Fame riddle

[SteveM]

non perdere letum maxima cura fuit:
(that death is not wasted is their chief concern)
Lucan Liber III

This is my spirit, one scornful of the day, that thinks
the honour you aim at well bought with life itself.
Virgil Aeneid Book IX:205

"Life is not lost," said she, "for which is bought
Endless renown; that, more then death, is to be sought."
Edmund Spenser Faerie Queen

Da l'altra parte un pensier dolce et agro,
con faticosa et dilectevol salma
sedendosi entro l'alma,
preme 'l cor di desio, di speme il pasce;
che sol per fama gloriosa et alma
non sente quand'io agghiaccio, o quand'io flagro,
s'i' son pallido o magro;
et s'io l'occido piu forte rinasce.

The Canzoniere: (Rerum vulgarium fragmenta) By Francesco Petrarca CCLXIV 55-62

The goddess Fame, like our temperance, is represented with wings.

Nullus argento color est avaris
Abdito terris, inimice lamnae
Crispe Sallusti, nisi temperato
Splendeat usu.

Vivet extento Proculeius* aevo,
Notus in fratres animi paterni;
Ilium aget penna metuente solvi
Fama superstes.

Yes, Sallust, scorn the mere inactive metal;
There is no lustre of itself in silver,
While niggard earth conceals; from temperate usage
Comes its smooth polish.

Known by the heart of father for his brethren,
Time's latest age shall hear of Proculeius.*
Him shall uplift, and on no waxen pinion,
Fame, the survivor.

Horace, Ode to Sallusticu Crispus. Trans. Lord Lytton.
Philip Francis translates it:
With never-failing wing shall fame To latest ages bear the name Of Proculeius,

[Ross G. R. Caldwell]

Ross had then 1543, Mike spoke of 1538

My edition was the one of 1543; I haven't seen the earlier ones. It might be wrong to assume it is there, but I suspect it would be.

[robert]

Hi everyone,

I find threads like this very difficult. Even though I love history, I find myself easily overwhelmed when discussing so many scraps of facts and attempting to connect them up to the topic being discussed.

I don't know that I have much to offer this thread, although much of it touches on tarot curiosities that I am very much interested in. I'll simply state some of the things that I find interesting related to these dicussions and hope not to go off topic or to lead anyone down a rabbit hole.

Some of the main questions I have when comparing these early decks:
What is the relationship between the Noblet and the Francois Heri deck that obviously shares some heritage with it? Where did Noblet get some of the unusual iconography, and how does Heri have it as well? In other words, is there a special relationship between the Noblet in France and the Heri in Switzerland? It's easy to just look at the Heri and say that it is a copy of the Noblet, but one of the features of the Besancon in general that I find particulary curious is the clouds on the lovers card. The Noblet and the Dodal seem "wrong" to me, the area around the cupid seems very out of place compared to the rest of the cards. On the Besancon, there are clouds, and these seem "right" to me, so... how is it that the Besancon got this feature "right" while none of the TdMs did? See here:
http://www.tarothistory.com/2008/04/09/ ... he-lovers/
It is especially noticible in comparing the Heri with the Noblet. This is why I'm always begging for more of the images of the Heri, I want to compare them with the Noblet and find the differences, they might tell us something. My secret question.. Did the Besancon come from the Tarot de Marseille, or did the Tarot de Marseille come from the Besancon? Or.... are as I think most likely, are they both just referring to something earlier that we don't have old enough examples of.. in other words.. Are all of our Tarot de Marseille decks just late copies of earlier decks that have lost or corrupted some iconographical images, and can we use both decks to recreate the missing ancestor?

Similarly, the Vieville is another mystery. It is unique. It shares some iconography with the Tarot de Marseille I, and it also shares iconography with the Belgian. While I don't think it reflects a pattern that was the "parent" of the Tarot de Marseille, I think it might show some details of an earlier Tarot de Marseille that are not reflected in any of our copies, Tarot de Marseille I or II. One of its strengths is that the entire image is shown, and the numbers have been added to the image whereever they can fit. We see details like the top of the hat on the Strength card that is chopped off on the Tarot de Marseille. The World is another example of it, the beasts at the bottom of the card have complete bodies, but these are cut off on the Tarot de Marseille II. The Noblet knows that the entire bodies should be there, and I believe that the Dodal shows a transition from having the bodies to areas being cut into the cards to add the titles. You find the same issue on the pips, on Viville, there are no numbers, so there are lots of floral motifs that are in place. On the Tarot de Marseille, areas of the flowers have been removed to make room to add the numbers. By comparing the Vieville with the Tarot de Marseille, details appear that, to me, make sense. This means, to me, that Vieville was using a pattern as his guide that is older than the existing Tarot de Marseille decks, but very likely was their ancestor.

Basically, I believe that the existing Tarot de Marseille decks, I and II, are later versions with alterations of a deck pattern that existed earlier, of which we no longer have copies of.

I believe that by looking at the Besancon, Belgian, Vieville, and Tarot de Marseille decks together, we can glimpse what that pattern might have looked like.

That said, I don't think there were radical changes, just changes in the details as copies upon copies were made.

I'm pretty convinced that the earlier pattern had no titles and numbers on it. I think that the Sforza Castle world card is likely to be the closest that we can currently come to it, but as noted in that thread, I don't think the number in the border is an original feature. I imagine that the Cary Sheet is yet another variation of this, but not the ancestor either. But the Cary Sheet's lack of numbers and titles is exactly what I suspect of the earlier Tarot de Marseille pattern.

Where did the Tarot de Marseille come from? I don't know. There are traces of it being produced in Italy very late that don't copy details of the existing French decks, like the Drago for instance. They are related to the Tarot de Marseille I, but how do they know the details that they know if they aren't in the existing French decks?

Italy seems a likely origin to me, but I wonder about the Cary Sheet, and think that the Devil card might help us locate it outside of Italy, and maybe in Switzerland or Germany.

There is no doubt that there is also some relationship between the Vieville and the Minchiate and Southern pattern with the Sun, Moon Star cards.

A fundamental question is, where is Vieville getting his iconography from? He's connected to so many different decks, and yet, doesn't really seem to be copying any of the existing ones.

I look at the cards. I compare details and try to trace lineage and ask myself, "where did they get that detail from?"

Ultimately, I've come to accept that what we have to work with are a lot of later decks that maintain some details and change others along the way, a natural progression. I think we need to remember that there were millions of decks produced and that only a few of them remain from the period. I often compare the study of these decks to the study of the Gospels, instead of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, we've Vieville, Noblet, Dodal and Conver. Each telling a related story in their own way, using older documents to create their own, and these only being a few of what were originaly a lot more "testaments" that have been lost to us. We need a Nag Hammadi!

Cheers,
robert

[Bertrand]

Hello,

I often compare the study of these decks to the study of the Gospels, instead of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, we've Vieville, Noblet, Dodal and Conver.

we also have the much overlooked anonymous parisian deck, which shares a lot of iconography with Vieville - the star for instance uses the same image, even in small details like the paved floor, "atrempance" is the closest that exists to Vieville although it is also very different, but basically we've got a lady pouring something in a recipient on the floor in both - and this deck which predates the Noblet and the Vieville has the established Marseille order, plus titles and numbers included in the design - while the suits are spanish.

Bertrand

[robert]

Hello,

I often compare the study of these decks to the study of the Gospels, instead of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, we've Vieville, Noblet, Dodal and Conver.

we also have the much overlooked anonymous parisian deck, which shares a lot of iconography with Vieville - the star for instance uses the same image, even in small details like the paved floor, "atrempance" is the closest that exists to Vieville although it is also very different, but basically we've got a lady pouring something in a recipient on the floor in both - and this deck which predates the Noblet and the Vieville has the established Marseille order, plus titles and numbers included in the design - while the suits are spanish.

Bertrand

Hi Bertrand,

Yes, I love the Paris too, and do include it when I do comparisons, I didn't mean to imply a limit to the four mentioned decks. And I'm sure you'd agree that the Vieville is a much closer cousin to the Tarot de Marseille, at least iconographically, than the Paris. I think we'd also both agree that the Tarot de Marseille iconographical pattern is older than the early 17th century when the Paris was created? I have no idea of how old the Tarot de Marseille pattern is, but I think that it must go back pretty far. I hope what I've said hasn't left the impression that I think the Tarot de Marseille wasn't created until a later date, I'm only arguing that the decks we have, from the 17th Century, are decendants of the patten and shouldn't be taken as exact copies of the earlier iconography. I think details changed, like the clouds on the Lovers card, but that they were likely there in the earlier pattern.

cheers,
robert

[Bertrand]

Yes, I love the Paris too, and do include it when I do comparisons, I didn't mean to imply a limit to the four mentioned decks. And I'm sure you'd agree that the Vieville is a much closer cousin to the Tarot de Marseille, at least iconographically, than the Paris.

iconographically... mostly yes, but then the order is stritcly identical in the Paris deck, and Vieville and the Paris deck are too close on certain details to consider them separately.

I hope what I've said hasn't left the impression that I think the Tarot de Marseille wasn't created until a later date

it definitely hasn't. At least that's one of the thing we can be sure of !

Sorry I didn't get your point clearly because in a sense Vieville doesn't fit as one of the "gospels" and because the iconographical details it shares with the Paris tarot may lead to think there may have been /several missing pattern(s).

I have trouble with the idea that the Paris deck is a "tarot de fantaisie", or to say it clearly I have trouble to decide if the Paris tarot is a sample of another iconographical pattern (as it shares some details with Vieville) or if it is one of a kind (Vieville XVII and XIIII and Paris XXI makes it sound unlikely).

Bertrand

[Huck]

hi Steven,

I followed your Fama-Sol meeting in Petrarca's Canzonieri, and found, that the quoted passage also contained the expression "dopo la morte" a little later behind the text, that you quoted.

(the discussed Boiardo passage has it also, as it was offered by Bertrand ...
Dopo la morte sol fama n' avanza,
E veramente son color tapini,
Che d' aggrandirla sempre non han cura,
Perché sua vita poco tempo dura.
...).

Found in the Canzonieri
http://books.google.com/books?id=IIVUZN ... te&f=false


translated to English

(this is part of a longer poem)

This passage might be also of interest.

translated to English

(this is a complete sonnet)

Generally I found the word Fama for 12 times in the whole offered text of this book, and at 6 of this pages I found also the word Sol and at 5 others the word Morte.

From this it seems, as if the words "fama", "morte" and "sol" somehow have an attraction to each other, so as if the mind of the poet Petrarca plays with them and one word associates the both others (to him) in the time, when he wrote the Canzonieri.

Now we have in the "Trionfi" poem (which is a good time later written then the Canzonieri) 6 headlines or chapters:
Love - Chastity - Death - Fama - Time - Eternity, so for Petrarca Boiardo's later statement "Dopo la morte (sol) fama" has a very specific meaning, if I leave "sol" aside: "Dopo la morte, fama" somehow would describe the middle part (3+4) of Petrarca's chapters in the Trionfi poem.

If I go now to the world of Alciato's small poem, then it appears, as if "Fama = Tarocchi card 14" (which is not usual)
and "Death = Tarocchi card 13" (as usual), and the sentence "Dopo la morto" sounds, as if he also describes the Tarocchi row of Alciato. "Death before fame", if I count the row from 1-21 ...

Now, if I imagine around this altered detail 14=Fama the usual other Tarocchi cards (without Temperance) I get ...

Tarot cards 0-5 = the usual 6 persons
Tarot cards 6-13 = 8 cards and the last of them is Death
Tarot Cards 14-21 = 8 cards and the first of them is Fama

... which somehow looks sorted in a clever way, just as a "central art" of the Tarocchi order. When I now become curious and ask for other Tarocchi cards close to Petrarca's Trionfi chapters, for instance Love and Eternity, then I find Love at the begin of the first 8-cards-group, and Eternity at the end, like Ross today (or was it yesterday?) stated ...

The more I look at it, the more I am convinced that it can only be Jesus Christ, in the triumphant "Ecce Homo" mode.

Following the idea, that 21 = Eternity I would see ...

Tarot cards 0-5 = the usual 6 persons
Tarot card 6 = Love
Tarot cards 7-12 = 6 cards, which somehow present Chastity (as a theory)
Tarot card 13 = Death
Tarot card 14 = Fama
Tarot Cards 15-20 = 6 cards, which somehow present Time (as a theory)
Tarot card 21 = Eternity


Seeing this, I realize the contrdiction, that Father Time appears in the row 15-20, but I see, that the sentence of Boiardo and the 3 examples of Petrarca with Fama and Morte somehow attracted the word "Sol".

Now "Sol" also presents "Time", as we count time in days and years. "Sol = sun" is between the trumps-group 15-20. Chastity is accompanied by virtues and virtues appear in the group 7-12.

And so Alciato's poem makes sense.

So what I see then, is naturally not the true order of Tarot, but just an order, which was interpreted or generated by Alciato in maybe 1538 or 1543 or somehow around this time ... for a not clear reason, but somehow with a view on the Petrarca-model of the Trionfi. Perhaps there was somebody with the same idea before (no data about Fame = 14 before Alciato), but we can't say so (but there is a reason for a deeper suspicion on the Teofilo Folengo poem of 1527). But it's indicated, that the Sol-Fama phenomenon later was taken by Vievil and the Belgian Tarocchi. However, how this happened, is for the moment also still dark.

... .-) nice finding, Steven

Boiardo's passage ...

Dopo la morte sol fama n' avanza,
E veramente son color tapini,
Che d' aggrandirla sempre non han cura,
Perché sua vita poco tempo dura.

... contains a "tempo" (time) a little later than the "Dopo la morte sol fama". Likely we can only conclude, that Boiardo reflected Petrarca's row of the 6 Trionfi in his poem. If he also thought in this context of the complete Tarocchi series, that we cannot say (at least not for the moment, perhaps better arguments will appear).

[Huck]

Ross had then 1543, Mike spoke of 1538

My edition was the one of 1543; I haven't seen the earlier ones. It might be wrong to assume it is there, but I suspect it would be.

Perhaps it will become of greater interest to clear this question. Perhaps also the Teofil Folengo poem should be discussed again.

[Huck]

Some of the main questions I have when comparing these early decks:
What is the relationship between the Noblet and the Francois Heri deck that obviously shares some heritage with it? Where did Noblet get some of the unusual iconography, and how does Heri have it as well? In other words, is there a special relationship between the Noblet in France and the Heri in Switzerland? It's easy to just look at the Heri and say that it is a copy of the Noblet, but one of the features of the Besancon in general that I find particulary curious is the clouds on the lovers card. The Noblet and the Dodal seem "wrong" to me, the area around the cupid seems very out of place compared to the rest of the cards. On the Besancon, there are clouds, and these seem "right" to me, so... how is it that the Besancon got this feature "right" while none of the TdMs did? See here:
http://www.tarothistory.com/2008/04/09/ ... he-lovers/
It is especially noticible in comparing the Heri with the Noblet. This is why I'm always begging for more of the images of the Heri, I want to compare them with the Noblet and find the differences, they might tell us something. My secret question.. Did the Besancon come from the Tarot de Marseille, or did the Tarot de Marseille come from the Besancon?

Yes, this became also my question, when I worked on this theme. As I realized, that you're interested in this question, I begged you to observe this thread. My reasons to get this idea are likely rather different as yours, so maybe together they make more sense.

Generally I see, that the Noblet is older and the Vievil is older. When there is no older Marseille deck reachable, the logical conclusion would be to assume, that both influenced the Marseille, not vice versa. Generally this is not a MUST, but without further argument it would be the logical idea. I'm interested to hear about real arguments, which give the assumption more strength. The Belgians called their deck "cards of Suisse" and cards of Suisse might be easily cards similar to the Becancon Tarot. So the Vievil seems to be dependent on Switzerland developments
Everything, which is recognizable (by me) from the Cary Sheet, which is considered to be similar to the Marseille Tarot I also find in the Noblet, and the Noblet itself has many details of the Francois Heri deck in Besancon style (beside the two cards Juno and Jupiter, which are not in the Noblet). J. Heri himself was not from the Franche Compte with the city Besancon, but from Switzerland (Solothurn).

If you visit Solothurn with Google maps, then you find German street names. If you go 20 km to the West, then you find French location names. Switzerland has 4 languages: German (64%), French(20%), Italian(6%), Rätoromansch (0.5%), Foreign (9%). Solothurn seems to have been part of the German zone, but the French language border seems to have been not far. It seems to be an interesting detail, that Solothurn became the place of a French embassy in Switzerland in 1530, where it stayed more than 250 years. This condition likely made it easier, that Suisse games could invade France (perhaps it would have been also easier, that French culture invaded Solothurn).
Dummett and McLeod found confirmation, that in Switzerland a first Tarot note was found in 1572, far before J. Heri.





Generally one has to think about this map of 1547.



This shows Habsburg territory in 1547. The Franche Compte, to which Besancon belonged, had been Habsburg territory then and it stayed so till 1678. Since 1566 it belonged to the Spanish Habsburger.
But the "Tarot de Besancon" was mainly played in the German-language regions of Switzerland. It seems to have been more used in regions in the neighborhood of the Italian border; a somehow logical development, if one assumes, that Tarocchi playing climbed in slow steps over the mountains of the alps.

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

Well, the Tarot de Paris ...

... :-) ... I'll announce, that I will (probably) challenge the dating of c. 1600 for the Tarot de Paris, at least for the concept of the deck (if the existent deck would be a later remake, which naturally is always a possibility, it naturally could be from 1600). I think, that the original was from 1559, more than 40 years older. So it's in the neighborhood of 1557 Lyon, the Catelyn Geofroy deck. The deck was likely (my opinion), influenced by Ludovico Gonzaga, the "man under suspicion", in 1559 just 20 years old, and serving in the French army.
Possibly it's a relevant idea, that Ludovico already influenced also the Catelin Geofroy version. He fought in the battle of St. Quentin in 1457 for France, and he became prisoner then. St Quentin is in the neighborhood of the small location, from which I assume, that the family name Vieville developed.

I just have to check a few things.

I may remember to the document 1559, in which a Roman playing card trader had French decks, but no Tarot decks from France, but only from Italy, mainly from Ferrara.

[mikeh]

Huck wrote

Ross had then 1543, Mike spoke of 1538

Then Ross commented

My edition was the one of 1543; I haven't seen the earlier ones. It might be wrong to assume it is there, but I suspect it would be.

My "1538" came from Huck's quote from Vitali, http://www.letarot.it/page.aspx?id=220&lng=ENG, in the first post in this thead:

But the jurist Andrea Alciati, the famous author of the Emblemata in another of his works, the Parergon Juris appeared for the first time in 1538, in Chapter XVI named De ludis nostri temporis...

and there follows the passage about "cross," "fama," etc.

I assumed that Vitali knew what he was talking about. I have not checked the 1538 edition personally, except to verify that there was one--two or three, actually. according to WorldCat.

I have a question: what does "sol" mean in the Petrarch, Boiardo, and Folengo, where it occurs along with "fama." I can't see where there is a word in the English translations corresponding to it. It does not seem to mean "sun": does it mean "alone," or what?

Also, Huck, what is your source for the dates you listed for Alciato, saying that he moved back to Italy in 1533 (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=747&start=10#p10712), not 1438 as the Catholic Encyclopedia states (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01273b.htm)? It would not be the first time the Catholic Encyclopedia was wrong, but I would like to know the contrary sources.