Now for my comments. To include all these various cards, the concept of "love" must be somewhat broader than it is in Petrarch, to include love of God (Pope, Popess), love of family and the social hierarchy(emperor, empress), perhaps love of the bizarre or, if the Bateleur is offering the shell game, riches. In that way he triumphs over the Fool, if that card was originally number 1. Either or both (or a hybrid) can triumph over--i.e. get the better of--Kings and so, while being the lowest of their suit, higher than any of the regular suit cards.
For Chastity, the idea of including a variety of virtues gets some support in the poem itself, where Chastity is not alone but has other virtues with her (see section 1 above). But Justice is not one of them, nor Temperance or Fortitude. In Petrarch, is specifically the virtues that have a particular relation to sexual morality: modesty, shame, fear of infamy. But Temperance, i.e. self-control, is also related to Chastity, and so is Fortitude. To include Justice as well, we have to go beyond sex, to Virtue. We need not be faithful to Petrarch; but the deck is getting further from the poems.
Moakley suggested that the celestials belong with Eternity, whereas Huck put them with Time. Well, in Petrarch, the Star is in both Fame (as an "amorous star", an object of love by those that desire her) and Eternity. And Time is the whirling of the heavens, with the Sun his main image. Eternity is the end of all that Yet it creates everything (including Fame, Chastity, and Love, I think) in a new form ((http://petrarch.petersadlon.com/read_tr ... ge=VI-I.en):
So apparently the celestials exist in a new form after the end of time, without whirling. But in that case, as I have said earlier in this thread, they lose their special relationship to the triumph in which they appear. So I think Moakley is wrong, at least in the sense of not fitting the poem. The celestials belong to Petrarchan Time. On the other hand, Petrarchan Time can be modified to fit the celestials: in the ancient pagan world it was thought that the celestials were "eternal, but in time". It is a non-biblical concept of Time. Then we avoid the awkward predicament of having three cards representing Time in one place, and 1 card representing Time in another....If all things
That are beneath the heavens are to fail,
How, after many circlings, will they end?
So ran my thought; and as I pondered it
More and more deeply, I at last beheld
A world made new and changeless and eternaL
I saw the sun, the heavens, and the stars
And land and sea unmade, and made again
More beauteous and more joyous than before.
Past, present, future: these I saw combined
In a single term, and that unchangeable:
No swiftness now, as there had been before.
The sun no more will pause in the Bull or the Fish,...
In medieval symbolism, the celestials did sometimes represent time. If so, the Old Man's hourglass is either a relic of times gone by, when it did represent Petrarchan Time, or it never did represent the whirlings after death, but only those before death. Either way, his position before Death is a modification of Petrarch. But if we can modify Love and Chastity, why not also Time?
We are left with Fame and Eternity. In minchiate, there is a Fama card, the card ordinarily then called Angel and later Judgment. In Petrarch, Judgment is associated only with the triumph of Eternity:
No secret shall be covered or be hid,
And every conscience, be it clear or dark,
Will then be open before all the world.
There will be One whose judgment will be sure,
And we shall see each sinner go his way
Like a driven beast seeking a forest cave.
Since Eternity is also the last Petrarchan triumph, it makes sense that the Angel of Judgment should be associated with Eternity. However the Angel is also associated with Fama, in the sense of "eternal glory" and also by the trumpet. Y Either is plausible.
Then there is the question of what to do with the card called the World. Is it part of the "Eternity" group? If so, then it represents the transcendence of the World, in the sense of the material world. Maybe a figure standing on a circle representing the world can count as such, especially if it is part of group and so doesn't have to be last, as in the A order. In the B order, it could represent Eternity easily, since it is after the Angel of Judgment and God's Justice.
But in the A order cards it also has attributes of Fame: the Boccaccian globe and sword, and the circle containing the world. If so, the figure on top of the world would be "on top of the world", in the sense of being master of it. There is also the question of the PMB World card: is it the Fame of Sforza's remodeled city, or the New Jerusalem, which looks rather like Sforza's program?
Yet some, historically, seem to have felt uncomfortable about its being Fame, especially when in the B and C orders, where it is at the end of the sequence and has no particular attributes of Fame. So Alciati calls the 14th card Fama and has no Temperance card. And Vieville gives the lady pouring from one vessel to another with the words "FAMA SOL".
I also wonder whether the Star card might be considered Fame. Another candidate might be the Tower card; the tower of Babel, according to the vulgate, was built to "make our name famous:
The card would be a moral lesson about the evil of working for earthly fame.venite faciamus nobis civitatem et turrem cuius culmen pertingat ad caelum et celebremus nomen nostrum...
(...let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven; and let us make our name famous.)
To sum up: Moakley's idea has the virtue of including all the cards. However to fit any existing order, Petrarchan concepts, including their order, have to be adjusted considerably. And even then it is not clear which cards go where, or if one or more triumph simply doesn't fit.
This is not to say that something like Moakley's thinking didn't affect the order and make-up of the 22 triumphs. For Love, the generalized idea does fit. For Chastity, the B order fits best, since Fortitude and Temperance are not hard to relate to Chastity, whereas Justice fits more easily with Eternity and the Last Judgment. If the concept of Chastity is further generalized to include Virtue generally, then the A order fits best.
However this result must be qualified: even Milan has a good claim to fit Petrarch, however not in the 16th century C order but earlier, because in the Cary-Yale all but one of the Petrarchans are represented, and that one, Time, is represented in the PMB. In that case, however, the Petrarchans apply not to groups but only to those specific cards, and whether they fit the Petrarchan order is not clear. For the 5 that have survived, following the order suggested by the Beinecke suit-assignments, they in fact do, as can be seen by the titles in all capitals that I reproduced before.
From this perspective, that Temperance follows Death is not a change from a pre-existing order where it preceded Death (as in A and B), but rather a property of an even earlier order in Milan