Tarot History Forum

I know, that some totally neglect everything, that connect chess and Tarot. Nonetheless I personally think, that the reason, why this Tower-symbol ...
... was presented at No. 20, depends on the condition, that the Tower was connected to the Rook in Chess, and the Rook was the strongest figure on the chess board, and so it had to have a high position.

Similar in the Boiardo Tarocchi poem, we have in the 3-line tercet which corresponds to No 20 ...

Oblivion di termine e confine
Del tutto sei, Elice e Dido a Lethe
Menasti, e famma e tempo hai in toe ruine.

... the keyword "ruine" or in English "ruin" ...

Oblivion, you are the end and boundary
Of all, you took to Lethe Elice and Dido,
And among your ruins you have fame and time.

... together with the keywords Fame and Time (both keywords are connected to other tarot cards).

Fame and Time now appear in the tercets 19 and 21 ...

19 Time, you that hurry men to death,
You saved Nestor, and if in the end he came to an end,
It seems impossible to think of such a life.

...

21 Inner strength made happy the death of
Lucretia: to clean her fame
She killed herself, and she prepared for the offender a dark net,

Giving an example to those who love their own name and honour.

... so that I would think, that the intended row of Tarot symbols inside the Boiardo Tarocchi poem and sort of chess context would mean ...

19 TIME
20 TOWER (Rook)
21 FAME (Rook)

... though there are a confusing "death" mentioned in 19 and a confusing "strength" in 21 (again other Tarot card names).

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

Today I took a view on sun symbols (my post http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic ... 605#p15605 ) and looked for a possible sun in the Sola Busca, and I came up with the idea, that it must be No 16 ...
... cause of the symbol in the upper right corner.
I took a further look and detected a Moon at card No 12 presented with a ...
... bow and arrows, which fit to the bow form of the crescent.

I detected a star at No 13 (small, right upper corner) ...


... and going back to No 17, I found an Angel and ...
... a man with wings.

The numbers ...

... -12-13- ... -16-17- ... 20 ... have a rythm, especially, if I would conclude, that 21 would be Fame (or World).

12 Moon
13 Star
(14)
(15)
16 Sun
17 Angel
(18)
(19)
20 Tower
21 Fame (or World)


The six usual top trumps (16-21) seem to be rearranged by a sort of system.

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

At ...
http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic ... ivo#p14716
... MikeH once quoted the recent Sola-Busca literature. It contradicts my consideration above, and MikeH gave a critique on the base of his own arguments.

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

If I follow the system, that is indicated by my observation, I would expect, that No 4-5 and 8-9 would proceed with a presentation of cards, which belong to the upper part of the Tarot cards, which would be (likely) 15 Devil, 13 Death, Hanging Man and possibly Justice (high in Ferrara) or Temperance (high in Milan) or Father Time.

Number 5 ...


... has a strange tool in his hand, and we once discovered a similar tool in context of a "Father Time" at the Casa Rella in Trento.
http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic ... tulo#p9607

Finally we found, that the strange tool is part of a clock.

Great identification.

at ...
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foliot

Indeed it's interesting, that we've a clear mixing of Time (clock) and lantern.

So indeed, though this man looks rather young, this might have been, as expected, a modernized "Father Time".

Number 8
Twice hanging objects (the not identified object and the hanging boy), this might well address the Hanging Man, as expected in this group. MikeH also found to this interpretation, whereas the Italian Sola Busa text assumed a sure Justice. Neither MikeH nor the Sola-Busca exhibition text found a Father Time in number V, likely MikeH didn't remember the Casa Rella debate (or overlooked it).

Number 4
There's a not identified symbol in the left upper corner, and at other corners of other cards this position was used to identify the meaning.


It appeared in the Lorenzo Spirito lot book (1482) and was named "Cristallina". I reported then ...
http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic ... rito#p5698

The second group shows

1. Sole - these are planets
2. Saturno - ...
3. Venus - ...
4. Marte - ...
5. Luna - ...
6. Mercurio - ...
....
one expects now Jupiter, but now in pairs follows

7./8.Taurus - Gemini ... that are zodiac signs
9./10. Montone (that's a joke of the author ...looks like Aries, but what is it?) - Sagitario is zodiac sign
11./12. Aquario - Aries (Zodiak)
13./14. Capricorno - Cancer (Zodiak)
15./16. Scorpione - Apollo (on a triumphal chariot) ... well, Scorpio is zodiac, but Apollo is on triumphal march
17./18. Cristallina ???? ... that's the heaven of the stars and then follows Iove (= Jove) (as emperor - or helmed man - with eagle shield)
19./ 20. Virgo (again with unicorn, but now from other side) [+ Libra; I forgot to mention it there]

"Cristallina" (though not with this name) appears also variously in the Mantegna Tarocchi: at Apollo (20), at Astrology (29), at Theology (30), at Cosmico (33 and Octava Sphera (48) ...
... and in the case of Octava Sphera (48) it's also close to Jupiter (46) as in the lot book of Lorenzo Spirito ["17./18. Cristallina ???? ... that's the heaven of the stars and then follows Iove (= Jove) (as emperor - or helmed man - with eagle shield")]

I ... at least for this moment ... come to the conclusion, that there is possibly no devil, but just "Octava Sphera", perhaps interpreted as "darkest night, but the stars are stll burning". Perhaps the red flag from Mario tells, that one can easily misfigure this as "devilish".

Lorenzo Spirito's lot book is mainly about the wedding night (according my earlier analyses), perhaps we can discover, that the Sola-Busca also is more about the wedding night than about something else. I personally think, that it was made for the wedding of Alfonso d'Este with Anna Sforza in early 1491.

The last of the cards under suspicion is this one ...

Number 9
Nothing makes me think, that this is either Tarot Devil nor Tarot Death, but when I remember, that the devil was turned to be "Cristallina" and "Octava Sphera" and the painter 1491 possibly had studied the popular lotbook of Lorenzo Spirito printed in 1482, then I think, that this might be just Jupiter in a somewhat unusual position. "Falco" is the name, and this word could be not only used in falcon-context, but also in eagle-context, as it seems. Eagle and Jupiter together give a natural idea. Possibly the square numbers 4 (= 2*2) and "9 (= 3*3)" provoked the idea to throw devil and death out of the upper world for the occasion of a wedding night.

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

So far this all has some logic, but one has to accept the idea, that the designer didn't slavish follow older contexts; what indeed is difficult to assume, as the Sola-Busca is indeed ratzher different to other Trionfi decks.
Mato and Panfilio ("Panfilio" is an expression, wich has special meaning in early card games, so this might be a natural name for a card figure like the Pagat. So I get till now:

0 Matto ----- Chess pawns
1 Panfilio ----- Chess pawns
(2)
(3)
4 Cristallina-Mario ---- Chess-Queen, possibly Empress ?
5 Father Time, rather young
(6)
(7)
8 Hanging Man
9 Jupiter-Falco ---- Chess-King, possibly Emperor ?
(10)
(11)
12 Moon ----- chess-bishops ?????
13 Star ----- chess-bishops ?????
(14)
(15)
16 Sun ---- chess-knights ?????
17 Angel ---- chess knights ?????
(18)
(19)
20 Tower - Rook
21 Fame - Rook

Well, if indeed Jupiter-Falco has to be interpreted in a sexual manner (erected male genital), the accompanying "Hanging Man" as an opposite becomes a rather funny expression (hanging male genital) in contrast to the bloody action done by Nerone at this card.

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

So let's look, what's with the rest of it ... later.

I found an old post of Marco as "Dr. Arcanus" at Aeclectic at 08-01-2006, so a long time ago:

DoctorArcanus wrote:From http://www.attalus.org/latin/orosius.html

Paulus Orosius: Historiarum Adversum Paganos

I found that books 4, 5 and 6 of this ancient work refer to 18 of the majors of the Sola Busca deck. For the 4 missing majors, I think the interpretation suggested by Michael J Hurst can be accepted. I also follow the spelling corrections that Hurst and Tea suggest for Ipeo/Lenpio. Here are possible sources for all of the majors (book numbers refer to Orosius):

0. Mato - Tarot
I. Panfilio - Boccaccio's Decameron
II. Postumio - "POSTUMIUS" Book 5
III. Lenpio - "LEPIDUS"? Book 5
IIII. Mario - "MARIUS" Book 5
V. Catulo - "CATULUS" Book 5
VI. Sesto - "SEXTUS" (Sextus Pompeius) Book 6
VII. Deo Tauro - "DEIOTARUS" Book 6
VIII. Nerone - "NERONE" Book 4
VIIII. Falco - "FLACCUS" Book 5
X. Venturio - "VETURIUS" Book 5
XI. Tulio - "CICERO" Book 6
XII. Carbone - "CARBO" Book 5
XIII. Catone - "CATO" Book 5
XIIII. Bocho - "BOCCHUS" Book 5
XV. Metelo - "METELLUS" Book 5
XVI. Olivo - "LIUIO" Book 4 (Livio: the online text always has "u" for lowercase "v")
XVII. Ipeo - "SCIPIO"? Book 5
XVIII. Lentulo - "LENTULUS" Book 5
XVIIII. Sabino - "SABINUS" Book 6
XX. Nenbroto - "NIMROD" Bible (Genesis)
XXI. Nabuchodenasor - "NEBUCHADNEZZAR" Bible (Daniel )

A check for the 12 Book 5 references can be made by simply pasting this string into Google:
lepidus flaccus scipio marius cato carbo lentulus metellus veturius bocchus postumius catulus

Marco

That was a good contribution.
However: The jump from Falco to Flaccus seems a little bit questionable. I was just interested in "Falco".

A pair-building of the Sola-Busca-Tarocchi trumps of this kind ...

0
1-2
3-4
5-(6)
7-8
9-10
11-12
13-14
15-16
17-18
19-20
21

... was once observed at Aeclectic (I tried to locate the post, but had no success, it was written by a person, who only once had contact to the history section). I immediately recognized, that this was GREAT finding. It must have been rather early (2003-2005).
The observation said, that odd-number-figures (1-3-etc) look to the right and even-number-figures (2-4-etc) look to the left. Exceptions are the numbers 0 for beginning, 21 for the end and curiously also No 6 - which more or less look straight.
The arrangement has the effect, that, if the cards would have been placed in a book with "0" as title and "21" as backside, the figure 1 (left page) would look to the figure 2 (right page) and figure 2 would look to figure 1. And so on for all the other pairs (beside figure 6) till page No. 20.

This curious condition is mirrored by the form of the Boiardo Tarocchi trumps. If one assumes, that the Fool in the first tercet is "0", the following numbers 1-20 present 10 pairs in the same form 1-2, 3-4, etc., whereby the odd numbers focus on male figures and on "Vices" and the even numbers focus on female figures and "Virtues". Indirect exceptions are No 6 (again) and Nr. 20; in 6 ...

Gratia a secreti e savii non va a sorte,
Ma con ragion, ché con amore ha il vanto
Colui che asconde le passion piu forte.

Grace does not go by chance, but with reason,
To the discreet and wise, for in love can be proud
He that hides his strongest passion.

... it's not clear, if or which female person is mentioned and in No. 20 ...

Oblivion di termine e confine
Del tutto sei, Elice e Dido a Lethe
Menasti, e famma e tempo hai in toe ruine.

Oblivion, you are the end and boundary
Of all, you took to Lethe Elice and Dido,
And among your ruins you have fame and time.

... two women are noted instead of usually one. If I understand it correctly, Dido and Elice had been sisters or they possibly had been considered even the same person.

By this we have some structural similarity between the Boiardo Tarocchi poem (likely produced in Ferrara) and the Sola-Busca Tarocchi, from which it was also assumed, that it was made in Ferrara or by at least a Ferrarese artist. This opinion got some alternative suggestions in recent time, by the attention of the Sola-Busca exhibition in Brera (2012-13).
http://images.brera.beniculturali.it//f ... a_english2
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicola_di_ ... o_d'Ancona

For the production of the Boiardo Tarocchi poem I assume, that it was made for the wedding of Lucrezia d'Este (illegitimate daughter of duke Ercole d'Este) in January 1487. I conclude this mainly from the condition, that the Roman heroine Lucrezia got the highest trump No. 21 in the poem. My opinion was confirmed by the condition, that the literary theme "women are better than men" became a literary topic at the Ferrara court after the Ferrarese war 1482/84. Leonora d'Aragon had taken then a strong position during the sickness of her husband. The connections "men-vices" and "women-virtues" in the Boiardo Tarocchi poem can be considered as an early form of the theme "women are better than men", which found a more intensive form in the work of the Ferrarese courtier Bartolommeo Goggio (c. 1487-1490) ...
http://books.google.de/books?id=-X3eGY5 ... 90&f=false
... with the title "De laudibus mulierum".
In the Ferrarese art production appeared in this phase 3 paintings of "strong women" by Ercole de' Roberti, between them also a Lucrezia.

The production time of the Sola-Busca Tarocchi is calculated with 1491 cause of inscriptions on cards.

I personally think, that it was made for the wedding of Alfonso d'Este with Anna Sforza. A figure "Panfilio" (title of the figure 1 in the deck) appeared in a theater play, that was shown at this occasion. In the two months after the wedding Alfonso made a journey to Venice, which possibly explains the distribution of the deck in Venice.

The dates of January 1487 and January 1491 are close to each other and the major Ferrarese interest in this time had been to arrange good marriages for 3 Este daughter and for Alfonso.

The similarity in the structure of Boiardo Tarocchi poem and Sola-Busca Tarocchi has logical components and very likely isn't accidental. So one likely should assume, that the arrangement of the Sola Busca deck took place in Ferrara and not elsewhere, beside the general points, that Ferrara was well known for playing card experiments, likely had enough artists, had in these years a very creative court especially inspired by theater and other reasons.

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

Just my question: Does the catalog of the exhibition speak of the pair-building in the Sola-Busca?

In the first post of this thread I pointed with a lot of arguments to the condition, that this arrangement makes sense:

0 Matto ----- Chess pawns
1 Panfilio ----- Chess pawns
(2)
(3)
4 Cristallina-Mario ---- Chess-Queen, possibly Empress ?
5 Father Time, rather young
(6)
(7)
8 Hanging Man
9 Jupiter-Falco ---- Chess-King, possibly Emperor ?
(10)
(11)
12 Moon ----- chess-bishops ?????
13 Star ----- chess-bishops ?????
(14)
(15)
16 Sun ---- chess-knights ?????
17 Angel ---- chess knights ?????
(18)
(19)
20 Tower - Rook
21 Fame - Rook

I could simplify the presentation with a pair model with 11 pairs ...

0-1
2-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
10-11
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-19
20-21

In the post "Sola-Busca riddles (3)" I pointed to another scheme, which had been earlier observed and which also used pairs, but in another order:

0
1-2
3-4
5-(6)
7-8
9-10
11-12
13-14
15-16
17-18
19-(20)
21

I think, that everybody can see, that both pairing models are opposites, but also relatives.

Naturally one could construct various pairing models with other forms with 22 elements, for instance ...

0-11
1-12
2-13
3-14
etc
10-21

... or ...

0-21
1-20
2-19
etc
10-11

... or with some inside variation ...

1-21
..
1-10
2-9
3-8
4-7
5-6
..
11-20
12-19
13-18
14-17
15-16

or

0-13
1-12
2-11
3-10
4-9
5-8
6-7
..
14-15
16-17
18-19
20-21

Whatever the artist desired or found to be an elegant form, the artist could easily realize it. There are many pairing models possible, but the artist of the Sola-Busca used two basic models with no split of the rules (and the basic pairing models are not so many).

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

Well, what I wanted to say: I just followed the scheme, that I already knew. With some details at 12-13 and 16-17 and 20 I was able to predict, that I would find (probably) something just completing the series with ...

0-1 / 4-5 / 8-9 / 12-13 / 16-17 / 20-21

... and there was only one contradiction pair with 4 ("Cristallina-Mario") and 9 ("Jupiter-Falco"), a pair, which I luckily could identify with the help of Lorenzo Spirito. Well, I had earlier analyzed Lorenzo Spirito's lot book and then realized, that this also had worked with 10 pairs, and so it was natural, that I had it in my mind as one three appearances of the suspected pairing model (the other both were just the Boiardo deck and the Sola-Busca).

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

Now there's a rest of 10 trump cards, which demand explanation. There is not so much, which can identified as "Tarot cards" by optical control.

2 Postumio has a skull on a table.

A skull usually should mean "Death" ... the Italian Sola-Busca interpreter, fixed on number 13, interpreted, that Catone means Cato and Cato killed himself and therefore this should be "Death", but overlooked the small star in the upper right corner, and apparently overlooked the small signs, which have signifying character and were used more than once.
Aaah, MY ERROR ..... I'm wrong with it, I've to excuse. She noted the star and made the Footnote "121. II coloritore ha inserito nella carta la stella e il motto "TRAHOR FATIS", che non esistevano nella versione a stampa." ... which means, that the star was added by the illuminator together with the "TRAHOR FATIS", which shall mean "I am drawn by Fate" according Tarotpedia.

So the star was either "invented" by the illuminator, or the illuminator had additional information. I followed the star and I've found something of interest, I think. For the moment I'm not ready to discard the star=13 idea. But ...

If 13 isn't the star ... then one would suspect, when seeing 16 = sun and 12 = moon, that 8 = star. But this seems to be wrong (Hanging Man symbols), cause 4 "Cristallina-Mario" naturally might mean "stars". If indeed 13 = Death, then it's not really a contradiction to my schematic experiment, cause it's a card of the second half of the Tarot sequence. And somehow the number 13 has a rather strong connection to Death. Well, in search of the then only still missing card DEVIL, however, one meets a rather innocent looking FALCO-JUPITER-EMPEROR at position 9.


(perhaps the kneeling position one could identify as "looks like a falcon", otherwise it's only the name "Falco")

But ....
Can we be sure, that Trionfi card versions in 1491 indeed had a devil? NO. All what I know, we can't be sure. What we indeed have is the appearance of a Falconer in a rather late Visconti-Sforza version, which contains a motto of Isabella d'Este "Nec spe nec metu" and for this reason the deck should be dated after 1505, when Isabella adapted the motto and personally I prefer the interpretation, that it was made in 1512 for the arrival of Massimiliano Sforza, which was organized to great parts by Isabella.


(made by a private attempt to give it some colors, the base is the Rosenthal Tarocchi Kaplan I, p. 99)

Kaplan interpreted the falconer as a replacement of the Fool card, but the scheme of the Sola-Busca seems to suggest, that it had a position in the upper half of the Tarot sequence.

Following these new considerations, after I detected my error, I get the following results for the moment ... and I just add some common numbers for the related Tarot cards.

21 Fame or World (usually 21)
20 Tower (usually 16/15)
--
--
17 Angel (usually 20/19)
16 Sol (usually 19/18)
--
--
13 Death (usually 13)
12 Moon (17/18)
--
--
9 Falconer (?)
8 Hanging Man (usually 12)
--
--
5 Father Time (usually 9 or 11)
4 Stars (usually 16 or 17)
--
--
1 Panfilio (usually 1)
0 Mato (usually 0)

There are two rows of "later numbers" running in a mixed form. I resort them in this manner:

21 Fame or World (usually 21)
17 Angel (usually 20/19)
16 Sol (usually 19/18)
12 Moon (17/18)
4 Stars (usually 16 or 17)
---
20 Tower (usually 16/15)
13 Death (usually 13)
8 Hanging Man (usually 12)
5 Father Time (usually 9 or 11)
--
9 Falconer (?)

As I didn't found a disturbing virtue as 20 Justice in the Ferrarese order, and also not a 14 Temperance as in the Milanese order (and must so assume, that there is no virtue in the upper half of the cards), I can reduce these both mixed rows to this (and I put the common values at begin, just for better overview):

21 Fame or World (Sola-Busca 21)
20 Angel (Sola-Busca 17)
19 Sol (Sola-Busca 16)
18 Moon (Sola-Busca 12)
17 Stars (Sola-Busca 4)
---
16 Tower (Sola-Busca 20)
15 ?
14 ?
13 Death (Sola-Busca 13)
12 Hanging Man (Sola-Busca 8)
9 or 11 Father Time (Sola-Busca 5)
--
(?) Falconer (Sola-Busca 9)

I get two free numbers at 14 and 15, but I've only one not positioned falconer card, which with I could fill the gap. There's a problem, and TIME solves it ...

Looking back to the earlier Boiardo Tarocchi poem, the upper three trumps seem to have been (as discussed in the first post in this thread)...

Similar in the Boiardo Tarocchi poem, we have in the 3-line tercet which corresponds to No 20 ...

Oblivion di termine e confine
Del tutto sei, Elice e Dido a Lethe
Menasti, e famma e tempo hai in toe ruine.

... the keyword "ruine" or in English "ruin" ...

Oblivion, you are the end and boundary
Of all, you took to Lethe Elice and Dido,
And among your ruins you have fame and time.

... together with the keywords Fame and Time (both keywords are connected to other tarot cards).

Fame and Time now appear in the tercets 19 and 21 ...

19 Time, you that hurry men to death,
You saved Nestor, and if in the end he came to an end,
It seems impossible to think of such a life.

...

21 Inner strength made happy the death of
Lucretia: to clean her fame
She killed herself, and she prepared for the offender a dark net,

Giving an example to those who love their own name and honour.

... so that I would think, that the intended row of Tarot symbols inside the Boiardo Tarocchi poem and sort of chess context would mean ...

19 TIME
20 TOWER (Rook)
21 FAME (Rook)

... though there are a confusing "death" mentioned in 19 and a confusing "strength" in 21 (again other Tarot card names).

...
19 TIME
20 TOWER (Rook)
21 FAME (Rook)

TIME, connected to the Greek hero Nestor, seemed to have been high in the Trionfi ranking in the Boiardo interpretation.

TIME was also relative high in the Trionfi interpretation of Petrarca and his six symbols:

6 Eternity
5 Time
4 Fame
3 Death
2 Chastity
1 Love

With some astonishment we've also observed in the Fama-Sol discussion, that common Tarot ...

21 World as Eternity
20 Time (?)
... (15-19)
14 Fama-Sol as Temperance-Angel
13 Death
... 8-12)
7 Chariot with Chastity (with female driver)
6 Love
... (0-5

... somehow mirrors the Petrarca model, if we assume, that Time was high. In the thread "Fame riddle" I expressed it this way:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=747&hilit=parergon&start=40#p10764

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), from which
Tarot card 12 = Hanging Man = NO FAME (according Piscina)
Tarot card 13 = Death
--------------------------------------------- cut (according Piscina)
Tarot card 14 = Fama
Tarot Cards 15-20 = 6 cards, which somehow present Time (as a theory)
Tarot card 21 = Eternity

The logic of the idea "TIME" demands, that it is considered higher than Sol, Moon, Star, cause these present just the clock of time.

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

From all this it seems, that there once had been a "fall of the figure Father Time" in the Trionfi sequence, which possibly also appears as a "hidden topic" in the Folengo text of the "Triperuno". For the moment I've no idea, how this related, cause this research is already a longer time ago and I should revive the older considerations before I talk too much about it. I'm just surprised by the not expected falconer.

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

Just to close this for the moment, I feel a little bit exhausted by this brainstorm, I would think, that something like this might have played a role ...

21 World
20 Angel
19 Father Time
18 Sol
17 Moon
15 Star
14 Falconer
13 Death
12 Hanging Man
...

... but for the moment I've no idea, if I should say, that this existed before the Sola-Busca Tarocchi, or, if I should assume, that it developed after the Sola-Busca-Tarocchi.

**********

Laura Paola Gnaccolini had her own ideas about Father Time.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=988&p=14716&hilit=olivo#p14716
She identified it as card No 17, and her decision also isn't bad, as this looks indeed like a winged Father Time ...



... which he gives with the argument in the Footnote:

126. L'identificazione parrebbe confortata dal confronto della posa e della fisionomia (anche se qui una fiamma ha sostituito la clessidra) con il cosiddetto "Eremita" (denominazione più tarda per il "Tempo") nei due mazzi ferraresi noti come "Tarocchi di Alessandro Sforza" e "Tarocchi di Carlo VI", cfr. Algeri 1987, pp. 32-35 catt. 2-3; Cieri Via 1987, pp. 170-171.
[... translated by MikeH with ... ]
126. The identification seems confirmed by comparison with the pose and physiognomy (although here a flame
has replaced the hourglass) of the so-called " Hermit" (the later name for "Time") in the two decks of Ferrara known as "Tarot of Alessandro Sforza" and "Tarot of Charles VI", cf. Algeri 1987, p. 32-35 Catt. 2-3; Cieri Via 1987, p. 170-171.

... but the result of her identification is, that she can't identify the Angel and counts it as not solvable riddle. Our Casa Rella observation (as earlier reported in the start thread), however, makes it possible to identify card 5 with Father Time, and then card 17 is free for the Angel.

Well, a lot to think about. I need a pause.

I made a pause and recovered a bit.

I couldn't avoid to think about the Lucca Tarocchi. I hope everybody knows, what this is. It's a strange reduced Tarocchi with 69 cards, from which 13 belong to the category "special cards" (1 Fool and 12 others)

not numbered Fool
9 Wheel
10 Chariot
11 Hermit
12 Hanging Man
13 Death
14 Devil
15 Tower
not numbered Star
not numbered Moon
not numbered Sun
not numbered World
not numbered Fame

So I make now a short summary of all that, what I found out by trial and error::

Sola Busca Tarocchi

Group A. According my research the Sola-Busca trumps 0-1 .. 4-5 .. 8-9 .. 12-13 .. 16-17 .. 20-21 refer (somehow) to normal Tarocchi cards (beside one, which is unusual, but which could be finally identified curiously as the "Falconer"; the guy is named "Falco" and sits in a manner, that one could call "imitating a falcon"). The card Hermit was really difficult to identify, the identification of Death might be called doubtful.

Group B. The other 10 trumps (which are 2-3 .. 6-7 .. 10-11 .. 14-15 .. 18-19) are only in one case (Chariot) easy to recognize, all else identifications in this group look more or less "hairdrawn" and "not really convincing".

I hope, you see the pattern A-B-A-B-A-B-A-B-A-B-A, whereby A (in group A) and B (in group B) stand for "2 cards" or "2 numbers".

Studying this arrangement, I see as earlier or later Trionfi row for sequence A ...

21 World (in Sola-Busca 21)
20 Angel (in Sola-Busca 17)
19 Father Time (in Sola-Busca 5)
18 Sol (in Sola-Busca 16)
17 Moon (in Sola-Busca 17)
16 Tower (in Sola-Busca 20)
15 Star (in Sola-Busca 4)
14 Falconer (in Sola-Busca 9) ... somehow later replaced as devil
13 Death (in Sola-Busca 13)
12 Hanging Man (in Sola-Busca 8)
...
1 Panfilio (in Sola-Busca 1)
0 Mato (in Sola-Busca 0)

An arrangement of 12 cards, from which one can say, that all beside one are part of the Lucca Tarot (beside 1 Panfilio)

From the group B one can say, that the only card, which can be identified with security (7 Chariot), is also part of the Lucca Tarot.

The one missing card from the Lucca Tarocchi is the "Wheel". There is no wheel at all the Sola-Busca cards. If I would assume, that 1 Panfilio presents the wheel, then all difficulties are gone. Panfilio has the greatest rounded shield of all the warriors, not enough to conclude the wheel, but ...

Panfilio in the Sola-Busca was the lowest trump.
In the Lucca Tarocchi the card "9 Wheel" was the lowest trump.
Well, no doubt, Panfilio is the Wheel.

I guess, something is solved now.

*******

You may wonder, why I have set Father Time at 19. Well, I might have chosen ...

(40) 20 World (in Sola-Busca 21)
(39) 19 Angel (in Sola-Busca 17)
(38) 18 Sol (in Sola-Busca 16)
(37) 17 Moon (in Sola-Busca 17)
(36) 16 Star (in Sola-Busca 4)
15 Tower (in Sola-Busca 20)
14 Falconer (in Sola-Busca 9) ... somehow later replaced as devil
13 Death (in Sola-Busca 13)
12 Hanging Man (in Sola-Busca 8)
11 Father Time (in Sola-Busca 5)
...
1 Panfilio (in Sola-Busca 1)
0 Mato (in Sola-Busca 0)

... and then I would be closer to the Minchiate-order.

But there are some indications, that "Father Time" once was high in the trump-sequence. In the Boiardo Tarocchi poem Nr. 19 refers to Tempo and Nestor, the very old hero.

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

There is another number system connected to the Sola-Busca Tarocchi which we discovered about 10 years ago.

1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19 look to the right

2-4-....-8-10-12-14-16-18-20 look to the left

0 + 6 + 21 look straight

If the cards were book pages and 0 would be title and 21 backside, then figure 1 would look at figure 2, and figure 2 at figure 1, etc. An exception would be number 6.

In Boiardo Tarocchi poem ...
1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19 are all male figures and relate to "vices
2-4-....-8-10-12-14-16-18-20 are all female figures a relate to "virtues" ... Exception is also number 6

So Sola-Busca Tarocchi and Boiardo Tarcchi poem have a structural similarity.

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

Pictures of the Sola-Busca are all at ...
http://www.tarotpedia.com/wiki/Sola-Busca_gallery

Boiardo Tarocchi poem
http://www.tarotpedia.com/wiki/Boiardo

The Sola-Busca is dated to 1491.
I date the Boiardo Tarocchi poem to 1487, so that's close to 1491.

The Lucca Tarocchi is known as a phenomenon around 1700 or 1730. Most motifs just were taken from the Minchiate cards, with few exceptions only, the producer noted an "Orfeo" on his cards.

As the Lucca Tarocchi had 69 cards and nearly 70 cards, I once suspected that the choice of this system went back to the deepest time of the Trionfi development, when 5x14-decks with 70 cards still played a role.

I guess, that it is proven now at least, that the Lucca Tarocchi game structure had something in common with the Sola Busca Tarocchi in 1491, which with 1491 at least is considerably older than "c. 1700"

I am glad you are taking up the Sola-Busca, Huck. You have some interesting ideas.

Identifying the T shaped object in V Catullo's hand as part of a clock is possible. I merely accepted Gnaccolini's identification of it as a groma, a Roman surveying instrument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groma_surveying); the way he is holding it fits that use. The wheel would also fit, as part of a clock. On the other hand, the wheel--his very round shield--plus time equals Fortune. This shield is rounder-looking than Panfilio's, due to part of it being concealed.) And the place in the deck, as well as Catullus's antitype, suggests Temperance, also a card not otherwise identified. Also, Lentulo, the old man pulling his beard (a symbol of defeat) and holding a torch, makes a very good Old Man/Time, as Gnaccolini suggests (not Ipeo, as I think you misread her rather confusing presentation).

One problem with identifying 17 Ipeo with the Angel is that the wings are bat-wings, usually associated with devils. Then the angel on the stick would be an idol. That angel, the one on the stick, does not have bat-wings, so it could be the Angel. Either way, there are difficulties: if it is the Devil, then where is the Angel in the deck? If it is the Angel, then where is the Devil? If there is no Devil in the deck, then what is there instead? I think that if most of the ordinary tarot subjects are there, as they seem to be, then probably they are all there.

So some of the identifications remain obscure, even among the ones that Gnaccolini says are "secure". The main advance in understanding, I think, mainly owing to Gnaccolini and which the two of us accept, is that indeed they are the usual subjects, not just Romans. It is the usual tarot deck, but with eccentric ways of portraying the subjects and an unusual order, but derivative from B but not with its order of the virtues (and so Justice not high).

Huck wrote,

I personally think, that it was made for the wedding of Alfonso d'Este with Anna Sforza. A figure "Panfilio" (title of the figure 1 in the deck) appeared in a theater play, that was shown at this occasion. In the two months after the wedding Alfonso made a journey to Venice, which possibly explains the distribution of the deck in Venice.

The dates of January 1487 and January 1491 are close to each other and the major Ferrarese interest in this time had been to arrange good marriages for 3 Este daughter and for Alfonso.

The similarity in the structure of Boiardo Tarocchi poem and Sola-Busca Tarocchi has logical components and very likely isn't accidental. So one likely should assume, that the arrangement of the Sola Busca deck took place in Ferrara and not elsewhere, beside the general points, that Ferrara was well known for playing card experiments, likely had enough artists, had in these years a very creative court especially inspired by theater and other reasons.

The identification of the artist with the Ancona man was the best argued part of the exhibition catalog, It is also that which the Brera endorsed most strongly. I can present the details if you like, but it would be a lot of work. It involves comparing all of the work attributed to "the master of the Sola-Busca" with works known to be by Nicola di maestro Antonio. I found the result very convincing.

Maestro Antonio's Ancona is well connected to Venice, via maritime interests. It is also the closest Italian port to some of Venice's Dalmatian outposts. Even today there is a ferry. There are also the painted initials on the cards to be accounted for, "M.S.", and the two stemmas, The Venetian diariest Marino Sanudo is a good guess, as one stemma was his and the other his mother's (see my post at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=988&p=14716&hilit=olivo#p14771). The program or programs (perhaps a different person for the suit cards) would not have to have been worked out in Ancona, to be sure.

The problem I have with the Alfonso wedding is that you would think there would be some momento of the occasion on the cards, some sorts of heraldic, as on the d'Este deck of 1473. Also, this is an engraved deck, of which the Sola-Busca is not the unique example. Engraved decks would have been of lower status, rather in the way printed books with painted illuminations were lower status than manuscripts. The Rothschild cards, another example of being engraved and then painted, would have been worthy of a noble family or rich merchant but not a ruling family. There is also the difficulty of accounting for its presence in Venice; I can't imagine that Alfonso would just leave such a present there. Sanudo merely had to buy the engraved deck and have it painted.

Boiardo's poem was not known only in Ferrara. A description of the game was done for a lady in Urbino, for example, and some cards survive from the deck that was made, perhaps worth comparing with the Sola-Busca. The pairing parallel is interesting, but doesn't make the deck Ferrarese. As far as know the Brera catalog does not discuss the pairing.

I did not understand your argument about the Lucca cards. Yes, you have the Lucca cards if you subtract the non-Lucca cards from the Sola-Busca and arrange them in the Lucca order. But that would be true of any deck. I do not know why the Lucca should be as late as 1700, but what is the connection between Lucca and Ferrara/Venice? The numbering of the Lucca deck is A: the order of Wheel and then Chariot is like Minchiate and also the Colonna (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-YlU6F53x-_E/U ... 3-11-03+at) but with either an unnumbered Bagatto, as Dummett suggests (see my post at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1019&p=15181&hilit=Lucca#p15181) or, as I suggested in my comments, a deck without a Popess-equivalent. Either type would seem to me to be earlier than Minchiate, as is suggested also by its lack of Minchiate's added cards. Dummett does not go that far; he leaves the dating open, which I suppose is good enough.

Added later: I noticed the pictures at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=345&start=220#p15615. The Lucca cards have little squares or circles on their borders. The Sforza castle cards with gods on their backs do , too. Also the Museo delle Arti delle Traditioni Populari cards. Dummett says in Il Mondo e l'Angelo (p. 335f; I am omitting part of his argument for placing the Sforza Castle gods cards, which includes refuting the idea that a lozenge indicates Venetian origin):

Anche se le carte prodotte a Bologna durante il XVII e il XVIII secolo avevano bordi bianchi senza disegno, il Diavolo cinquecentesco di Agnolo Hebreo ne aveva uno con motivo a losanga 9; inoltre, i tarocchi ferraresi nel Museo delle Arti e Tradizioni Popolari di Roma presentano sui bordi un disegno punteggiato molto simile, come pure le carte ‘Orfeo’ e altri tarocchi provenienti da Lucca. Che il bordo sia a motivi o biancoè indicazione più sicura di data che di provenienza: le carte veneziane del XVII secolo avevano bordi bianchi 10.

E probabile, dunque, che le carte con divinità classiche del Castello Sforzesco siano del XVI anziché del XVII secolo. Ciò che esclude la loro attribuzione a Venezia è il fatto che rappresentano un modello standard nettamente definito, che è del tutto diverso da qualsiasi tipo prodotto da fabbricanti veneziani di cui siamo a conoscenza.

(Cards produced in Bologna during the XVIIth and XVIIIth century also had white borders without design, the 16th century Devil by Agnolo Hebreo reasonably had diamonds [lozanga] 9; in addition, the tarots of Ferrara in the Museum of Popular Arts and Traditions of Rome have on their edges a very similarly punctuated design, as well as the 'Orpheus' and other tarot cards from Lucca. That the border is patterned or white is a very secure indication of the date of origin: the Venetian cards of the seventeenth century had white borders.

It is likely, therefore, that the cards with classical deities of the Castello Sforzesco are sixteenth rather than seventeenth century. What excludes their assignment to Venice is the fact that they represent a clearly defined standard model, which is completely different from any type of product from Venetian manufacturers that we know of.
__________________
9. The border is attached to the back, which is separate [staccato] from the face of the card; see the illustration in D. Hoffmann, op. cit., pl. 14 (a).
10. See D. Hoffmann, op. cit pl. 8 (a).)

What Dummett means in note 9 is that the border is formed by folding the edges of the back onto the front, which otherwise would have a white border.

I notice that the Tarot de Paris has a checkered border, too, perhaps suggesting an earlier origin than Dummett gives it (he makes it later than the Vieville); but this border looks slightly different.

Well, I try to explain it in another way:

This one describes the Michelino deck ...
http://trionfi.com/olympic-gods



The numbers go from 1-16, which is not perfect, cause actually Jupiter is highest trump and Juno second and Amor is the last. Actually Jupiter should have 16, Juno 15 and Amor as the lowest 1 and one should transfer the numbers like this:



Also I could use this graphical form:



It becomes interesting, if somebody knows the graphic (but not the numbers), but interprets, that Jupiter is highest (16) and Amor is lowest (1), but that not Juno is second but Apollo is second and Mercury third and Hercules 4th and Juno the 5th. Somehow like this:



In the Sola-Busca-Tarocchi we've not 16 figures, but 22. The number 22 can't be divided before, but I can skip the first and the last in the manner (0) 1-20 (21).

Then I've two ways of interpretation, one of 5 columns with 4 rows and another one with 4 columns and 5 rows





The second way of representations looks more interesting, cause I've three rather significant symbols in the Sola-Busca Tarocchi, Sun-Moon-Star, and Sun-Moon-Star are all in one row.
I research, what I can get about all the others. I come to the conclusion, that these have some chance to identified.



Well, I try to add, what the Italian author Laura Paola Gnaccolini thought. Also I add my own opinion in the few points, where I have one (Falco = Falconer, Father Time, Angel, Panfilio).
In my notes G. stands for Gnaccolini, M. for MikeH and H. for Huck.



9 times (all blue fields beside 7 Chariot) I decide "no clear relation recognizable". From these 9 Gnacciolini finds 4 to be insecure or also "not recognizable", 3 finds from her side get only a "probable" and in two cases she thinks that her analyses is really secure. But her really secure findings in this case are 14 Bocho = Hanging Man, which neither me nor MikeH believes, and 10 Venturio = Fortune, from which MikeH also has no good opinion.

Well, if there were only 2 or 3 cards "not recognizable", I likely would also follow her in some points of her "probable" judgments, but a group of 9, which additionally are formed by a specific mathematical pattern (as above shown), which are somehow turned and twisted to fit the all-important row of the known Tarot cards, this makes no sense.

One finds a much better interpretation, if one simply defines some cards as unknown, if they are indeed unknown, and looks just at the form, which the unknown and the really recognized cards have. And then it's pretty clear, that the part, which is known, is just the part, which the Lucca Tarocchi with its "69 cards including 12 and 1 Fool" uses, and the unknown part is just that, what the Lucca Tarocchi uses not.

It's not clear, what this means, but one hardly cannot identify as just an accident. The few confusing parts (Falco, Panfilio-Wheel as "lowest trump" and Chariot in exotic position) are all explainable.

The Lucca Tarocchi curiously has 69 cards in 4x14+13-structure in the year 1700, the cards are more or less all simply in Florentine Minchiate style, possibly due to the trivial condition, that Lucca artists couldn't produce cards as cheap as the Florentine ones.

4x14+13 structure is very similar to 5x14 and from this the suspicion exists, that the Lucca game form might be rather old, possibly reaching back to a time, when 5x14 decks presented some standard.
Then we have Andrea Vitali who defends the possibility, that once Pince Fibbia invented a card game in Bologna, very early,before 1419. Prince Fibbia descended from a Lucca family, going back to ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castruccio_Castracani
... a successful man in Lucca, who was responsible for military triumphs and related Trionfi festivities ... very early.

Around this time (1333 I remember), that emperor Charles IV, then just a grandson of an emperor and not emperor himself, was in Lucca for some time. Charles IV, according researcher Hübsch in 1850, knew for 1340 playing cards in Bohemia, perhaps he knew them already in 1433, when he was in Lucca. Possibly there was an internal family tradition of very early playing cards, perhaps disrupted by the strong plague of 1350.

And we have had a war between Florence and Lucca finished in 1438, just a short time, before Trionfi cards appeared in Florence (1440).

Maybe there was a very old influence of Lucca cards, at least we have the curious sensation, that a game with a structure had been Lucca around 1700, perhaps as a relict of a time long ago.

In Chess history we have, that a village Ströbeck bewared the very old game form of Courier-Chess, which once had been far-spread, thanks for the reason of a local tradition.Why shouldn't have Lucca bewared another old game? It bewared also its old independence, in spite of the strong neighbor Toscana. Small states often fight for their traditions more than larger states, which mutate with more speed in their social habits.
There are in the small Swiss valleys Tarocchi variants, which are played only in some locations. The Tarocchi variant Cego, rather young (since around 1500), stayed more or less in the borders in Baden.

With the Sola-Busca Tarocchi we've a sort of evidence, that this variant had also some influence on this game. Or otherwise, as we can't know, what is earlier, a game variant connected to Sola-Busca influenced the game of Lucca.

********

Well, one should look at the 9 unknown cards, which sort of mystery they encode.

Nr. 6, the only card, which looks straight between 1-20, has as symbols Mercury wings at the feet and a torch. Perhaps he looks straight, cause he's connected to number 7 (chariot), which seems to be a central motive, used in the group 9+1=10 (the blue group) and the group 12+1=13 (the yellow group in my presentation).



Nr. 10 has the Mercury wings at the feet, but no torch.



Nr. 11 has the torch, but not the Mercury wings.



Nr. 2 has an object similar to the torch-tool, though not burning, but the major object is the skull. Actually one should think, that this card means "death" cause of the skull (and no other cards show skull or bones or skeleton), but this doesn't fit with with the observed general number system, which prefers 13 as death. The figure has green clothes, as 1 Panfilio has, no other figure has this green. Both have their face more or less hidden, all other figures show more of their face. Both cards can be regarded as the begin of a series, Panfilio opens the sequence in the "known to the Lucca Tarocchi" group, Postumio opens the "not known to the Lucca Tarocchi" group. Both names start with a "P", no other name starts with "P" ... the last two trumps 20+21 start with an "N" (one other card start with "N", Nerone, the Hanging Man).
Postumius sounds like Postumius and stares at the skull (... ? indicating the rest of his deceased father, who died before his birth ?)





Well, these connections between the cards possibly contain a riddle and it looks difficult to solve it.

I've to think about it.

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

After some time I think, that it's just about the detection of fire.

Huck wrote

Well, I try to add, what the Italian author Laura Paola Gnaccolini thought. Also I add my own opinion in the few points, where I have one (Falco = Falconer, Father Time, Angel, Panfilio).
In my notes G. stands for Gnaccolini, M. for MikeH and H. for Huck.

9 times (all blue fields beside 7 Chariot) I decide "no clear relation recognizable". From these 9 Gnacciolini finds 4 to be insecure or also "not recognizable", 3 finds from her side get only a "probable" and in two cases she thinks that her analyses is really secure. But her really secure findings in this case are 14 Bocho = Hanging Man, which neither me nor MikeH believes, and 10 Venturio = Fortune, from which MikeH also has no good opinion.

Well, if there were only 2 or 3 cards "not recognizable", I likely would also follow her in some points of her "probable" judgments, but a group of 9, which additionally are formed by a specific mathematical pattern (as above shown), which are somehow turned and twisted to fit the all-important row of the known Tarot cards, this makes no sense.

Your chart is misleading in its colors, if "blue" means "insecure". In the second row, 8 is somewhat insecure, even though you and I agree. In the third row, 15 is secure. And if 8 was secure in the first row, than 14 is secure in the third row (as Justice). In the fourth row, 17, 9, and 5 are insecure. It is true that there are more secure cards in the Lucca group than in the non-Lucca. But this is just because 4 of 5 of Gnacciolini's insecure cards, which are also insecure for us, are the four "papi" cards. It is relatively secure that four of them are in the non-Lucca group. So the division Lucca/non-Lucca, corresponding somewhat to secure/non-secure, is most readily explained by the "four papi" blurring of identities in A group decks (i.e. Minchiate), which also exists to some extent in the Sola-Busca, owing to the nature of an all-male sequence.

Huck wrote,

Then we have Andrea Vitali who defends the possibility, that once Pince Fibbia invented a card game in Bologna, very early,before 1419. Prince Fibbia descended from a Lucca family, going back to ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castruccio_Castracani
... a successful man in Lucca, who was responsible for military triumphs and related Trionfi festivities ... very early.

There is no evidence that Bologna decks were missing the bottom 9 cards of the sequence. If anything, the evidence, from the Cary-Yale, is that early decks might have been missing the cards from Devil to Sun, and had at at least four of the lower nine Lucca cards (emperor, empress, love, fortitude) .

Huck wrote

And we have had a war between Florence and Lucca finished in 1438, just a short time, before Trionfi cards appeared in Florence (1440).

There is also no hint that Florentine cards were missing their bottom 9 cards, in fact just the reverse.

Huck wrote

Well, one should look at the 9 unknown cards, which sort of mystery they encode.
...
After some time I think, that it's just about the detection of fire.

This needs more explanation. I do not know what you mean, since only two of the ones you showed had fire. I see fire in 3, 6, 11, and 18 (in 3, in his hand wrongly colored). Perhaps it represents spirit, the highest sphere. just as fire is the highest element. Then 3 and 11 correspond to the Popess and Pope, 6 is the fire of Love (with wings) and 18 is the Hermit, with a torch instead of lantern.

Gnacciolini's five insecure cards were 2, 3, 9, 11, and 19, which for her were the four "papi" plus Angel (viewtopic.php?f=11&t=988&p=14716&hilit=olivo#p14716). 2 and 19 certainly look secular; 9 is looking up, so might imply either Pope (replacing my previous suggestion of 11) or Angel (which could be 11, as I said on the other thread: the Angel also relates to spirit).

To Gnacciolini's five, indeed card 10 needs to be added as insecure. You included 1 and 6, but I don't think they are very insecure. 6 is Love and 1 the Bagatto. What is your ninth insecure card? 14 ? (http://www.tarotpedia.com/wiki/images/t ... _Busca.jpg. He certainly looks like Gnacciolini's traitor, even if he is not upside down. But it is hard to distinguish "hanged man" from "justice". I would put 14 as Justice (to which the figure is submitting), just because the upside down baby is so graphic. But it seems to me that there continue to be many insecurities.

hi MikeH,

I interpreted this ...
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=988&p=14716&hilit=olivo#p14716

..Per gli altri trionfi ci sono identificazioni sicure (le Stelle: IIII. MARIO (figg. 1.3,1.127); il Carro: VII. DEO TAVRO (fig. 1.84); la Giustizia: Vili. NERONE; (fig. 1.116), con intento sarcastico [120]; la Fortuna: X. VENTVRIO (fig. 1.8); la Luna: XII. CARBONE (fig. 1.18, 1.126); la Morte: XIII. CATONE [121] (figg. 1.25,1.85); il Traditore: XIIII. BOCHO (figg. 1.93, 1.133); il Sole: XVI. OLIVO (figg. 1.76); la [start p. 39] Sagitta [122]: XX. NENBROTO (fig. 1.4); il Mondo: XXI. NABVCHODENASOR; fig. 1.77), identificazioni probabili (il Bagatto [123]: I. PANFILIO (fig. 1.5); la Temperanza: V. CATVLO con la groma (figg. 1.10); Amore [124]: VI. SESTO con la fiaccola accesa (figg. 1.24); la Fortezza: XV. METELO con la colonna - figg. 1.21,1.128; il Diavolo [125]: XVII. IPEO - fig. 1.9; il Tempo - in seguito Eremita [126]: XVIII. LENTVLO - fig. 1.22) e trionfi che non riesco a identificare con un sufficiente grado di sicurezza (le carte IL POSTVMIO - fig. 1.26; III. LENPIO - fig. 1.6; V. FALCO - fig. 1.7; XI. TVLIO - fig. 1.23; XVIIII. SABINO - figg. 1.19,1.95), che dovrebbero essere, ma non sappiamo in quale ordine, la Papessa, l’lmperatrice, l'Imperatore, il Papa e l’Angelo (cioè il Giudizio). A questo punto, se queste osservazioni sono valide, noi avremmo una sequenza molto particolare, che non corrisponde a nessuno dei tre tipi italiani individuati dagli studiosi [127], pia questa della grandissima originalità del mazzo anche sotto questo punto di vista [128].

... and thought, that Gnaccioli took as ...

secure
4 Star
7 Chariot
8 Hanging Man
10 Fortuna
12 Moon
13 Death
14 Hanging Man
16 Sun
20 Tower
21 World

probable:
1 Panfilio (Magician, lowest trump)
5 Temperance
6 Love
15 Fortitudo
17 Devil
18 Time

insecure (all the rest):
2, 3, 9, 11, 19
She writes according the text you reported ...
"POSTVMIO - fig. 1.26; III. LENPIO - fig. 1.6; V. FALCO - fig. 1.7; XI. TVLIO - fig. 1.23; XVIIII. SABINO - figg. 1.19,1.95)"
... according the text, but Falco is not No. "V", but No. IX



That's what I read.

Your chart is misleading in its colors, if "blue" means "insecure". In the second row, 8 is somewhat insecure, even though you and I agree. In the third row, 15 is secure. And if 8 was secure in the first row, than 14 is secure in the third row (as Justice). In the fourth row, 17, 9, and 5 are insecure. It is true that there are more secure cards in the Lucca group than in the non-Lucca. But this is just because 4 of 5 of Gnacciolini's insecure cards, which are also insecure for us, are the four "papi" cards. It is relatively secure that four of them are in the non-Lucca group. So the division Lucca/non-Lucca, corresponding somewhat to secure/non-secure, is most readily explained by the "four papi" blurring of identities in A group decks (i.e. Minchiate), which also exists to some extent in the Sola-Busca, owing to the nature of an all-male sequence.

The background color "blue" is my comment, that's what I think, that it is "not recognizable".

The terminus "insecure" I took from Gnaccioli and imported it. 15 is considered by her as "probable identification", not as "secure". 8 is considered by her as secure.
I don't understand your "And if 8 was secure in the first row, than 14 is secure in the third row (as Justice)." Who thinks so?

Huck wrote,

Then we have Andrea Vitali who defends the possibility, that once Pince Fibbia invented a card game in Bologna, very early,before 1419. Prince Fibbia descended from a Lucca family, going back to ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castruccio_Castracani
... a successful man in Lucca, who was responsible for military triumphs and related Trionfi festivities ... very early.

There is no evidence that Bologna decks were missing the bottom 9 cards of the sequence. If anything, the evidence, from the Cary-Yale, is that early decks might have been missing the cards from Devil to Sun, and had at at least four of the lower nine Lucca cards (emperor, empress, love, fortitude) .

I pointed only to the possibility, that there might have been some playing card activity in Lucca in very early time (just points of "points of suspicion"). I didn't relate it to Cary-Yale cards.

Huck wrote

And we have had a war between Florence and Lucca finished in 1438, just a short time, before Trionfi cards appeared in Florence (1440).

There is also no hint that Florentine cards were missing their bottom 9 cards, in fact just the reverse.

I didn't relate a possible content to Florentine cards.
What I think is, that a specific use of trumps in a 5th indepenentvsuit might have been possibly in use in Lucca very early, and the idea might have triggered similar playing cards experiments in Florence after 1438. For Lucca possibly a deck with a 5x13 structure, which was later modified in Florence and possibly modified in Lucca to 4x14+13.

Huck wrote

Well, one should look at the 9 unknown cards, which sort of mystery they encode.
...
After some time I think, that it's just about the detection of fire.

This needs more explanation.

Yes, that's true.

Card 2 (insecure row 1) has a "sort of torch", but a plant seems to grow in it.
Card 3 (insecure row 2) seems to have an idea, how to make fire. The figure carries a plant. At the bottom is something (oil ? something which burns ?).

card 6 (insecure row 1) with Mercury wings at the feet and now with burning torch (indicating an invention ?)
card 7 (insecure row 2): Chariot

card 10 (insecure row 1) again with Mercury wings (new inventions ?), no fire symbol.
card 11 (insecure row 2) again with burning torch

card 14 (insecure row 1) Bocho kneeling, around him seems to be light (enlightened ?)
card 15 (insecure row 2) sitting person with column. Fire on the column (light house ?)

card 18 (insecure row 1) A philosoph at a writing desk (?) with some burning light
card 19 (insecure row 2) A strong man, a king (?) no fire symbol

2 finishing cards:
card 20 Fire from heaven (Tower card; known great Babylon emperor)
card 21 Dragon (fire animal) at heaven (known great Babylonian emperor)

A lot of fire in these insecure rows.
Lucca once took Pisa (with Castruccio Castracani). Later Pisa was taken by Florence. The harbor of Pisa played a deciding role for further developments. Lucca went into decline, Florence developed in pleasant manner, but Lucca could defend its independence.

Huck wrote,

She writes according the text you reported ...
"POSTVMIO - fig. 1.26; III. LENPIO - fig. 1.6; V. FALCO - fig. 1.7; XI. TVLIO - fig. 1.23; XVIIII. SABINO - figg. 1.19,1.95)"
... according the text, but Falco is not No. "V", but No. IX

I took her as meaning "9", too, not noticing the "V" written before "FALCO" in the Italian version, because she says that 5 CATULO is probably Temperance. Actually, she did write VIIII; I made a mistake correcting my OCR program's lapse into nonsense, which I caught in the English version but not the Italian. I will correct it immediately. Did I raise a problem due to this?

Huck wrote

I don't understand your "And if 8 was secure in the first row, than 14 is secure in the third row (as Justice)." Who thinks so?

I think so. What I meant was that if 8 is the Hanged Man, then 14 is Justice. The only thing that makes 14 insecure is doubt about her assignment of Hanged Man to it. If it isn't Hanged Man, it should be Justice, because of the look on the man's face, and that nothing else would fit Justice.

There is a kind of intrinsic vagueness here regarding all the cards normally represented by females in this all male sequence, thus the virtue cards as well as the "papi" (including the male ones, because we don't know which is which).

Huck wrote,

What I think is, that a specific use of trumps in a 5th indepenentvsuit might have been possibly in use in Lucca very early, and the idea might have triggered similar playing cards experiments in Florence after 1438. For Lucca possibly a deck with a 5x13 structure, which was later modified in Florence and possibly modified in Lucca to 4x14+13.

"Very early", with no affect on Florence or Bologna except to "trigger simialr playing cards experiments" but not particular cards or sequences or parts of sequences, just a "structure" somewhat like your hypothesized 5x14 structure, but one card less per suit. And your basis is something in Lucca three centuries later (although I think maybe half that), no trace in between, which you say is a modification of the original "structure", whileusing cards from Minchiate. I find that immensely speculative, but I will keep it in mind.

Thanks for the explanation of what "detecting fire" was. There are 3 fires (out of 5 cards) in your first "insecure" row, and 2 at most in the second. Since all flame-like things are counting as fire, even if they are not painted red (incompetent painter?), I count 3 fires also in your first "secure" row (8 has one definitely, 12 one that could be a fire or a plant). It is true that there are none in your second "secure" row.