was only used, when Antonio di Simone wasn't present.


Nanni is a form of Giovanni.


The problem with Giovanni di Marco is, that there is no evidence for his playing card production. We have more than 40 names connected to playing card production from Florence till 1462, but none of them is Giovanni di Marco or "del ponte".
Although he is much more researched than other people ... this should give reason to think about.


Antonio di Dino is the oldest Florentine name, for which we have evidence of some connection to the production of Trionfi playing cards (1445), though this entry is a little bit obscure.

Further we have for Antonio di Dino 1441 two entries with totally 5 decks, which are bought by the silk dealers for 24 Soldi ... a high prize. The cards aren't declared as "Trionfi decks", but this might have been Trionfi decks. The silk dealers simply might have been not accustomed to the new name for playing cards.



For Giovanni di Marco we have, that he isn't noted as active after 1437. "Trionfi" as a card deck name might be suspected to have arrived 1439/40.

Re: Giovanni dal Ponte (1385-c.1437) & the Rothschild cards

mikeh wrote:although "Antonio di Dino" is a common enough name...

Indeed, one search on his name brings up one Antonio di Dino (clothes-maker), 40+ years old, who in 1436 is fined 50 lire for keeping Francesco d'Orlandino (under 18 years), "for his use as a woman",* Francesco himself was fined 18 Lira (a lesser fine presumably because of his being minor).

*Another common expression recorded for such crimes was 'as his wife' (per moglie, or per la sua moglie).
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests