full picture: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... fibbia.jpg
According Kaplan I, p. 32/33, Leopoldo Cicognara (1831, Memorie Spettanti alla Storia della Calcografia del Commend) had pointed to the picture. The picture was indeed found during 20th century.
https://books.google.de/books?id=BWCxb1 ... ia&f=false
Andrea Vitali in "I Tarocchino di Bologna" (2005), p 60-65, published about Prince Fibbia ... the article became the base of ...
The creator of the Ludus Triumphorum
Translation revised by Michael S. Howard, Feb. 2012
Andrea Vitali published another book ...
IL PRINCIPE DEI TAROCCHI
(The Prince of the Tarot)
Francesco Antelminelli Castracani Fibbia
Essay by Andrea Vitali
Pocket size, cm. 15 x 9.5, p. 110 with 42 black/white photos
Moderna Editions (Mystery Editorial Series), Ravenna, Italy, 2013
http://www.associazioneletarot.it/page. ... 08&lng=ENG
I don't have the text.
The web page text gives this information to Prince Fibbia:
Prince Fibbia was born 1360 as a grandson of the oldest son Enrico of the condottiero Nicolo Castracani Antelminelli, and died 1419.Here are some revelations: “…avendo fatto il suo testamento l’anno adietro del MCCCXXVII alli 20. di Dicembre, in Lucca…ma sentendosi mancare, & essere sopra fatto della gravezza del male; & avendo discorso con li suoi Segretarij, & dati molti ordini; fece chiamare à se la Duchessa sua moglie, M. Nicolo Castracani Antelminelli, Principal Vegli, Duccio Sandei, & F. Lazaro, Priore di Altopascio; & lasciolli nel testamento tutori, con Enrico, Valevano, Giovanni & Verde, suoi figliuoli; a’ quali con volto intrepido diede la benedizione paterna e l’ultimo bacio” ( …having made his testament the year before, MCCCXXVII on December 20th in Lucca,…but feeling lacking & being above the fact of the gravity of his illness, he spoke with his secretaries, giving them lots of orders; he desired to see his wife, the Duchess, M. Nicolo Castracani Antelminelli, Principal Vegli, Duke Sandei, & F. Lazaro, Prior of Altopascio & executor of the will, and Enrico, Valevano, Giovanni & Verde, his sons, to whom he gave with intrepid face the paternal benediction and a last kiss) (p. 95). Castruccio expired on 23th September 1328 at the age of XLVII, five months, & five days” (p. 97). Giovanni died still young in 1343 and he was buried in Pisa, near his mother in St. Francis Church (figure 2 - Giovanni Castracani's tombstone / figure 3 - Coat of Arms of the Castracani Family on the tombstone): “In the same temple Giovanni, son of Castruccio, is buried, a knight and important man in many battles. His upper body is sculpted, armed, and dressed in Chivalric clothes, with the emblem of his family: & the inscription said: “Virtutis exemplum. momentaneo iuventutis flore clarescens, praematurae mortis in cursu praeventus, tegor hac in petra Ioannes, natus olim Illustris Domini Castruccij, Lucani Ducis, altissimae mentis, indelendae memoriae, libertatis patriae defensoris, hostibus semper invicti. Anno MCCCXLIII. Die XIJ.Maj”. (Exemplar of virtue. While I got fame in the flower of youth, anticipating the path of premature death, I lie covered by this stone, me, Giovanni, son of the famous lord Castruccio, Duke of Lucca, of the highest intelligence, of indestructible memory, defender of the homeland, never defeated by the enemy. 14th May 1343) (p. 107). It is clear, based on the inscription under the painting, that Francesco wasn’t Giovanni’s son, because he was born 17 years after his death.
Like his brothers, Giovanni was a Prince of many Tuscan cities, and in particular Prince of Pietra Santa and Monteggiori, thanks to a charter given by the Emperor Lodovico the Bavarian, who “Volendo poi finger alcuna dimostratione di benevolenza e, meschiarla alla grande ingratitudine, confermò alli 10. di Aprile alla Duchessa, moglie di Castruccio, le entrate, che gli aveva lasciate il marito; e diedegli libera podestà, & dominio sopra il castello di Monteggiori, & suo distretto come Patrimonio, con tutte le ville nel Contado, & terre sopra Pietrasanta; assegnando quattromila Fiorini d’oro l’anno sopra esse Vicaria, a lei & à figliuoli, & e loro discendenti. & alli 17. di dicembre fece due Privilegi à quella Signora, à Valerano, e Giovanni predetti, confermandoli Signori di Monteggiori, & loro successori, con la istessa entrata” (Wanting to demonstrate benevolence, mingled with great ingratitude, on 10th April granted, to the Duchess, wife of Castruccio, all the real estate left by her husband; gave her free power & dominion over Monteggiori Castle and all the towns in Contado and the lands above Pietrasanta; assigning four thousand gold florins per year on this Vicarage, to her, her sons and their descendants; making on 17th December, two charters to the Duchess, and to the aforesaid Valerano and Giovanni, confirming them and their successors as Lords of Monteggiori, with the same income) (p. 105). Manucci has the whole text of this charter in his work, as well as the Castruccio will.
So, who was this Francesco in the painting? Manucci, and also other documents and family trees referring to this family (figure 4), said that he was born of Orlando, son of Enrico, first-born of Castruccio Castracani. From Manucci we discover that Enrico, Giovanni’s brother, had a son named Orlando, who had four other sons, Castruccio, Enrico, Francesco and Rolando.
Nicolo Castracani Antelminelli ...
http://www.greve-in-chianti.com/hiking- ... ni-eng.htm
Also:CASTRUCCIO CASTRACANI DEGLI ANTELMINELLI (1281 1328), Duke of Lucca, was by birth a Lucchese, and by descent and training a Ghibelline. Being exiled at an early age with his parents and others of their faction by the Guelphs, then in the ascendant, and orphaned at nineteen, he served as a condottiere under Philip of France in Flanders, later with the Visconti in Lombardy, and in 1313 under the Ghibelline chief, Uguccione della Faggiuola, lord of Pisa, in central Italy. He assisted Uguccione in many enterprises, including the capture of Lucca (1314) and the victory over the Florentines at Montecatini (1315). An insurrection of the Lucchese having led to the expulsion of Uguccione and his party, Castruccio regained his freedom and his position, and the Ghibelline triumph was presently assured. Elected lord of Lucca in 1316, he warred incessantly against the Florentines, and was at first the faithful adviser and staunch supporter of Frederick of Austria, who made him imperial vicar of Lucca in 1320. After the battle of Muhlbach he went over to the emperor Louis the Bavarian, whom he served for many years. In 1325 he defeated the Florentines at Altopascio, and was appointed by the emperor duke of Lucca, Pistoia, Volterra and Luni, and two years later he captured Pisa, of which he was made imperial vicar. But, subsequently, his relations with Louis seem to have grown less friendly and he was afterwards excommunicated by the papal legate in the interests of the Guelphs. At his death in 1328 the fortunes of his young children were wrecked in the Guelphic triumph.
http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/cas ... ografico)/
The son Castruccio-son Giovanni (died 1343) seems to be known better than the Prince Fibbia-grandfather Enrico. Enrico had a son Orlando and this became the father of Francesco (= Prince Fibbia).
Perhaps the Vitali book of 2013 has better information.
Franco Pratesi ...
... noted Porto Venere as the place of an old playing card document "with doubts" for the year 1370 (not 1371, as the picture tells, sorry, my error).
The article of Franco was translated by MikeH.
Pratesi: "Playing cards in Europe before 1377? - Italy"
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1097&p=16866&hilit ... ere#p16866
From this article:
Emperor Charles IV, from which I suspect, that he distributed playing cards in Europe during his journeys, was in Lucca in 1368/69 during his Italian journey.Portovenere 1370
Portovenere does not need any introduction: for the beauty of its territory, the city has been included, along with the Cinque Terre, as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO. In the time of interest there had been the unification within a single set of walls of the Borgo Vecchio and Borgo Nuovo. and the harbor was under the rule of Genoa.
The ancient statutes of Portovenere were published by Emilio Pandiani more than a century ago, thanks to the scrutiny of a valuable manuscript in a private library 3. The editor not only described and professionally transcribed the manuscript, but also tracked its passage among the private collections of several noble families of Liguria.
Actually it is not a single municipal statute, but three collections of laws which present themselves as corresponding to the stages before their meeting in a single body of statutory laws. Pandiani notes that this statute is of great interest for its original character: while many statutes, mostly from later periods, present themselves as the result of a common fixed model, with only slight variations from one case to another, this specimen has its own characteristics that demonstrate the direct creation of choices effectuated by the local population in all the various subjects independently.
Also based on my personal experience arising from the reading of many similar statutes, I can confirm that this statute presents itself
3 E. Pandiani (ed.), Gli statuti di Portovenere, anno 1370. Genoa 1901.
differently from the usual case from its very beginning. The headings begin after the statement In nomine domini nostri Jesu Christi Anno MCCCLXX indicione VIII die VII Madii; The first heading is De non blasphemando, the second De non ludendo ad taxillos nec ad cartas, the third De non tenendo ludum in domo sua. A communal statute never begins that way, at least it would not do in the Florence area I know best; It could possibly be a mayor’s statute or a reform to be introduced in the text of a previous municipal statute.
But the originality does not stop there; it is mainly the text of the law that in the second rubric copied below (from p. 74 of the book cited) looks absolutely extraordinary, as the extraordinary rest presents already the title, with those unexpected cartas.
Item statuerunt et ordinaverunt quod aliqua persona non audeat vel presumet ludere ad aliquem ludum tasilorum nec ad ludum cartarum nixi ad ludum rectum pena et banno soldorum quinque Ianuinorum, Si de die fuerit et si de nocte fuerit pena et banno soldorum decem Ianuinorum salvo ad tabulas ved ad Schachos et salvo bastasii a puteis ultra.
Of course, the hardest thing to accept is the date, but there are also elements that make the full story most indigestible. Playing cards do not appear with the term of naibi that is normally there, but we could concede that we are far enough away from Florence to accept the use of the other term. The most delicate point is that while for the first time it will allow card playing, it would already document at the same time one of the games done with the cards, the ludus rectus, which we find more often with its common name of diritta, similarly also permitted, usually, in the Florentine Republic, but of course in later times.
So if this text could actually have been written in 1370 it would be concurrently the first witness for cards in Europe and also for the information that there were already more card games, including one that became traditional, diritta, which could then be assimilated with a few other games, not of cards, deemed worthy of being excluded from the prohibitions. At this point there seems to me necessary an act of faith, or credulity, and personally I do not accept it, ready to "reconsider" only if faced with confirmation arising from other documents, however, secure ones.
Potentially the young prince Fibbia (then 8-9 years old) or his family might have learned about playing cards at this opportunity.
Andrea Vitali confirmed, that the Tarocchino deck included a card with Fibbia heraldry.
old Tombstones of Fibbia family (dog motif)
Playing card Queen with dog
My own finding ...
Fibbia heraldry c. 1790
http://badigit.comune.bologna.it/caneto ... ognese.htm
... confirms the playing card motif
My own recent statement to the Fibbia case ...
from ... viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1168&p=19065&hilit=fibbia#p19065Meister Ingold in 1432 claimed to have read in an old book, that playing cards came to Germany in the year 1300.
It is not believed in playing card history, that this statement is true. Meister Ingold is only about 80-100 years later than 1300, assuming, that he might have been born c. 1380. It is not believed in spite of the condition, that there are other claims of an older date than the generally accepted "c. 1370". These claims are also considered as "somehow wrong".
The author of the picture with the short prince Fibbia story lived a much longer time later than prince Fibbia. His report has a definite error in his text about "Tarocchino". Further the author is easily under suspicion to write something "too positive" about the ancestor prince Fibbia ... the whole matter might be something, which a few gamblers invented at an evening with cards and some vine and much fun about a recent funny idea.
Meister Ingold had no recognizable reason to lie about his "old book", but one never knows.
I count 3 points, in which the story of Ingold appears more reliable than the story of prince Fibbia. Both existed, definitely, in this point it's a remis. But the story of Meister Ingold is ALSO not believed ... somehow with good reasons.
Personally I believe, that there might be something true about Meister Ingold's statement. Indeed I think also, that there might be also something true about prince Fibbia.
Prince Fibbia (or his family) came from Lucca originally, and the later emperor Charles IV was in Lucca as a young man and also in his time as emperor. Lucca had special relations to German emperors since old times. Prince Fibbia might have brought "some interesting card playing ideas" to Bologna ... this makes sense, if the notes of F.L. Hübsch in 1849 are correct, who had the opinion, that playing cards in Bohemia (home place of Charles IV) were very early (c. 1340).
Further we have, that the later Lucca had a curious way to play with 69 cards, from which 13 were like Minchiate "special cards". Further there are some considerations to the Sola-Busca concept. And there are observations to the Rosenwald and to the 5x14-theory, which make it plausible, that Lucca had (possibly) a very special role in the distribution of card games in Italy.
In this context Prince Fibbia is interesting.
This is interesting, but as far I can see it, this is ignored cause of ignorance ... :-)