EUGIM wrote:Returning to the topic as its began,I think that Vieville deck is too much earlier than Noblet,or best said,it is based on a very older mould.
* If we see the XVII card only Vieville deck shows a bigger central star and only four little stars around it,as in the case of the Cary Sheet.
You know, I was never really sure what the topic was when this began? What do you mean by Noblet = Vieville? Do you mean in age? If so, then yes, they are from around the same period, 1650=1660s. Or do you mean something else?
I think the Star is perhaps a bad example, surely when compared to the Cary Sheet, the general iconography is a match for the Tarot de Marseille with its nude waterbearer rather than the Astrologer on the Vieville? If anything, the Star on the Cary Sheet shows that some of the iconography of the Tarot de Marseille existed about 150 years before our oldest surviving Tarot de Marseille deck, the Jean Noblet.
Now personally, I've been trying to show that the Vieville, while not a Tarot de Marseille, contains details that I think probably existed on earlier Tarot de Marseille decks than those that have survived. I've pointed out the pips, and how they match cards found in the Sforza Castle that also do not have parts of the images replaced with numbers. I've pointed out the areas at the tops and bottoms of the Vieville (like on the chariot, and on Strength) which I think might show details that were lost on the Tarot de Marseille during what I believe was the process of adding titles and numbers.
I think the Vieville is a wonderful, special deck. And I do think that it harkens back to something earlier, and that there are mysteries in it that have yet to be solved.
Why does it have iconography from the "Bologna" tradition? How did it get into the Vieville and the Belgian Tarot?
Why does Vieville mix the Belgain Tarot and the Tarot de Marseille tarot?
Does he invent the Belgian? Or is he bringing an existing style into Paris?
Does he intend to suggest ethnicity with his courts?
Who was his market? Were parisians playing with this type of deck?
What is the relationship with the Vieville and Alciato's naming order? Does Vieville's sequence tell us something of his origin?
There are a ton more questions I'm sure, I don't have the deck in front of me at the moment, these are just off the top of my head.
So Eugim, what are you getting at? What's your point? What is this discussion to be about? I'll happily talk about the Vieville as much as anyone wants to!