Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

311
After we got more data (Franco Pratesi and Arnold Esch mainly), the new values confirmed, what earlier was suggested by analysis ...

Image


Image


... not much in the 1440s (the 2 entries of 1444 are missing at the graphic), but very much in the 1450s. However, I didn't expect in the time of 2003/204, that the usual market of Trionfi deck had then already so an intensive development. From the documents, which were available at this time, it didn't look probable, at least to me.

http://trionfi.com/n/130901/
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

312
Huck wrote
Which recorded "marriage commemoration luxury deck" would disturb this consideration? We've no record for such a deck for the wedding of Leonello in 1445.
Well, the 1444 convictions in Florence already decrease the size of your "hole". And as you say, for the period of increased repression the tarot could have been restricted to a smaller social circle, for which ruling families might qualify. Also, as I've said, special orders for dukes might not be part of the statistics. If we have a good record of a tarot deck made for some other d'Este wedding with an Aragonese princess, then I happily withdraw my speculation about the one we know possibly being for Leonello.

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

313
mikeh wrote:Huck wrote
Which recorded "marriage commemoration luxury deck" would disturb this consideration? We've no record for such a deck for the wedding of Leonello in 1445.
Well, the 1444 convictions in Florence already decrease the size of your "hole".


... .-) ... well, a prohibition against card playing naturally proves "positive" the existence of cards, but for playing card distribution it's naturally a "negative" signal.
For the document collection it's just one neutral point in a series of other points, but we're interested in the reality behind the numbers of the list, and then a prohibitive action naturally is more part of the "interpretation of the hole" than an usual entry. If there wouldn't have been a prohibition, we possibly would have an earlier and more intensive distribution of the cards (and more points on our list)
And as you say, for the period of increased repression the tarot could have been restricted to a smaller social circle, for which ruling families might qualify. Also, as I've said, special orders for dukes might not be part of the statistics. If we have a good record of a tarot deck made for some other d'Este wedding with an Aragonese princess, then I happily withdraw my speculation about the one we know possibly being for Leonello.
We have in these years 1444-1449 a single record about a playing card production in 1446 in Ferrara, which is less than in all other times till 1463. For the earlier time we've a longer pause of mentioned playing card activities between 1425 (death of Parisina) and 1433 (start of the weddings for Niccolo children). This was a time, when San Bernardino increased his fight against playing cards.
As you should know, we have from the Ferrarese records no direct relation in documents between production notice and related event. We can only estimate, for which reason decks were produced at specific times. The 2 decks of 1457 were likely made for the visit of the young Galeazzo Maria Sforza, the 4 decks paid at February 1442 likely for Leonello's start as Signore of Ferrara, the Tarochi decks in 1505 likely for the begin of Alfonso as duke of Ferrara. We've Bisticci praising Alfonso of Aragon (father of the bride) as being against the use of playing cards.
Manetti, after having negotiations with Alfonso in 1443, proved as a playing card hater in Pistoia in 1446-47. In 1444 we have a persecution case for "playing with Trionfi cards". We have a fall of playing card records in the lists of the silk dealers (only the acquired decks) ...
http://trionfi.com/naibi-aquired

Image


... and for the Puri family, which only was in the playing card business 1447-1449 ...
http://trionfi.com/naibi-on-sale

Image


... we observe a good progress in the year 1447, after he had started in the month of September.

In the month of August 1447 Filippo Maria Visconti had died, a long-time enemy of Florence. This naturally changed the conditions in Florence. It seems, that the strong playing card persecution in Florence had stopped. So Puri thought, that playing cards might be a good business, after the persecution. Likely a lot of people now were willing to buy cards. But this unusual situation seems to have become quickly a normal state again, and this normal business wasn't good enough. Puri stopped this part of his business.
Also Pope Eugen had died this same year (February 1447) and likely other political pressure from Rome went to nothing.Pope Eugen, often weak in his early career, had reached his political climax, when he united himself with the interest of Alfonso in Naples.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

315
If you mean this ...
If we have a good record of a tarot deck made for some other d'Este wedding with an Aragonese princess, then I happily withdraw my speculation about the one we know possibly being for Leonello.
... Eleanor of Aragon married Ercole d'Este. But I thought, that this was obvious to you. That is the normal theory to the Este cards with Aragon heraldic, as far I know. "1450" I know only from the Beinecke article.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

316
No, I meant my objection that a hand-painted deck done on order for a duke would escape any repression by the authorities (and especially if it was made in the territory governed by that duke).

Yes, of course I know that Ercole married an Aragon princess. And I know that there is no document saying that there was a tarot deck made for that wedding. It is the same for the 1445. It is not reasonable for you to dismiss one particular case as opposed to the other, for lack of documents. Clearly the deck was made for one or the other. But we still don't know which.

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

317
mikeh wrote:No, I meant my objection that a hand-painted deck done on order for a duke would escape any repression by the authorities (and especially if it was made in the territory governed by that duke).

Yes, of course I know that Ercole married an Aragon princess. And I know that there is no document saying that there was a tarot deck made for that wedding. It is the same for the 1445. It is not reasonable for you to dismiss one particular case as opposed to the other, for lack of documents. Clearly the deck was made for one or the other. But we still don't know which.
If the married Aragon girl was educated in the spirit of Alfonso and Alfonso's spirit was indeed against playing cards, then it would have been a problem for the signore of Ferrara and his playing cards.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

318
Yes, I see. Unless she changed her attitude quickly once she was in her new home. A marriage deck doesn't have to be made in time for the wedding. It can be an anniversary present, too. But without evidence to the contrary, that is less likely than what you propose, in only 4 years.

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

319
mikeh wrote:Yes, I see. Unless she changed her attitude quickly once she was in her new home. A marriage deck doesn't have to be made in time for the wedding. It can be an anniversary present, too. But without evidence to the contrary, that is less likely than what you propose, in only 4 years.
It was one of our suspicions, that playing cards were important for the ladies at the court, but not for the men (Galeazzo Maria played played and betted on chess ; and the room, where the ladies got their meals, was decorated with Trionfi players in Pavia). And in Savoy were rules, that men were only allowed to play cards, when they played cards with women.
But if the top woman at the court wouldn't like to play cards, what then? No card playing and no card playing notes. Perhaps card playing only at Christmas time.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Trionfi.com: News and Updates

320
mikeh wrote:No, I meant my objection that a hand-painted deck done on order for a duke would escape any repression by the authorities (and especially if it was made in the territory governed by that duke).

Yes, of course I know that Ercole married an Aragon princess. And I know that there is no document saying that there was a tarot deck made for that wedding. It is the same for the 1445. It is not reasonable for you to dismiss one particular case as opposed to the other, for lack of documents. Clearly the deck was made for one or the other. But we still don't know which.
The figure of Alexander may then also be of interest in relation to Leonello's own interest in Alexander. Guarino translated The Life of Alexander the Great for him, and Decembrio reports dialogues between Guarino and Leonello in which anecdotes from Alexander from a variety of sources appear. Pisanello portrayed him with mane of curly hair not only in reference to his name (little lion) but after portraits of Alexander on coins, in recognition of the appeal of Alexander to Leonello's self-representation. Also there is the known activity of d'Este court painter Sagramoro with production of playing cards, including Trionfi decks (four handpainted decks in 1442 for 'the use of our Lord' - at that time Leonello, in same year there is the purchase of cheaper (printed?) trump decks for the use of Leonello's brothers, Ercole and Sigismondo ordered from a merchant - which would perhaps indicated that the courts own playing card press was used for ordinary playing cards but not trumps decks at that time. We know playing cards including Trionfi were popular at the d'Este court, no need to imagine the d'Este/Aragon deck is a wedding gift, perhaps Leonello simply had the Aragon coat of arms added to one of his existing decks after his marriage - Sagramoro was still around to do the job himself (in fact painting heraldic devices on d'Este possessions seems to have been one of his regular jobs).
Last edited by SteveM on 13 Nov 2016, 12:36, edited 1 time in total.