The coin praises the Patriarch of Aquileja, not the cardinal. So perhaps one should suspect a date after December 18 1439, and likely for merits, that Trevisan had earned in Florence as archbishop during the council.
Impossible for any connection to the Council because Trevisan did not have the Patriarch title when the bull was proclaimed. Also note this from The Renaissance Portrait:
“…the medal is unlikely to date after 1445 [not “until the end of his life” as your reference incorrectly stated], when the cardinal made over the temporal powers associated with the ancient patriarchate of Acquileia to Venice in return for an annual salary of five thousand ducats.” (325)
... :-) ... no, if Trevisan still got 5000 ducats annually from Venice for it, then he still owned something. These patriarch titles often even belonged to places, which were totally out of control of the church, nonetheless they used the title of it (perhaps with the argument, that time might change the political situation). I think, that my source is correct.
So Lorenzo Zane had been "patriarca d'Antiochia" in 1473 ...
and got the commission to become active in crusade activities in 1473/74, which made him travel to Greece. As the situation didn't improve, he got military commission to help surrender rebellious cities close to Rome.
His coin used a motif from the Mantegna Tarocchi.
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=463&hilit=mantegna ... i&start=89
The researchers likely had a not justified consideration with their consideration. Nonetheless it seems plausible, that Trevisan would have used the cardinal title for the medal, if it presented the battle of Anghiari.
If the medal were celebrating an event while Trevisan was a cardinal it would have surely listed that title. But given he was Patriarch only from December 1439 (after the Council) until the day after Anghiari, July 1 1440, that means the medal celebrated an event within that narrow six month period. But there is no need to guess what the event was, he was elevated to cardinal right after Anghiari – the medal retrospectively lists his correct title at the time of the battle, his valor during which allowed his elevation. The soldiers parading before a classical temple on the medal clearly indicates a military victory – absolutely nothing to do with the Union.
It might be so, but it's by far not secure. The battle of Anghiari didn't restore Ecclesia ... or do you see an aspect? Perhaps it could be interpreted as a victory against the anti-pope Felix?
In the center of the medal scene there appear two persons, and one seem to kiss the other ... the figures are too small to recognize, if it's really a kiss. If "Western church kissed Eastern church" we would know, that it meant the result of the council.
Besides Neri (whom Cosimo dealt with the next year by having Neri’s personal ally, Baldaccio d’Anghiari, another character indirectly leading us to Giusti’s sphere of operations, unceremonially thrown out of the tower of the Palazzo Vecchio in September 1441), you are forgetting Benedetto de Medici, a cousin of Cosimo’s, who requested the same rewards as Neri in the same dispatches after the battle of Anghiari. In addition to those dispatches we have Machiavelli’s account where the specific term of triumphal is used:
Benedetto de' Medici, finding the report of Niccolo having proceeded either to Rome or to La Marca, incorrect, returned with his forces to Neri, and they proceeded together to Florence, where the highest honors were decreed to them which it was customary with the city to bestow upon her victorious citizens, and they were received by the Signory, the Capitani di Parte, and the whole city, in triumphal pomp. (History of Florence, Book V, Chapter VII).
Well, it would likely help, if we would have all arguments, which underline the triumphal activities following the battle of Anghiari together.
And Castagno, who painted the Albizzi faction as hanged men on what we now call the Bargello after the battle, was patronized by this very same Benedetto. The Bargello is on the traditional processional route through Florence where a triumph would have been lead, leading to the Duomo, itself lit up (obviously with torches) to celebrate Anghiari (see the references to Anghiari in Kent, Cosimo's Ouevre).
It would indeed be helpful, if you give such information with a direct link. At least in the case, that you're interested to be understood.
In regard to the closeness of the Papacy, Medici and even Giusti at this juncture, I did not realize this tidbit you dredged up:
Trevisan got for Anghiari the cardinal title, that's already praise, and a celebration at 20th of July. Possibly Giusto stayed for this celebration, cause he left at the 21st of July.
So this shows the Papacy caught up in parallel celebrations of Anghiari to that of the Medici, and places Giusti as exposed to this ‘triumphal pomp’ (the proposed ur-tarot deck celebrating the “Holy Alliance” of Florence and the Papacy – the battle did not happen in the Veneto so obviously no need to celebrate absent Venice, also part of the alliance…an ambiguous partner at all events as events a decade later would prove). If Giusti never mentions ‘naibi’ before but is suddenly commissioning a deck for a condottiero prince re-allied with Cosimo, Malatesta, it seems natural that he is mimicking something already happening in Florence at this precise time in connection with Anghiari.
The observation is, that Giusto left at the 21st of July, but his condottiero (likely in company of some of his soldiers) left at the 17th. As Giusto had "diplomatic function" for his condottiero, he might still have had a few things to do in Florence. Visiting the celebration for Trevisan might have been one of his points.
Giusto had indeed not much time to arrange something in Florence, arriving at 8th/9th of July and leaving at 21st. Well, he might have heard in his soldier camp, that a serial production of Trionfi decks had been done in Florence. He even might have heard about a project to produce something like this already during his stay. He might have commissioned a deck specified on Malatesta heraldry in expectation, that he wished to improve his personal relations to Malatesta.
Condottieridiventura.it has for Malatesta
http://condottieridiventura.it/index.ph ... di-brescia
Niccolò Piccinino è pesantemente sconfitto da Micheletto Attendolo e da Pietro Giampaolo Orsini ad Anghiari: Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta cerca di correre ai ripari ed ospita a Rimini Oddantonio da Montefeltro.
Malatesta has a visit of his earlier foe.
Stipula un trattato di alleanza con il signore di Faenza Guidantonio Manfredi; si incontra sulla porta di Cotogni con Pietro Giampaolo Orsini.
Guidantonio Manfredi belonged to those, who had attacked Anghiari.
http://condottieridiventura.it/index.ph ... o-manfredi
"Porta Cotogni" is a place in Forli, likely a door in the city wall.
The meeting with Pietro Giampaolo Orsini, who had fought in Anghiari on the side of Florence, should have caused, that Malatesta changed sides (?). We should find a better description of this action.
... Malatesta fights for Firenze against Milano
Combatte i ducali agli ordini di Francesco Sforza, mentre il fratello Domenico si conduce al soldo dei Visconti. Colloca il campo a Ronco ed assedia Forlimpopoli: i difensori hanno spesso la meglio sui suoi uomini. Si accampa a Selbagnone ed assedia Forlì.
The brother Domenico is at the other side. Malatesta should be already around Forli. Giusto (and his connected army) is possibly around Cesena (Domenico's location).
Occupa Bagnacavallo, Massa Lombarda ed altre terre dell’imolese; non può, o non vuole, impedire a Francesco Piccinino l’ingresso in Forlì. Danneggia molti villaggi e tenta di espugnare il capoluogo. Vista l'inanità dell' impresa si sposta prima a Forlimpopoli con gli altri condottieri. A metà ottobre i fiorentini prendono la strada di Capodicolle e della val di Savio: Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta si ferma a San Vittore perché trattenuto dai fiumi in piena. Le milizie fiorentine proseguono per la Toscana; egli deve, invece, fermarsi per qualche giorno in quanto non può trovare riparo a Cesena dal momento che il fratello milita al soldo del duca di Milano. Rientra a Rimini.
At 16th September Malatesta gets the deck. This should have been in the camp near Forli.
For Pietro Giampaolo Orsini
we have after the battle of Anghiari ...
http://condottieridiventura.it/index.ph ... manoppello
Si accampa con Micheletto Attendolo a Sansepolcro alla testa di 6000 cavalli, di 7000 fanti e di numerose cernite: Niccolò Piccinino si rifugia a Pistoia. Pietro Giampaolo Orsini può così spostarsi e con il commissario Neri Capponi costringe Francesco di Poppi, alleato dei viscontei, a cedere ai fiorentini Poppi ed a liberare tutti i prigionieri che sono nelle sue mani. Rientra, di seguito, in Romagna; si incontra con Sigismondo Pandolofo Malatesta sulla porta di Codogni a Forlì.
The same meeting with Malatesta, but no details. But we should see: Orsini seems not to belong to those, who celebrate in Florence and start to discuss, who had the greater merits in the battle. The word "incontra" reappears again and actually it means, that Malatesta and Orsini fight with each other.
Si muove a Montevecchio, sopra Civitella di Romagna; si attenda a Galeata ed a San Zeno in Volpinara; si trasferisce nei pressi di Fiumana e con il cardinale Scarampo, alla testa di 6000 uomini, conquista Pedrignano. Attacca Forlimpopoli (caduta a maggio in potere di Antonio Ordelaffi) con Micheletto Attendolo; si unisce loro anche Sigismondo Pandolfo Malatesta (che nel frattempo ha mutato bandiera), pone i suoi alloggiamenti a Selbagnone ed assedia Forlì. Ottiene la rocca di Bagnacavallo, senza che Francesco Piccinino e Guidantonio Manfredi trovino l'ardire di venire in soccorso dei difensori. Si sposta nel forlivese con il cardinale Scarampo ed assedia vanamente il capoluogo.
This indicates, that Malatesta's change to the other side happened later than his "incontra" meeting with Orsini.
As long Malatesta hadn't changed the sides, Giusto hadn't a good reason to think about a Trionfi deck for Malatesta. As it doesn't look really plausible (at least for the moment), that Giusto knew about "Malatesta on the side of Florence" before 21st of July, one has to conclude, that he couldn't think about a Trionfi deck for him before 21st of July.
Well, what do we know ...The Angari brothers were close to Malatesta. Perhaps they understood the intentions of Malatesta better than everybody else.
As long Malatesta was in risk, that Piccinino might get the idea, that he could attack with his army Rimini, Malatesta wasn't interested to be on another side as Piccinino.
If Piccinino was weakened enough, that wouldn't be such a big problem. And perhaps the Angari brothers and also Giusto had a secret understanding in this matter.
Giusto had visited Malatesta to trade the freedom of Gregorio in May 1440. And this worked. There was opportunity to talk "secret words" and declare the position of Malatesta against and for Florence and the reasons for it. Naturally this was nothing for the official records, and one can't find documents about such things. If this was done different, Malatesta would have looked as a traitor and this would have been bad for his reputation as condottiero.