Here is a translation of the last of the four most recently posted notes of Franco's, this one of "1498 – Trionfi, libri dei Tornabuoni," posted at https://www.naibi.net/A/TORNABUONI.pdf on July 28, 2024. Comments in brackets are mine, in consultation with Franco, for explanatory purposes.


1498 – Trionfi, books of the Tornabuoni

Franco Pratesi

1. Introduction

Continuing my research on the Magistracy of Minors collection prior to the Principality [fondo Magistrato dei Pupilli avanti il Principato] in the State Archives of Florence (ASFi), I have examined the manuscript of the Campione series of inventories and accounts, revised No. 181: Quarters Santa Maria Novella and San Giovanni 1495-1501 (part of the 15th Campione).

An inventory of some interest can be found in correspondence with the prestigious Tornabuoni family, certainly one of the oldest in Florence, if we consider that it was born simply with a "strategic" change of surname from the even older one of Tornaquinci (to avoid, as magnates, being ousted from high public office).

After a long presence at the top of the city, in the era in question they found themselves following the Medici themselves closely, including close family ties. In this case, not only the family is known but also the members themselves involved here, starting with the grandfather Giovanni Tornabuoni, who was Lorenzo the Magnificent's uncle and papal treasurer.

The marriage of Lorenzo di Giovanni in 1486 to Giovanna degli Albizzi marked an attempt to bring the two long-adversarial families closer together. This Giovanna was one of the most beautiful Florentine young women, painted several times in portraits and frescoes by Ghirlandaio and Botticelli. The Tornabuoni family was known for its patronage, and among other works, the famous Tornabuoni Chapel in Santa Maria Novella remains as one evidence.

Lorenzo was born in Florence in 1465 to Giovanni and Francesca di Luca Pitti, and his closeness to the Medici was fatal to him: together with four other conspirators who intended to re-establish the hegemony of the Medici during the Savonarola republic (destined to end shortly after), he was condemned to death and beheaded in the Bargello Palace on 21 August 1497.

The specific case of the inventory in question concerns the inheritance left by Lorenzo di Giovanni to his ten-year-old sons Giovanni, born to his first wife Giovanna degli Albizzi (who died in childbirth at the age of twenty, at the end of her second pregnancy), and five-year-old Leonardo, three-year-old Francesca and one-year-old Giovanna, children of his second wife Ginevra Gianfigliazzi.

2. Saint Stefano in Pane

The inventories begin on c. 141r with that of 5 January 1498 relating to one of the villas that the family owned in the Florentine countryside, in this case, a villa purchased a few decades before in the parish of Santo Stefano in Pane, and in particular in "Chiasso a Macieregli." Chiasso Macerelli is a road that goes up from Rifredi to Careggi and in the twentieth century took the name of Via Taddeo Alderotti.

The Tornabuoni, in addition to their possessions in the area, long had the patronage of the pieve [main church of a group of parishes, ten or so constituting a diocese] of Santo Stefano in Pane, and three priests of the family were pieve priests in the 16th and 17th centuries (elsewhere, somewhat curiously, as many as four members of the family were bishops of Spoleto during the sixteenth century). This pieve has always had a particular importance in the area, which continued as it transformed from a country pieve into a suburban parish in Rifredi, until recently an important working-class neighborhood with many factories, starting with the Officine Galileo precisely in Chiasso Macerelli.

To get an idea of this long history, I think the brief description by Alberto Andreoni on the website of the same parish is sufficient. [note 1] Before industrialization, the area was especially famous for its country villas. The panorama of the time is difficult to imagine today, but the nearby and much more famous Villa di Careggi was similarly at the center of agricultural estates belonging to the Medici family for centuries and only recently habitually welcomed writers and philosophers. In connection with the
_____________________
1. https://www.pieverifredi.it/storia_arte.php


2
Villa Medici in Careggi, there were other villas of rich Florentines who, like the Tornabuoni, also gravitated culturally around the artistic and literary environment of the Medici.

Some information on the history of the villa in question, then Villa Lemmi, can also be found on Wikipedia, [note 2] and detailed information is collected in several books; note 3 to see some of the frescoes from Tornabuoni times involved here - found in the 19th century - you have to go to the Louvre.
Villa Tornabuoni Lemmi from Via Incontri (2024)
Church of Santo Stefano in Pane (2024) The inventory of household goods in the villa (purchased in 1469) was compiled on 4 January 1498; I have reproduced the page in question and transcribed the elements of interest.
_______________
2. https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villa_Lemmi
3. For example: Villa Tornabuoni-Lemmi di Careggi. Rome 1988


3 ASFi, Magistracy of Minors prior to the Principality, 181, f. 141v (Reproduction prohibited)

In the bed-chamber of the section above said room

One piata [pietà] and one small tabernacle [Typically the container for consecrated hosts on the (church) altar, but could also be a setting for religious images at home]
1 wooden bed frame with walnut cornices and inlay, 4 arm-lengths with supports and cane
1 raw mattress [two sheets sewn together, with stuffing] in two pieces
1 side mattress with old wool
1 striped quilt [choltricie] vergata [?], good, of feathers
2 primacci [large pillows or small quilts] of said bed, weight s. 4
1 pair of used 4-piece sheets
1 thick quilt [coltrone] with cottonwool, good
1 white quilt [choltra] with more work, good
2 good bed pillows
1 set of curtains with hangings around [the bed] as a pavilion
1 covered small bed antique-style of walnut of about 5 arm-lengths with chappellinaio [“hatrack” on wall, thus suitable for various items of clothing]
1 side [?] mattress with green wool cloth [weaving?]
2 pillows, of tapestry and leather
1 pair of pillows for small bed
1 used Parisian-style blanket for small bed, used

4

1 large bed towel
2 chests with 4 fasteners around said bed and in the 1st
1 chalice with enameled silver cup
1 missal in form and 1 piece of press [iron or other pressing device]
1 silver and bone pacie [“peace” tablet kissed during the mass]
1 brocaded altar front with 2 cloths
1 chasuble [liturgical vestment], brocaded
1 embroidered red velvet surplice
1 stole of blue velvet, amice [liturgical garment worn at the neck], and brocaded manipola [or manipolo, strap around the wrist, descending one or two hand-lengths]
1 surplice, used, and 1 amice, used
1 small bell and 2 brass chandeliers
1 book of triumphs of Petrarch

At f. 144r, after the household goods, the land and house possessions in the area are listed and the second inventory relating to the other country property begins.

3. San Michele in Castello

There follows the inventory of the villa of the Brache located in the parish of Santo Michele in Castello, a place known as le brache, made on 6 January 1497 [1498 in the current system] by the hands of Bernardo Ughuccioni first and Francescho a Careggi.

If the Careggi area could be considered a countryside suitable for holidays, that of Castello, further away from the walls of Florence in the same direction, was perhaps even more so, and numerous villas built in the area over the centuries on the low slopes in the foothills of Monte Morello remain as evidence, among which the famous Medici Villas of Castello and Petraia excel.

As usual, the inventory of household goods refers only to the villa, where the Tornabuoni family holidayed. ASFi, Magistracy of Minors prior to the Principality, 181, f. 145v. Detail (Reproduction prohibited)

5

In Giovanni's room

1 Our lady, painted in gesso
1 Saint Jerome painting
1. Simple bed frame attached to the small bed and chest and chappellinaio [“hatrack” on wall, also suitable to hang other clothing items]
1 raw mattress [?] of 2 pieces with sticks
1 rough fabric mattress with chapecchio [extra thickness at head end?]
2 rough fabric mattresses and 1 with blue fabric with wool
1 mattress of dense cotton or wool fabric full of cotton wool
1 primaccio [large pillow or small quilt] with Lombard filling
3 cotton heavy quilts [choltroni] used on said bed
1 rough fabric mattress with wool
1 Parisian-style quilt [choltre], used on said bed
1cottonwool quilt, used, for small bed
1 pillow of tapestry and leather used
1 platform pierced for invalids
1 chest with 2 fasteners, in antique style
1 simple panel of 3 arm-lengths with trestles
1 dining table at 4 feet by 2 arm-lengths and 1 window covering
1 used walnut table
2 books covered in red in form of Guido's [probably referring to Livy's] decades and petrarcha's trionfi
1 pair of andirons of l. 32
1 dustpan 1 pair of tongs and 1 fork

After the inventory of household goods, f. 146r briefly lists the farms, workers' houses, and cultivated land that the family-owned locally.

4. The big house

In a rather unusual order, starting from c. 146v, after the inventories of the household goods in the two Tornabuoni country houses, we find the last inventory of this kind, relating to the stately home of the city, the Palazzo Tornabuoni, which still exists near the Palazzo Strozzi, despite renovations repeated over the centuries and with massive reconstructions on the occasion of Florence as capital [of Italy].

A large house with its vaults and courtyard rooms and bedchambers and other homes and apartments located in the parish of Santo Branchazio of Florence and in via de beglisporti.

Two other houses are also listed, one adjacent, the other also nearby, in Via dei Ferravecchi. I have not seen the date of this inventory, but it cannot be far from the previous ones.

The inventory occupies eight pages written in two columns and therefore highlights the abundance of objects, as could be expected from the family's well-known wealth. Somewhat surprisingly, we find very few books listed. Of gaming objects we only find a chessboard; that there are no playing cards or triumphs present corresponds to the general situation, such that they are only recorded in extremely rare cases. Instead, some musical instruments appear.

In the ground floor room in the entrance hall: 1 viola with bow, 2 zufoli [early flutes or recorders?] to play, and 1 chessboard. a bone horn with works. In the chamber of the golden ceiling: 1 large harp for playing.

This inventory ends on f. 150r.

5. Comments and conclusion

The reason why I have reported this information does not directly concern playing cards or triumphs, but "only" the books of Francesco Petrarch's Trionfi. We are now at the end of the fifteenth century, and finding these books in the homes of ancient Florentine families cannot be a surprise. But there are some open questions about it.


6
An initial question is whether there could have been printed books or manuscripts. If it had been a list of new or very recently produced objects, the choice would plausibly go towards the press, but no one can certify that these books had not been preserved as they were in the family for decades. Incidentally, I don't know of a printed book that contains both the Deche and the Trionfi, but I don't have enough experience in this regard. Personally, however, I am inclined, at least in this case, towards a manuscript, also on the basis of the book's binding.

Perhaps more significant is trying to understand the relevance of these two books for the personages of the Tornabuoni family. We know from other sources that there was a rich library in the family. Here we can only glimpse something of the kind when we read that: "In the study of the country house of Santo Stefano in Pane, there are 30 volumes of Latin and Vernacular books, unfortunately not better identified.

Instead, the Trionfi have a unique and prominent role. An example is present in both villas, and it is as if it had taken the place of a book of the Gospels, or of Dante. Ultimately, it is this unexpected role that gives all the information particular importance.

Florence, 07.28.2024

mikeh wrote: 10 Aug 2024, 21:01 I thought that Poggio's commentary was only on the Triumph of Fame, and that the 1473 commentary was anonymous. At least that is what D. D. Carnicelli said in Romance Philology, Vol. 23, No. 1 (August 1969), pp. 57-64. Of course that was a while back. I queried Franco on both of these, but he is not able to give any further clarification.

Indeed, my "consensus" is too strong. He has been suggested as the author, though. The University of Manchester page on the book says "probably":
"The Triumphi with commentary, attributed to Franciscus Philelphus in the colophon but probably that of Jacopo di Poggio (Bracciolini). Printed by Andreas Portilia in Parma, dated 1473."
https://www.digitalcollections.manchest ... -18977/250

Sonia Maura Barillari, «La “coppia d’Arimino” fra il Triumphus cupidinis e il Purgatorio di san Patrizio. (Una ballata per Viola Novella dal codice Magliabechiano VII, 1078)» in Paolo Canettieri and Arianna Punzi, eds., Dai pochi ai molti. Studi in onore di Roberto Antonelli, Rome, 2014, pp. 89-114; see page 95 note 29:

Fra le attribuzioni proposte per il Commento Portilia vi è anche quella a Jacopo di Poggio Bracciolini. Per ulteriori approfondimenti rinvio a C. Bianca, "Filelfo, Petrarca et alii: ipotesi per un commento ai Trioni," in «quaderni petrarcheschi», 7 (1990), pp. 217-229.

https://www.academia.edu/7001507/_La_co ... _VII_1078_

I haven't been able to see Concetta Bianca's paper in order to learn about the arguments given for and against Iacopo's authorship.

While I haven't found a downloadable copy of the 1473 Portilia text yet, there is something better, a critical edition (because using the manuscripts upon which the 1473 printing is partly based):

Sandra Rizzardi, Il commento "Portilia" ai Trionfi di F. Petrarca (edizione critica), thesis at the Università Ca' Foscari Venezia, 2004.

Text downloadable from the link which says "View/Open" at the bottom of this page:
http://dspace.unive.it/handle/10579/319

I can't find Bianchi online either. However, the PhD dissertation you found has some useful comments in the introduction. My translation follows these png files. Comments in brackets are my translations of the Latin (a language I don't really know!). Poggio isn't mentioned, and instead two other suggestions, both of whom seem credible, especially the first, and who do have some connection to Filelfo, for whom, at least the name, has some basis in the text. Here is the relevant section, pp. XXVIII-XXX of Rizzardi's introduction.

XXVIII
...
§ 5. The problem of the authorship of the commentary.
Finally, a few words on the problem of the authorship of the commentary, not yet resolved but close to a solution at least as regards the estensore (as S calls him) of the commentary, i.e. the second redactor and reviser of the archaic glosses. The attribution to Francesco Filelfo is found in manuscripts P and H, and can be deduced from the final couplets of the incunabulum S (and of the ms suo descriptus Co), a sort of farewell addressed to the reader, where however only the surname is mentioned ( ... perlege: Philelphi nam commentario... [...read through: Philelphus for the commentary...]), which could also make you think of his son Gian Mario Filelfo; all the other witnesses are adespoti [nameless], even the most authoritative among them, such as Ash, T, for the complete comment, and Pv for the partial one. This gives rise to the possibility that the certain attribution of manuscripts P and H originates in some way from the same misunderstanding that the couplets can generate (an antigraph with only the surname Filelfo?). Secondly, as we see in Concetta Bianca's study 25, several times

XXIX
Francesco Filelfo, questioned by friends about his alleged commentary on the Trionfi, flatly denied having ever written one. Ultimately, in the first part of the commentary there seems to be a serious error (as Allenspach 22 also observes), which Filelfo would never have made (and we are referring to the first part, because the crudeness of the second excludes a priori any Filelfian revision): see at comment to Tr. C. IV, vv 22-24, Ash 47r:

L'uno era Ovidio, l'altro era Catullo / L'altro Propertio che d'amor cantavo / fervidamente. L'altro era Tibullo. Ovidio fu da Sulmona. Catullo di Verona. Gli altri appresso furono greci. Tutti questi quano compuosero libri de amore come dice lo testo.

One was Ovid, another was Catullo / Another Propertio that sang of love / fervently. Another was Tibullo. Ovid was from Sulmona. Catullus of Verona. The others after were Greeks. All these four composed books of love as the text says.

In any case, the error seems to be reduced a bit if we compare this gloss with another very similar one, from which we understand how these "archaic" notations could only have been made by the first closatore: see, in the comment of Tr. F. III, v 90, Ash 265v:

Seneca fu il più morale uomo che avesse Grecia, overo Italia nel tempo suo, fu preceptore di Claudio Nerone, fu amicissimo dello apostolo Paulo.

Seneca was the most moral man in Greece, or Italy in his time, he was preceptor of Claudius Nero, he was a very close friend of the apostle Paul.

As regards the attribution to Giovan Mario Filelfo, there is only one certain piece of data, introduced by Dionisotti 23, which however still needs to be analyzed: around 1471 Giovan Mario compiled a list of his works composed up until then in a Latin elegy to Bartolomeo Girardino, where he recalls one of his Petrarchan comments "tightened by a more serious knot than his father's," probably meaning his comment on the Trionfi after that of Filelfo on the RVF: Francisci numeros nodo graviore Petrarcae adstrictos prosa sedulus explicui [Franciscus's numbers tied by Petrarch's heavier knot I elaborated in prose].

Dionisotti also has suggested, however indirectly, another candidate for the authorship of the commentary, where, describing the ms Forster Request 436 (formerly 48.D.28) of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, evidence of a commentary on the Canzoniere by Francesco Patrizi and an unknown partial commentary on the Trionfi (which stops at the Tr. Famae la), assigns this also with strong probability to Patrizi 25. Concetta Bianca foreshadows the possibility that this same commentary is that of the "pseudo-Filelfo," at the same time suggesting with Belloni to compare the London manuscript with Marciano R. IX 227 (=6888), which also contains a commentary on the Trionfi 26.

In addition to these elements, the significant diffusion of the pseudo-Filelfian commentary in Neapolitan (4 mss out of 15 are by a Neapolitan copyist, excluding the incunabulum and the descriptus of this) now directs the research in the direction of the Sienese Francesco Patrizi (born in 1413, pupil of Filelfo in Siena), bishop of Gaeta and humanist, protected by the Duke of Calabria, former commentator of the RVF (the fact that many manuscripts are written in Neapolitan does not mean that the original was in this language, it was enough that the Sienese Patrizi was surrounded by Neapolitan copyists; after all, T and P, which are Neapolitan, are almost copies of each other, but are less close to the original than Ash). Also remember the precision with which the Neapolitan area and the southern Pontine is described in some glosses
_____________
22 ALLENSPACH 1993, 293.
23 DIONISOTTI 87-88.
24 C. BIANCA 1990, 222; see the eulogy in L. AGOSTINELLI and G. BENADUCCI, Biografia e bibliografia di Giovan Mario Filelfo, Tolentino 1899, 31-34.
25 DIONISOTTI 92-93. See also N. MANN, 331-332, who refers to Dionisotti.
26 G. BELLONI, "Manoscritti veneziani e prime stampe venete," in Ateneo Veneto, n.s., XXI (1983), 42-43; C. BIANCA 1990, 223.

XXX
(at Tr . P., 163-168; cf. Ash, f. 64v), requires that the commentator has at least stayed in these southern areas.

My tentative conclusion is that the Tornabuoni were well enough connected with the literati of Florence that, he would not have bothered buying it, since it would quickly have been an object of ridicule. Carnicelli, in the article I cited previously, p. 58, says of the anonymous 1473 commentary that it "was so bad and so incomplete that it was never reprinted." Illicino's was an immediate success. He seems to have been living in Siena at the time: Treccani traces him there in 1474 as his last known residence. [Added later in day: The statement about Tibullus and Propertius being Greek is, or was originally, perhaps only to say that they wrote in a Greek elegaic manner. See dissertation p. 220. I do not know what to make of the statement about Seneca.]