And goes on to give a partial translation of the letter."Cosimo De medici had his own copy of The Trionfi by 1418."
"...Cosimo acquired his copy in 1418."Do I have to take your word for it, or would either or you, Lorredan or Phaeded, care to provide documentation of this assertion?In the book Cosimo de’medici and The Florentine Renaissance by Professor Dale Kent (deceased) 2006 2nd Printing ISBN 0-300-08128Wish I could help you out on the 1418 refenece but I was just assuming Lorredan’s reference was correct. At all events the trajectory of this thread has veered far from the question of Marcello/Monselice/Petrarch (which was a dead end) and is headed…where?
Part One The Patron’s Oeuvre Page 13 it says…..45. In the Index it says…As in Cosmos’s patronage, dynastic, civic, and religious themes were integrated in Petrarch’s Triumphs; love triumphs over chastity, death over love, fame over death, time over fame, and eternity over all. Cosimo had his own copy of the Trionfi by 1418, a splendidly illuminated edition of the text was Piero’s first manuscript commission, and Giovanni read Petrarch for diversion at his villa in Fiesole.45.
On this last see Brown, Bartolommeo Scala,17, and below,pp297-9; on Cosimo’s books,chapter.4.; on Piero’s,pp. 296-9
17 in the index: Gombich, “Early Medici as Patrons” Evidence from several articles in Beyer and Bouher, Piero de medici, tends to confirm this this suggestion. On the chapel and it’s frescoes, below, ch 13 and 14,pp.339-41; see also particularly Acidini, Chapel of the Maji, and Cole Ahl, Benozzo Gozzoli, ch.3.
(The suggestion, as it turns out was that the Chapel of Maji painted by Gozzoli used from Matteo de Pasti the technique of Gold dust painting that he told Piero Cosimo about when he was commissioned to illustrate the unillustrated text of the Trionfi)
So the next index note 46 reads so…
See his letter to Piero published by Milanesi, “lettere di’arist”, 78-9. The English translation in Chambers,Artists and Patrons, 94-5, is accompanied by a misleading commentary; see alternatively Gilbert, Italian Art, 6 and Ames-Lewis, Matteo de ‘Pasti.
So I get hold of Gombrich’s Book on the Renaissance and read…If these two letters happen to tell us of the Commissions the Medici did not give,
We are compensated by a third letter written to Piero two years later, in 1441, which gives us a first glimpse of his taste. It is written by Matteo de’Pasti, from Venice, and deals with a commission to paint the Trionfi of Petrarch, which were destined to become so popular in decorative art
So I look for Francis Ames-Lewis book called the “Library and Manuscripts of Piero di Cosimo de Medici” and find it is in the fine arts library and cannot be inter- loaned.
The Librarian tells me over the phone that Ames-Lewis mentions the manuscript in the book and that Ames Lewis’s research shows it was the first commission of Peiro and that the folio cover had Cosimo’s palle on the ink text and Piero’s device of a diamond ring with three ostrich feathers in white/red and green.(Faith Hope and Charity) added at a later date.
I was told there was a Francis Ames-Lewis essay in.…
Cosimo "il Vecchio" de' Medici, 1389-1464: Essays in Commemoration of the 600th Anniversary of Cosimo de' Medici's Birth: Including papers delivered ... at the Warburg Institute, London, 19 May 1989
This book of Essays is not available to me except for a one hour inspection at the Fine Arts Library and I have to book the hour…hahahahha.
So same wonderful Librarian felt sorry for me and when available will forward me a copy of an essay at a time and I have the 4th essay which is nothing to do with Petrarch or Ames-Lewis and his research.
I do not keep wonderful reading records and my notes are in notebooks for my own ramblings about subjects that have some value for myself and my interests. Some books are on the same page as other subjects and they would not form a cohesive index.
This post is my best to give some clarity to the statement of Cosimo having a text of I trionfi in his hands in 1418. It seems that there is a truth in the statement, regardless of whose knickers get in a knot about the subject.
The subject was not what I was reading about in the first place, and I regret even bring it up, regardless of how true it is or is not. I was reading about the demographic, economic, and human environment of the monastic communities of 15th Century Florence. In particular the ones Cosimo the Elder supported, gave books to, provided work etc. The most important for Tarot (to my mind) is the Worthy Men of Saint Martin or The Buonomini di San Martino- originally attached to the Camaldolese Monastery; The ‘shamed poor’ who before 1470 were exclusively all artisans, who were seriously disadvantaged and made poor by the tax laws, famine and plague. The connection to Petrarch was that the “shamed Poor” would sing for their supper, recite poetry, put on plays etc in the square directly opposite Torre del Castagna. But that is another story for the Unicorn Terrace as I have no intention of ever posting in this research forum again.
Huck should you read this…you will find a lot of fruit in researching Petrarch in the
Zibaldoni or informal books/scrapbooks/manuscripts of the 15th Century held at the Biblioteca Nazionale, the Riccardia and the Laurenziana. There are many thousands. One early 15th century one is at the Biblioteca Riccardiana 1103, folio 10v. Matteo di Giunto acquired a compilation of Petrarch’s Trionfi belonging to an unidentified owner, and added his own illustrations and his own coat of arms of a boars head. This was common practice apparently to either erase a previous device or put a new one on the cover. Petrarch’s works inspired the overwhelming majority of these informal book illustrations.We call it scrapbooking today.