August 27 in 2015
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=345&start=250#p16435
Franco Pratesi has found 3 new appearances of the word "naibi" in cases of the justice ... all in the year 1398.
1398: Firenze – Primi naibi nei Libri del Giglio
http://naibi.net/A/416-GIGLIO300-Z.pdf
9 gennaio 1398 (Libro N. 3 c. 41r – fra le condanne del Capitano):
Meo di Nanni da Siena fu trovato giuchare anaibj. pagho adj 18 di
giennaio L.10.
21 settembre 1398 (Libro N. 3 c. 84v fra le condanne
dell’Esecutore): Per Giuliano di Checho popolo S.ta Lucia dognissanti
preso per giuocho anaibj. pagho adj 19 dottobre L.10.
11 novembre 1398 (Libro N. 3 c. 86r fra le condanne
dell’Esecutore): Antonio di Francecoleso(?) popolo San Friano preso
a giucho di naibj. pagho L.10 questo(?) di 29 di marzo 1399
... followed by ...
31 Aug 2015
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=345&start=250#p16436
Further findings of Franco Pratesi in Florence from similar sources as before.
1388-1396: Firenze − Condanne per naibi da parte dell’Esecutore
http://naibi.net/A/417-ESECUTORE-Z.pdf
"19.12.1388. (N. 1050, c. 107r): Cherricus Michaelis de Salseburge de
Alamania inventus fuit per militem et familiam praesentis domini Executoris
ludere ad ludum naiborum contra formam statutorun communis Florentiae."
Franco's comment:
"Questa cattura indicata espressamente per il gioco di naibi presenta più punti
degni di nota. La data appare assai precoce e ci dimostra che allora le leggi
che vietavano i naibi erano già fatte rispettare. Su quanto lo fossero ci
rimangono dei dubbi. Il punto notevole qui è che viene catturato un
“alemanno” di Salisburgo, e che questo rappresenta il solo giocatore
catturato. Non si può certo pensare che fosse stato preso mentre con le carte
da gioco faceva un solitario! Allora forse, coi giocatori fiorentini la famiglia
dell’esecutore era pronta a chiudere un occhio."
...
"22.11.1394 (N. 1242, c. 29v) : Nicholaus Ser Anthonij populi S.ti
Johannis de Florentia repertus fuit per militem et familiam predicti(?)
domini executoris ludere ad ludum nayborum seu cartarum contra formam
(…) statutorum… "
...
"20.01.1395 (N. 1242, c. 31v): Grassus Grassi ferrator populi S.te Lucie
de Magnolis de Florentia repertus fuit per me notarium( ?) et familiam
predictam ludere ad ludum cartarum seu nayborum contra formam
statutorum et ordinament(orum) dictis communis… "
...
"25.12.1395 (N. 1276, c. 44v): Bertus(?) Zenobij de populi S.te Marie
Maioris de Florentia - Andreas (+++) - repert(i?) per familiam domini
executoris ludere ad ludum naiborum contra formam statutorum communis
Florentiae…"
...
"18.11.1396 (N. 1309, c. 24r): Johannes a Ture(?) stipendiarius inventus
fuit per familiam domini executoris ludere ad carticulas contra formam
statutorum communis Florentiae et captus fuit familiam dicti domini
Executoris. − Nannes Becholj(?) stipendiarius de civitate Castelli inventus
fuit per familiam domini Executoris ludere as carticulas contra formam
statutorum communis Florentiae et captus fuit per Anthonium de
perusio(?)."
****************************
Now Franco Pratesi has published 4 (or 3?) further articles to the same source "Libri del Giglio"
1.
4/20. 1401-1425: Firenze – Condanne per i naibi nei Libri del Giglio. (24.09.2015)
http://www.naibi.net/A/420-GIGLIO400-Z.pdf
This relates to the years 1401-1425. It contains 60 findings about playing card use, which was punished and had to be paid as a fine, mostly 10 Lira.
1401: 1
1407: 4
1410: 1
1411: 7
1415: 25
1416: 2
1417: 6
1418: 2
1419: 2
1420: 2
1421: 4
1422: 1
1424: 1
1425: 2
Curiously the year 1415 has very much punishments. It's the year, when the council of Constance started. From earlier researches we had indications of a curious situation at the data of the Lapini family also in the year 1415.
http://trionfi.com/lapini-playing-cards
The Lapini family sold very high numbers of playing card decks in this year.
2.
4/22. 1426-1499: Firenze – Condanne per giochi di carte nei Libri del Giglio. (01.10.2015)
http://www.naibi.net/A/422-GIGLIO450-Z.pdf
In this research Franco persecuted only each 5th or 10th year probably due to the condition, that he didn't found much with the exception for the year 1445:
1426: 0
1430: 0
1435: 0
1440: 0
1445: 9
1450: 0
1455: 0
1460: 1
1465: 1
1469: 0
1475: 0
1480: 0
1489: 0
1499: 0
Cause of this result he researched the years 1440-1450 more carefully in the last article (Nr. 4).
3.
4/23. 1377: Firenze – Condanne ai giocatori di naibi. (09.10.2015)
http://www.naibi.net/A/423-1377-Z.pdf
This is for the moment a bad link, and I don't know, if this finding really belongs to the "Libri di Giglio" series (it's not announced in the title). Anyway, if the title is right, this should be the second oldest playing card note in Florence.
Franco gave the comment: "The note about 1377, I have not yet decided to insert in the web page."
4.
4/24. 1440-1450: Firenze – Condanne per giochi di carte nei Libri del Giglio. (12.10.2015)
http://www.naibi.net/A/424-GIGLIO444-Z.pdf
This is Franco's more detailed research to the years 1440-1450. The results were ...
1440: 0
1441: 0
1442: 13
1443: 7
1444: 2
1445: 9
1446: 0
1447: 0
1448: 1
1449: 0
1450: 0
So some more intensity of persecution in the years 1442-1445.
Franco gave the comment:
So a "0" must not always mean indeed a zero and likely the number of the findings of each year might be open to higher numbers. The number of the Giglio-book for 1499 is "70" ... this alone gives an idea, how much work and time Franco had spend on this research.The note about 1377, I have not yet decided to insert in the web page.
In 1444 there were two players captured (together supposedly) while playing “alle carte a trionfi” and the corresponding (part of the) fine of 10 Lire is recorded in Libri del giglio. I have commented not only on the date but also on the context. I have not controlled whether your numbers are right – I suppose that they are. Nevertheless, I would insist on one point. Whenever you find some record, you can discuss it in any way you like, but whenever there are no records, this does not at all mean that there was no activity. There are several possible, and different, reasons that can justify the missing data.
This article contained 2 new Trionfi notes, which very likely relate to the same event.
The related texts are ...
Likely the prohibited action took place at 3rd of January, Vieri di Nanni payed his fine at February 3 and Giovanni di Ser Piero payed at February 24. The cassiere di camera was in both cases Batista Guicciardini and he got the money.Giovanni di Ser Piero popolo San Simone fu preso adi 3 di genaio per giuchare
alle charte a trionfi per presente chapitano. Pagho adi 24 di fìebraio a Batista
Guicciardini cassiere di camera.
Vieri di Nanni popolo San Simone fu preso adi detto per giuchare alle charte a
trionfi per detto rettore. Pagho adi 3 di febraio a Batista Guicciardini cassiere di
camera.
Franco gives 2 pages as comment for the event. He concentrates the fact, that the region, where both players lived, San Simone, is considered as a poor region of the city Florence in 15th century.
An indication of a higher playing card persecution than usual was already given by the analyses of the lists of the silk dealers ...
http://trionfi.com/naibi-silk-dealers
http://trionfi.com/naibi-aquired
... which indicated bad-business-years in the mid 1440s and by the card prohibition activities of Giannozzo Manetti in Pistoia (1446/47 as reported by Bisticci).
One of our earlier discussions to this point ...
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=815&p=11638&hilit=bisticci#p11638
***********
Anyway, may the prohibition discussion go its own way, these 2 notes of 1444 (which possibly are related only to one event) are the 4th and 5th oldest, that we have now:
1. September 1440: Giusto Giusto document, a deck for Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta
2. Febrary 1442, Sagramoro makes 4 decks for Leonello d'Este
3. July 1442, a deck bought from Marchione Burdochio for the two d'Este boys
4.1444 February 3, Vieri di Nanni payed fine for "giuchare
alle charte a trionfi"
5.1444 February 24, Giovanni di Ser Piero payed fine for "giuchare alle charte a trionfi"
...