Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#51
Mike,
With all due respect, the assignment of the trumps to suits does not interest me in the least, since I consider the trump numbers to be 14 and 21/22 - neither of which divides by 4. If 16 were a trump number then we would have seen a bureaucratic or merchant reference to "16 images" or a trionfi deck of 72 cards (instead we have a relatively late reference, 1457, to 70 cards; ergo 14 trumps is accounted for, 16 is not).

No comment on my identification of the rationale(s) of why a triumphal arch was used in regard to Fama ( - of Florence, - of Sforza)?

Phaeded

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#52
Well, yes, but I wanted to see if you had any comments about the Beinecke first. The deck of 70 cards could well be 22 plus 48, with 12 cards per suit, as Pratesi has suggested. Since there is only one such "bureaucratic note", it is meaningless to talk of probabilities. The "14 figures" at New Year's in 1441 and the 5:4 price ratio in Bologna are additional evidence. But it is no better evidence than the Marziano precedent and the 16 cards per suit, as opposed to 14 elsewhere, for the CY. And it is mostly evidence for Ferrara, not Florence (the Bologna evidence in 1477 is too late and too indeterminate: the triumph decks again might be shortened ones, 22 + 48, and regular decks 56).

I am not sure about the point of the rest of your post, since you do not seem to be denying that the CY card in question has as its subject "Fama", even if it is only the fama of one person rather than a crowd. The frame of the lower scene on the CY card does have the shape of a triumphal arch, as well as that of a half-circle plus rectangle. Triumphal arches in general, such as the one in Ancona, are memorials to the greatness of the person whose person and deeds are being remembered. It is an instrument to make the fama of the person last as long as possible. In the Santa Maria Novella fresco it might not be a triumphal arch, as opposed to the formal entrance into heaven. Wreaths, especially of laurel, are put on people to celebrate their achievements and give them fama, glory. They could also be a form of welcome, although I don't know anywhere that does that except (colonized) Hawaii.

However again you want to connect fama with prudentia, i.e. the word "providentia" on the arch in Ancona, as recorded by Ciriaco and shown, assumedly, to Filelfo, who assumedly has something to do with the CY World card. I do not deny that fama is connected with prudentia. It also may be that the particular shape of the scene has something to do with Sforza in Ancona; however fama suggests triumphal arches in any case; and while "Sforza" may be the operative word now, the original design may have referred to somebody else, i.e. Filippo on his way to see Bianca and her mother, who in fact were set up in a red castle across a channel (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=365&p=6796&hilit=red+castle#p6796). But what I don't see is why it follows that the card conflates fama with prudentia. If there are 6 virtue cards in a deck, there is a good chance that there is one more, since the standard set was 7. There is also a good chance that if there are 5 out 6 Petrarchan triumphs, there is one more. It may well be that Prudentia was put next to Fama in the sequence, to indicate the close relationship; in fact I think it likely--either that or Justice. As I say, that there were 16 triumphs is suggested not only by the precedent of the Marziano and the Beinecke suit-assignments, but by the fact that there are 16 cards per regular suit. And if there are only 14 triumphal cards, as seems reasonably possible in the case of the BB, then probably one of the virtues was dropped or conflated with a Petrarchan, most likely Prudence since there is no deck other than minchiate with such an extant card, and probably Time was represented by the Wheel, perhaps out of Petrarchan order. I don't deny such 14 card decks.

I am still waiting to see your account for how the literary reference explains the order of the sequence.

Added later in the evening: I added one sentence to the above, that beginning "It also may be...".

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#53
mikeh wrote:...The deck of 70 cards could well be 22 plus 48, with 12 cards per suit, as Pratesi has suggested. Since there is only one such "bureaucratic note", it is meaningless to talk of probabilities. The "14 figures" at New Year's in 1441 and the 5:4 price ratio in Bologna are additional evidence. But it is no better evidence than the Marziano precedent and the 16 cards per suit, as opposed to 14 elsewhere, for the CY. And it is mostly evidence for Ferrara, not Florence (the Bologna evidence in 1477 is too late and too indeterminate: the triumph decks again might be shortened ones, 22 + 48, and regular decks 56).
The essential argument for the 5x14-deck is the composition of the 20 trumps in the PMB, and 14 trumps made by a first painter, and 6 by another ... an argument, which you left out in the collection above. This fact alone was once good enough to suggest an earlier game structure of 5x14.
All other points, that you mentioned, have the character of a later confirmation for the already existing hypothesis.

It's true, that most people, who have learnt about the 5x14-theory, consider the 70-cards-note from Ferrara as more important, and perhaps they think, that one could attack the 5x14-theory, when explaining, that the 70 cards of 1457 could point to a deck with 22 trumps and 48 others. But that's wrong. The major argument is in the PMB-situation. This was good enough for the theory of John Berry, and it was good enough for the Trionfi.com hypothesis, long before the 70-cards note was generally known.

A. The first painter made the trump cards 0-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10- - 11-12-13- - 20 of the later Milanese row. That's a fact.

B. The second painter made six cards, which look sorted: sun-moon-star as a triad, and 3 cardinal virtues as a triad. That's a second fact, although one might dispute, that there are only 2 cardinal virtues + world. We've discussed that.

If somebody doesn't address this curious composition, he can't attack the 5x14-theory. If you don't talk about this, you don't really talk about the 5x14-theory.
It's true, that the 5x14-theory is complex and difficult to understand. So it was very practical, that the 70-cards-note existed, cause this seems to be something, which others easily understand. But this wasn't actually part of the original argument.

The theory about the Sforza-deck PMB doesn't dispute, that other contemporary decks with other deck structures might have existed at the same time, for instance decks with 16 or 20 or 22 or 40 trumps. A theory about the PMB can only lead to some insight about the nature of the PMB, not about the structure of other decks ... this should understandable.

16 trumps for the Cary-Yale Tarocchi are a plausible solution.

Bruzio ... well, actually the topic here ... also had 16 figures. Why not?

***************

Added: btw. Adrian Goldwetter had published a letter he received from the Morgan library ...
see viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1084&start=70#p16869
... related to the PMB cards ...
(shortened)

Re: Visconti-Sforza Tarot Cards

19.01.2016

Dear [name withheld by request],

First, I should say that our deck originally contained 78 cards, of which 74 are preserved, divided among the Morgan Library (35 cards), the Accademia Carrara in Bergamo (26 cards) and the Colleoni family (13 cards).

I was intrigued by your request to learn the thickness and weight of the cards, but for another reasons, to see if there were differences between the original cards and the replacement cards - as proved to be the case. as I was eager to see if there was a difference The cards were all 173 x 87 mm, and the weight and thickness of the original cards, be they picture cards or number cards, was fairly consistent. The thickness of the Hanged Man and the Queen of Swords, on laminated stock, was about 1.5 mm and the weight, in grams of the former was 14.78, and the latter, 14.84.

The replacement cards were on solid stock, and Temperance and Fortitude, for example, were less than 1 mm thick, and weighed weighed 11.94 grams and 12.53 grams respectively.

Sincerely yours,
...
So there are clear production differences between the 68 cards of the first painter, and the 6 cards of the second painter.
Maybe not everybody had received this information.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#54
Yes, the email to Adrian is important, for showing that the two groups were very probably not made a or near the same time.

Well, I wasn't intending to deal with the 5x14 theory as you define it, just the points that Phaeded had raised. Yes, the PMB might have originally been a 14 card sequence. Sorry to have left that out. I don't see that it changes anything. That it was 14 seems to me at least as insecure as any other number 17-22, since we don't know how many 1st artist cards are missing, if any. Also, I'm not sure I understand the proposal. If 14, how many virtues does it have? Are you conflating Justice with Fame, or saying that it is Fame rather than Justice? How does it fit in with Petrarch, or does it?

Huck wrote,
The second painter made six cards, which look sorted: sun-moon-star as a triad, and 3 cardinal virtues as a triad. That's a second fact, although one might dispute, that there are only 2 cardinal virtues + world. We've discussed that.
When you say "we've discussed that", you don't give a link, so I don't know what discussion you are talking about. Please elaborate. It might have a bearing on the interpretation of the CY.

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#55
mikeh wrote:Yes, the email to Adrian is important, for showing that the two groups were very probably not made a or near the same time.

Well, I wasn't intending to deal with the 5x14 theory as you define it, just the points that Phaeded had raised. Yes, the PMB might have originally been a 14 card sequence. Sorry to have left that out. I don't see that it changes anything. That it was 14 seems to me at least as insecure as any other number 17-22, since we don't know how many 1st artist cards are missing, if any.
0-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10- -12-13- - 20

There are about 350.000 possibilities to select 14 cards out of 22. The above given choice is extremely unusual, indicating, that the choice didn't happen in an accidental manner. Do you understand that? An accidental choice is not probable, cause you have 13 out of 14 of the first numbers. If I would express that in numbers, I would assume, the chance is less than 1:1000, that it is accidental. The chance is so small, that one naturally has to decide for the other possibility (999:1000), that the sequence has an unknown logical reason.

A logical reason might have been, that somebody had a nearly sorted deck (0-21 with a minor disturbance) with possibly 22 trumps, parted this sorted deck in two halves (14/8) for unknown reasons, went over a bridge and lost the 8 cards in the water. Surely a stupid story, but a possible story, how this sequence might have formed.

There are other stupid reason, how a sorted loss of some cards might have occurred.

Another logical reason might have been, that the deck had only 14 trumps. It was just a 5x14-deck.

In the research process it was necessary to get outside confirmation, which would make the last explanation strong against the possibility of "stupid reasons". These confirmations were found in the research process. It could be more and more would be better, but I think, they are good enough.
Also, I'm not sure I understand the proposal. If 14, how many virtues does it have? Are you conflating Justice with Fame, or saying that it is Fame rather than Justice? How does it fit in with Petrarch, or does it?
As I recently suggested, I think, that the card Justice just meant "Fame" in the 5x14-deck.

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=345&start=280#p17682
Franco Pratesi asked recently ...
"Given the 6 triumphs of Petrarch, how could they be expanded up to the 22 ones of the tarot pack?"

A rather good question. The 14 trumps of the first painter of the PMB were once (at the start) sorted (according my opinion) ...

1 Magician (with 4 symbols on the table)
Image


-----------
2 Popess
3 Empress
4 Emperor
5 Pope
-----------
-----------
6 Love (1st Trionfo of Petrarca)
7 Chariot with woman = Chastity (traditionally accompanied by virtues; 2nd Trionfo of Petrarca)
8 NEW: Justice = Fame (4th Trionfo of Petrarca)
9 Father Time (Trionfo of Petrarca)
-----------
10 Fortune (with 4 persons)
Image


11 Fool
12 Traitor

13 Death (3rd Trionfo of Petrarca; finishes individual life)
14 NEW; Judgment = Eternity (6th Trionfo of Petrarca; finishes global life)
...

You wrote ...
Huck wrote,
The second painter made six cards, which look sorted: sun-moon-star as a triad, and 3 cardinal virtues as a triad. That's a second fact, although one might dispute, that there are only 2 cardinal virtues + world. We've discussed that.
When you say "we've discussed that", you don't give a link, so I don't know what discussion you are talking about. Please elaborate. It might have a bearing on the interpretation of the CY.
Variously we discussed the insecurity of the World-Prudentia-Fama motif in PMB, in Charles VI and in Cary-Yale.... .-) ... it's not imaginable, that you didn't note that.

In the Charles VI we have 3 cardinal virtues and a 4th card, which was discussed as either World or Fame or Prudentia (cause the octagonal halo).

That the six cards of PMB-2 consists of 2 triads is another unusual feature, again with a high degree of being not probable as the result of a random. Likely with a similar value as "1:1000".

2 numbers with the value of 1:1000 make together 1 : 1000*1000, just as (1/2)*(1/2) makes 1/4 or 25%.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#56
Thanks for being specific, Huck. I'm not the only one who will read these posts, hopefully. Also, you've said quite a bit in the past, so it's hard to know what specifically you are referring to.

Yes, there are logical reasons and stupid reasons. And everything in between. We have no idea, except that it probably wasn't purely random.

Here is my favorite explanation, which I think is logical: someone, e.g. Bona of Savoy, decided that the virtue cards should commemorate particular family members with those virtues. Justice already commemorated Bianca Maria and Galeazzo Maria (the boy on the white horse), so "Forza" could commemorate their father, as well as promoting some good will with Ferrara, whose duke was Ercole (reigned 1471-1505). And Temperance could commemorate her sister in law Elisabetta, who died in childbirth (1472) and to whom Bona had a special attachment. Moreover, the celestials either were new, replacing the theologicals, or were good places to put in more family members. So they get redesigned, with Elisabetta getting a second card, the Moon. The kids on the Sun and World cards might, for all we know, resemble other family members, as well as glorifying their city or castle. The other cards she doesn't care about changing. Most of them already commemorated family members (the Hanged Man, Time/Old Man, the Popess, Love, the Chariot, maybe the Empress, maybe others).

I'm not putting forward this theory as compelling, just as reasonable. There may be other reasonable explanations of which we have no knowledge. It is easy to think of stupid reasons, less easy to think of logical reasons, especially if one has a special attachment to one of them, so that it appears the most logical. For myself, it seems obvious that Temperance and the Moon-lady resemble Elisabetta, as portrayed in other paintings of the period (albeit not as herself, but as one or another saint), and that the "Forza" card would commemorate Sforza/Ercole. All the art historians think that Cicognara was the artist, whose known work starts 1480s. Have you seen his work? It could have been a little earlier, when he was still apprenticing. The bridle the Moon-lady carries is an attribute of Temperance, linking her to the Temperance card, with Diana as the goddess of virginity, which would have stood Elisabetta in good stead--or at least, a later marriage. Bearing three children before one is 16 is hard on a young body. Galeazzo had pressured her into marrying at 13, according to Lubkin.

Putting family members in works of art was standard for them, really. See my post at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=917 for examples. Others did it, too; you have only to look at the Procession of the Magi in Florence. The Sforzas had the Bembo do something similar in Cremona, only featuring just Sforzas, according to Edith Kirsch (“Bonifacio Bembo’s Saint Agostino Altarpiece,” in Studi di storia dell'arte in onore di Mina Gregori, Milano: Silvana Editoriale, 1994, pp. 47-50, 5 ill.).

My hypothesis seems at least as logical as saying that a card with a big picture of a lady with scales and sword and a little man on a horse in the background is first more Fame then Justice (so it doesn't count as a lone virtue), but then a virtue (one of four), with a card of a city in a bubble held up by two cherubs, probably done c. 1480, as Prudence.

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#57
Well, once we had a long discussion ...
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=365
... about the 5x14-theory. In that time the possibility existed, that there were not much Trionfi cards in the early period till 1465-70, and that the major part of decks were made for high nobility. About Florence we had the idea, that it possibly was late with the Trionfi cards.
We were corrected in these assumption by Franco Pratesi first and then also by material from the custom office in Rome collected by Arnold Esch. There was a middle-class market in the 1450s and possibly the begin of a low-class market mid of the 1460s. And there was possibly a leading role of Florence in the beginning of the Trionfi card production.

*************

The new material reduced the value of the extant cards of the period 1440-1470. In the older interpretation they looked like the begin of a big development, started recently by the nobility, nowadays they look like the peak of an already big mountain of events.
In long discussions we learned, that there (likely) was a context between the popularity of the Trionfi poem by Petrarca, specific illustrations of these Trionfi in illuminated manuscripts, the use of these motifs at Cassone pictures and the cards called Trionfi. And naturally also a context to specific triumphal celebrations.

If in this stream of events a rich family with their home project "personal Trionfi cards" embedded private portraits in the stream of events wouldn't be so important.

We've the Florentine signal "Minchiate" in 1466, which should mean at least an enlargement of the trump numbers (possibly, likely even probably). If the Rosenwald sheet is indeed of 1464/65, it just might have been this Minchiate with 96 cards, which 2x20 trumps. This could have been the signal for Milan or just the Sforza family to add 6 trumps to their earlier 14, getting 20. In that, what we can observe, we have in the flow of time a Mantegna Tarocchi with even 50 pictures (maybe c. 1465 or later around 1473-75), the Lazzarelli text with 27 pictures (1471-74), an 28-motifs-phenomenon for Montefeltro (around 1475) and Lorenzo Spirito with a 4x20-lot-book-model in 1482. It followed an "embedded 20" with totally 22 trumps (Boiardo) and another embedded 20 with the Sola-Busca Tarocchi (1491).
And finally we've a list of 22 Tarochi, possibly from Ferrara in 1505.

These were not always Trionfi cards, but just interest in picture collections with selected motifs.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#58
We've the Florentine signal "Minchiate" in 1466, which should mean at least an enlargement of the trump numbers (possibly, likely even probably). If the Rosenwald sheet is indeed of 1464/65, it just might have been this Minchiate with 96 cards, which 2x20 trumps. This could have been the signal for Milan or just the Sforza family to add 6 trumps to their earlier 14, getting 20. In that, what we can observe, we have in the flow of time a Mantegna Tarocchi with even 50 pictures (maybe c. 1465 or later around 1473-75), the Lazzarelli text with 27 pictures (1471-74), an 28-motifs-phenomenon for Montefeltro (around 1475) and Lorenzo Spirito with a 4x20-lot-book-model in 1482. It followed an "embedded 20" with totally 22 trumps (Boiardo) and another embedded 20 with the Sola-Busca Tarocchi (1491).
Once - 2011 - before Franco's restart as active playing card researcher, I wrote about possible decks with 20 trumps at Aeclectic ... recently I transferred the older texts to this forum.
"20 Figure" and the 5x14-theory (from 2011)
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1110

Beside Trionfi decks with 14, 16 or 22 trumps there might have been a time for decks with 20 trumps. One example might have been the 20 trumps of PMB-1 and PMB-2.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#59
Huck wrote,
Beside Trionfi decks with 14, 16 or 22 trumps there might have been a time for decks with 20 trumps. One example might have been the 20 trumps of PMB-1 and PMB-2.
Well, as long as you say "could" or "might have been", and if by "and" you mean "and/or", you will get no argument from me.
I would add 21, 17, 18, 19, (Dummett's 2004 hypothesis) and 21 to this mix, if you are including the Fool in the count. For the period after 1440, any number from 14 on is reasonably possible, as I said a couple of days ago. And we know nothing about the period before 1440, when lower numbers might have been in existence.

The importance of the luxury decks is what they suggest about the non-luxury deck of its time and place and earlier. Esch and Pratesi still tell us nothing about the period before 1440, or, for the popular deck, 1444, since the 1440 note is of a luxury deck, except, perhaps, that there wasn't much of an export market in Florence. What I like about Franco's recent "earliest triumphs" note is that he does not make too much of his own findings.

One thing that we have to keep in mind is the "conservatism of the players". This means that for a given consumer-set, changing the order is a drastic step. This does not exclude adding and subtracting cards, or changing details in the pictures of a few cards. Nor does it exclude a drastic change in order if the consumer-set changes, for example from the Visconti court pre-1447 to the Sforza court and popular tarot post-1450 in Milan.

Huck wrote,
We've the Florentine signal "Minchiate" in 1466, which should mean at least an enlargement of the trump numbers (possibly, likely even probably). If the Rosenwald sheet is indeed of 1464/65, it just might have been this Minchiate with 96 cards, which 2x20 trumps. This could have been the signal for Milan or just the Sforza family to add 6 trumps to their earlier 14, getting 20.
Bear in mind Franco's recent finding that the sheets that came with the Rosenwald 3rd sheet are from the 1501-1502 [corrected from 1507] Perugia edition of a law book. We really don't know what distinguished minchiate in 1466 from ordinary triumphs. It may have simply been the presence of the theologicals and Prudence, and perhaps the absence of the Popess, for a 25 or 26 triumph deck, and/or the absence of the celestials.

Added later: on 20 trump decks, we have to bear in mind that the missing cards, Devil and Tower, are precisely the ones that might have been removed by later owners out of piety or fear of the Inquisition (during a time when the Tower meant "house of the devil"). That reduces the likelihood. On the other hand, 20 is a nice round number.

Re: Panegyric of Bruzio Visconti by Bartolomeo da Bologn

#60
mikeh wrote:Well, yes, but I wanted to see if you had any comments about the Beinecke first.
To whom exactly are you referring with "Beinecke"? An anonymous person of the 19th or 20th century? How could that possibly matter?
mikeh wrote:In the Santa Maria Novella fresco it might not be a triumphal arch, as opposed to the formal entrance into heaven.
It's both - St. Peter is standing under the arch with his keys, as the be-laureled saved pass through. Again, Ciriaco met with everyone of note in Florence, when Filelfo was also resident there, to discuss his Arch of Trajan findings, etc., and there is no way that arch is not identified in the Quattrocento as also triumphal (however it was understood in the Trecento and religious the context). At all events, the triumphal arch perfectly matches the goal of the fresco: the Church Triumphant.
mikeh wrote:But what I don't see is why it follows that the card conflates fama with prudentia.
Again, THERE IS NO CONFLATION. A prudent hero (Sforza), who is to rule a Visconti dominion, is having his fame declared; as such he is worthy of the duke's daughter across the stream. Bianca traveled down the Po to Cremona from Abbiategrasso via Pavia, so one could argue she was kneeling in front of her home in Abbiategrasso or the ducal home in Pavia [both south of Milan], and that the city further away in the middle is Cremona, but it still makes more sense that the city she kneels besides is her dowry city, especially given it’s tall tower, for which Cremona was renown. What the Brambilla would have shown is anyone's guess - if a "red castle", fine.

The hero disappears in all subsequent 'Worlds', along with fama and prudenza. What are the implications of that? Assuming the ur-tarot indicated the fame of some prudent one/thing (e.g., the Fame of Florence), as did the CY, then a lasting convention was set for what the last card might indicate - a "domain" (without the qualifying attributes of fame or prudence being necesssary) Even the CY is arguably about the domain of Cremona, if not the larger issue of dynastic succession for the Duchy of Milan, as indicated by the flag of Pavia on the Love card (as Filippo was firstly Count of Pavia; the first thing Sforza did in 1447 was make himself Count of Pavia, despite the Ambrosian Republic, who simply caved in to this, post-facto: see Ady, A History of Milan Under the Sforza, 1907: 41). Fame and prudence would be closely associated with the rulership of a domain, but there simply is no sign of either in all subsequent "worlds" (just indications of a city or contado, presumably ruled by a ruler famed for his prudence, the virtue par excellence of rulership...even into Cosimo I's time). The Virtue or putti holding the scepter over a contado is simply an allegory of the domain ( or a 'genius of the place/domain', if you will), not unlike the “papess” is an allegory of the Church. Finally, in regard to prudence, this means she is oddly not explicitly shown in the trumps while the other 3 cardinal trumps are, but this focus on what is ruled (the domain), versus the ruler, in the highest trump means the normally person-associated virtue of prudence makes less sense as a symbol. This is simply one of history's vagaries - but a development we can pin down to as occurring in Milan (where the city is the focus in the PMB). And note that the mounted figure of Sforza is transferred from the World, as found in the CY, to the background of the Justice card in the PMB, so the ruler is still given his due, while the ruled domain (Milan) is high-lighted in the highest card as that which must be transformed.

Similarly, the changes to other key trumps from the CY to the PMB showing Sforza and Bianca are significant and explain their changed circumstances from 1441 to 1450. Refer to the referenced images I've already posted above in this thread:

LOVE trump:
- CY: a matrimonial bed awaits the couple - the marriage needs to be made legitimate/consumated.
- PMB: the matrimonial bed is missing (Cupid simply stands on a column, like an idol), because the marriage has been consummated already; she had two kids by 1450, and was pregnant with a third when Sforza entered Milan.

CHARIOT:
- CY: A chaste maiden offers Chastity's symbol of a jousting shield, while the page on the calm horse holds the orb of rulership (that comes with a domain - the dowry of Cremona); she is offering that to someone.
- PMB - a woman no longer associated with Chasity, instead holds symbols of rulership (not offered), pulled by two winged horses. In his contemporary Odes, Filelfo refers to the Ambrosian Republic's mob as a gorgon - the mythical creature from whose slain blood Pegasus was born. Pegasus, in turn, creates the Helicon spring by scratching its hoof on a mountain top from which proceed the Muses (any number of illuminations or paintings depict this; e.g.: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/56 ... 02ac16.jpg. By way of Pegasus, Bianca is thus associated with the Muses - the Muses return to Milan with the Sforzas, per Filelfo (his Odes are themselves organized into books named after each Muse). No one even has alternate theory as to why two pegasuses draw this chariot (the mythical Pegasus was of course singular, but I will concede the pictorial Petrarchan triumph genre was enough to influence this depiction as two winged horses [versus, say, two elephants]; at all events, the card is about Bianca's virtue, not Pegasus per se). The PMB Chariot has nothing to do with the CY Chariot's symbols, other than the rider in both cases was Bianca, but she has been transformed from chaste virgin to a virtuous ruler to whom even the Muses will rally (in restoring Milan). [the armored Queen of Swords is also arguably a reference to Bianca's military defense of Cremona against Venice - when she donned armor - a success that helped secure Milan].

STAR/VENUS:
- CY: No evidence it existed (nor the son or moon - which also presents a numerical issue for 14 or 16 trumps).
- PMB: Clearly patterned after the Paduan prototype of planetary Venus, the PMB figure also holds her hand across her pregnant belly like so many Madonna del Parto paintings we have previously discussed, but equally importantly she also does the same in the Venus of Besozzo's Visconti genealogy (where she is not in a planetary aspect, just mythical: http://www.wga.hu/html_m/m/michelin/elogium1.html). Venus is making these pregnant gestures because the subject is births and dynastic succession, something wholly appropriate to a new ruler of Milan who needed to show he had heirs. Venus thus combines the planetary aspect along with that of the mythical Venus Genetrix (which ultimately goes back to Caesar as his divine ancestor, which a Marziano or Filelfo would have been well aware).

WORLD
- CY: A knight coming to a maiden beside a city, a river between, with a coastline on the horizon: arguably Bianca next to her dowry city on the Po River, which flows to the Adriatic. The coastline is prominent and needs to be explained - given the fact that Sforza was given Cremona because intervened between Milan and arch-enemy Venice, the Adriatic is the obvious answer.
- PMB: Two putti before a hexagonally walled city (such as we find in the Visconti Hours with Prudence placed over it, but again, no prudence indicated explicitly in the trump). The Venus-del-parto, which indicates dynastic succession, receives its concrete confirmation here in the two children already born to Bianca at the time of the taking of Milan in 1450 in the form of the two putti. Milan itself is idealized, like the two children as putti (the dynastic lineage goes back to Venus, after all), as if a heavenly city (surrounded by stars), like a New Jerusalem. Sforza will restore Milan accordingly. The message is simple, but it is his domain to restore. An idealized domain is retained as the meaning of this card until the Anima Mundi/four apostles motif gets introduced.

The CY and PMB are impossible to understand by simply referring to the homogenized subjects of later decks of tarot - whether you believe in the 14->21/22 expansion from the CY to PMB, there is no denying the significant changes made to the Milanese trumps just discussed, from one deck to the next. But the bottom line is the theme of the World was already altered from the CY to the PMB - subsequent 15th century packs favored showing a contado, but then again, few cities were as large as Milan (not Ferrara, whose contado was contested by Venice, and certainly not Pesaro). And no other city had her former "domain" symbols of power, the Visconti, savagely dismantled and the city itself utterly ruined by internecine fighting, famine and plague...only to be restored by one claiming to be "Visconti" by way of his marriage. Sforza as a "healing Apollo" (Fiellfo's words) was required.
I am still waiting to see your account for how the literary reference explains the order of the sequence.
I was quite clear in my original "Literary Source of the Trumps: Dante's Paradiso" that there is no explicit or implicit order for any subset of the 7 virtues, 7 planets nor 7 exempli; none of the subsets of 7 take priority in the literary source. Each of the 7 "steps" of ascension simply contain three aspects: planetary/virtue/exempli (after the seventh step the Church Militant ceases as we enter the highest heavens and the Church Triumphant). A sequence must have been derived, however ad hoc, and used by card-players (and here I give a nod towards Ross - the game-playing milieu was all important for sequence; but I don't think Filelfo gave a shit, per his derogatory comments about the Cremonese "scholars of the gaming table"). This lack of explicit/implicit sequence in the source material in fact explains the lack of consistent sequence we witness in the regional variations, something that no one has been able to provide a rationale for, only that the problem of inconsistency exists.

Phaeded

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests

cron