Re: Visconti snake
Posted: 26 Nov 2010, 15:33
Thanks for answer
I'm surprised. As much I look the cards, always new things out. In any case, do not change my arguments.
a) The numbers are placed after and not are enough to know if they are order A. To order C have many variants (documentated) in the sixteenth century. I think we can only say some deck is order A to the XV and XVI if:
1) The angel is the greater triumphs.
2) The virtues are gathered.
c) Exists four Popes or Moors instead four different characters.
That is, I dont think this numbers are important, sorry.
b)
And in any case, there is no objective reason, scientific, by which "molto antico" does not mean the XVII century. And I'm saying I dont know one proof, robust, demonstrating the existence of order A for the XV and XVI. Not XVII.
I'm surprised. As much I look the cards, always new things out. In any case, do not change my arguments.
a) The numbers are placed after and not are enough to know if they are order A. To order C have many variants (documentated) in the sixteenth century. I think we can only say some deck is order A to the XV and XVI if:
1) The angel is the greater triumphs.
2) The virtues are gathered.
c) Exists four Popes or Moors instead four different characters.
That is, I dont think this numbers are important, sorry.
b)
Well, that's not a good arguments. With permission, I dont believe in the precision of oral tradition. Rumors, faulty memory ... There are many elements that generate noise in the oral tradition. Not serve to establish a precise date .... And you know it. The document is from 1724. This is the only data secure, direct. The rest is conjecture, gossip, recall a memory of a memory. Sorry very much, but I don't think is a sure historic date when born of the memory of a grandfather. My grandmother live the last ten years of his life mixing all her memories.La datazione dell'originale è o...
And in any case, there is no objective reason, scientific, by which "molto antico" does not mean the XVII century. And I'm saying I dont know one proof, robust, demonstrating the existence of order A for the XV and XVI. Not XVII.