Tarot History Forum

I'll keep this as brief as possible, because I don't have a lot of time at the moment:

Regarding the provenance of the Charles VI and Catania decks: Beware of not seeing the forest for the trees. We always need to weigh up the whole ensemble of evidence available and in this case, we have a lot of factors pointing strongly toward Florence and really nothing that points strongly to anywhere else, so the only sensible conclusion is that these cards (and all the related ones) were made in Florence.

As for your idea about the Bolognese order being first, I think that the earliest Florentine order we can hypothesize would have been the order in the strambotto plus the Popess. The Popess must have been there originally because she's in the Rosenwald deck and because there were four papi in Bologna (I don't see any reason to think that the order came from Bologna to Florence, the direction of movement is far more likely to have been from Florence to Bologna; exactly where the order of the virtues was modified is very much an open question, especially because we don't know exactly what their order was meant to be in the Rosenwald deck). The Popess was probably trump 2 originally, although she might have been between the Pope and the Emperor (arguably the most intuitive position for people to have put her in at first, with the Empress probably just below the Emperor just as the queens were just below the kings).

As for minchiate:

- I'm of the view (and I am in good company in this) that the term "minchiate" in the 15th century records refers only to a game, not to a deck, and it appears to have been significantly different from the later Minchiate game and not merely in respect of its trumps. This is primarily based on the fact that the Minchiate deck (and associated game) is always called Germini in the earliest sources for a very long time before it gets called Minchiate—the only sensible conclusion is that the Germini game eventually took the name Minchiate from the other, older game, which it probably resembled in some significant respect. Moreover, one would not expect such a radical alteration of the tarot deck so early in its history, radical not only in terms of content but also in terms of the way the trumps were perceived. I think that in the beginning, people must have tried to see the trump sequence as a somehow logical progression of figures triumphing over one another—they must surely have derived substantial enjoyment and satisfaction from that idea. Whereas the Germini cards, by contrast, were clearly just a large number of cards inserted in a fairly slipshod fashion simply in order to increase the number of trumps in the game. It must have taken a while before attitudes to the tarot deck could reach the point where someone could do that, where someone could think of the trumps essentially just as tokens in the game, with no very meaningful signficance beyond that. I don't think it would have occurred before the trumps were numbered, which I think would have been an important step in transforming them from a meaningful hierarchy of named subjects into just a series of game tokens, known primarily by number alone.

- Regarding the non-Florentine origin of the Minchiate deck, that is based on two assumptions: (1) the Charles VI, Catania, Rothschild, Louvre, etc. cards are from Florence, and (2) the Rosenwald deck and the closely related Assisi deck are from Umbria (probably both from Perugia). If we make those assumptions, it seems very unlikely that the earliest standard, printed tarot decks in Florence in the mid-15th century could have had suit cards that looked anything remotely like the suit cards we see in the Minchiate deck. The standard tarot trump cards in the Minchiate deck also have features which look significantly different from what we see on their Catania and Charles VI counterparts. So I conclude that it is very likely that the tarot deck on which Minchiate was based was originally from somewhere outside Florence, most likely to the south, because of the similarity of the suit cards to those of Roman cards and the Umbrian cards. The dimensions of the Minchiate cards support this too, being markedly wider in format that the mid-15th century Florentine cards and much closer to the early cards we have from Rome. So I think that either the Minchiate deck was entirely invented outside Florence, or—more probably, given those Florentine halos on the four extra virtues of the Minchiate deck—Florentines at some point started using a tarot deck that had originally been designed in some nearby city, and someone in Florence then chose to use that deck as the basis for the Minchiate deck.

Thanks for taking the time to explain your views, Nathaniel. Maybe at some point we can discuss the issues further. Meanwhile I will think about what you have written.

Roberta Delmoro, Le Tarot à Milan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pTeC5n ... wS1QG_9KsB
Gabriele Reina, Le Tarot à Milan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XvPWDU ... sB&index=2
Marie France Lemay, Le Tarot à Milan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHuAgkU ... sB&index=3
Thierry Depaulis, Le Tarot à Milan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX_vnUx ... sB&index=4
Ada Labriola, Le Tarot à Florence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX_vnUx ... sB&index=5
Emilia Maggio, Le Tarot à Florence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfN4sHW ... sB&index=6
Ross Caldwell (lu par Thierry Depaulis), Le Tarot à Florence
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXGEtcx ... sB&index=7

Hello.

This thread is very interesting. Thanks, Mikeh, for comparing the artwork and the two supposedly Florentine trump decks. The deck called Catania or Alessandro has the Borso coat of arms. That's not a problem for thinking they were cards created in Florence by Scheggia. But you say there are numbers noted that don't correspond to the Ferrara numbering. I would find it strange if that deck was commissioned by Borso in Ferrara, where someone noted Florence numbers years later. It would be logical for the numbering to be from Ferrara if the numbers were actually written in Ferrara. I can imagine that Ferrara had that numbering early on, which was later in Florence, but the Steele sermon already had a Ferrara numbering early on. I have to consider that option in detail, but there are more options. We can assume that Borso commissioned the Catania deck in Florence and gave it to someone in Florence. It seems a bit of a stretch. Perhaps another option is that someone commissioned this deck in Florence to give it to Borso d'Este in Ferrara. I hadn't previously considered the problem of the numbers written in Florence on a deck with the Ferrara coat of arms (a carnation in a diamond ring). I don't see any comments on the woodcut issue.

It seems to be accepted that the Catania deck was painted over a printed design. This is argued by observing the line of the drawing, for example, the hand in Old Man (Hermité). But the Charles VI deck also has a line drawn on the Elder's hand. It seems that Charles VI has fewer lines and more paint, but Catania also has areas without lines. I suppose the paint covered the line in several areas of the design. Labriola doesn't seem to clarify this matter: is the Charles VI deck woodcut and painted over it, or is it painted directly? The woodcut technique is different from hand drawing, and this affects the aesthetics of the designs. To compare works by different artists, it would be useful to know if they are woodcut cards or just painted ones.

Nathaniel's theory about Rosenwald's origin in Perugia seems valid. These are decks that were with papers from Perugia. I don't know if they were the three or just the trumps, but that's not usually taken into account. We forget Perugia and tend to think that Rosenwald was from Florence or Bologna. We prefer to think that this deck arrived in Perugia from somewhere else. But it's true that the Assis Deck is also from Umbria. So Perugia seems valid for Rosenwald. And it's possible that this suit design was used in Florence to create the extensive Germini-Minchiate deck. However, there were centaurs in older decks from Provence, if I recall correctly. Florence is a little closer to Provence than Umbria. This seems silly, but it would seem logical to think that these centaurs came from Provence and passed through Florence before arriving in Umbria. Well, perhaps they went to Umbria by boat via Rome. Are there centaurs in ancient Roman decks? Nathaniel's observation about Rome is interesting. I think I have a Roman deck at home. I hope it has centaurs...

Thanks

Magic Moon wrote,

This thread is very interesting. Thanks, Mikeh, for comparing the artwork and the two supposedly Florentine trump decks.

You're welcome. But it is very confusing to others when you reply in one thread to a post in another thread that is totally different, unless you give the link. I assume you meant my post at viewtopic.php?p=27450#p27450.

Magic Moon wrote,

The deck called Catania or Alessandro has the Borso coat of arms. That's not a problem for thinking they were cards created in Florence by Scheggia. But you say there are numbers noted that don't correspond to the Ferrara numbering.

What arms do you mean? I can guess, but I wish you had said, as there is a chance my guess is wrong. The diamond ring and flower? There is much literature proposing that Alessandro Sforza also used this device. The most recent, although not on the internet, is Emilia Maggio's essay in Tarot Illumine (the catalog that went with the Issy exhibition). The book shows a manuscript illustration with this emblem in a Pesaro ms. of ca. 1460, their cat. 24. It is also in a famous Rogier van der Weyden triptych destined for the family (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... za,_07.JPG - the ring is held by a small figure to the right of the male donor). Maggio explains that the emblem was featured on a banner given to Alessandro's father by Nicolo III d'Este in 1409 and figured in Sforza heraldry thereafter (p. 133). Her source is Dummett's 1993 Le Monde e L'Angelo p. 81. He cites Giuliana Angieri, I Tarocchi, p. 33, n. 2, who, however, described it as a "personal emblem" of Alessandro's. For more, there is also S. Abele-Hipp, The Playing-Card, Vol. 49, No. 1, 2020, pp. 14-17.

I don't remember discussing the numbers on the Alessandro Sforza cards. Searching for discussions of the numbers on that deck, all I find is Chariot 10 and Hermit 11. viewtopic.php?t=627. Those numbers, whenever they were put there, are consistent with Florence. No problem. The mistake is in thinking they were made for Borso. Anyway, the numbers were not part of the original design.

Magic Moon wrote,

It seems to be accepted that the Catania deck was painted over a printed design.

By whom?

Magic Moon wrote,

Labriola doesn't seem to clarify this matter: is the Charles VI deck woodcut and painted over it, or is it painted directly?

The quotation I gave from Labriola makes it clear that she considers the Charles VI not to be a woodcut with paint on it.

Magic Moon wrote,

Nathaniel's theory about Rosenwald's origin in Perugia seems valid.

By "origin" you mean where the designs originated, I assume - was that just the monster-knights or other cards, too? I don't remember. The physical Rosenwald sheets were very likely printed in Perugia - that was Franco Pratesi's research and argument. I assume you don't mean that. There is also the issue of whether there was a difference between germini and minchiate. As names of games, of course, they are both documented first in Florence.

When you find those decks with centaurs in Provence, we can discuss them further.

Hi Mikeh.

When I thanked you for your work comparing artists, I was referring to the work you're doing in this very thread we're currently working on. That's why I didn't include a link. Thanks for the link you provided, because that way I can see the response you posted in the thread we're currently working on. I arrived here (current thread) because you mentioned Labriola there (the thread we're currently working on), and I looked for information on the subject, but I hadn't yet seen that you'd added a new post there. Now I'll gladly have to read everything.

It's true that I'm referring to the crest of the ring with the carnation. I think I mentioned that later. The discussion about the numbers is in this thread (where I'm currently writing to) but perhaps it's an old discussion and you're not thinking about. It was said that the numbering of the Catania-Alessandro deck is from Florence, as you now confirm. Thanks for the details about how Alessandro Sforza may have used the crest of the ring with the carnation. I thought Alessandro's theory was out of the question, but I see it's still valid. I've read Maggio, but I don't remember the ring part, so thanks for mentioning it. The problem with the numbers written later in the Catania deck is similar to that of Borso and Alessandro. The problem lies in understanding how that deck got from Alessandro Sforza to Florence, which would explain why those two numbers are from Florence.

You're asking me who accepts that the Catania deck has a woodcut print beneath the paint. I seem to recall that Klein stated this in 1966 about the Rothschild (Emperor) deck and also about the Catania-Alessandro deck. I thought you accepted it. I don't know specifically who else has defended this woodcut. Perhaps I'm wrong then. Okay, so Labriola doesn't believe in woodcuts. Very well. Thank you.

Here is Klein text. I am looking for the part aboit Alessandro Sforza deck but it is very long and I dont find it. It speak about xilografic decks near to fig.15 (before and after):
https://traditionaltarot.wordpress.com/ ... h-century/

You say Pratesi mentioned Perugia to Rosenwald before Nathaniel. Thanks for reminding me. You've understood my comment correctly about Rosenwald. If I find out more, I'll post it. Very good.

What Klein says about the Alessandro Sforza (he calls it "Castello Urbino") is the following:

Without being able to verify the matter in situ, we do not know if the tarot cards of Castello Ursino (Catania, Museo Civico), which were rightly connected to the Rothschild tarots – after having been unhesitatingly assigned to Bonifacio Bembo himself – are also coloured xylographs; we would not be in the least surprised if it were so.

That is to say, he doesn't know if they are colored woodcuts or not. He does say that the Rothschild cards are colored "xylographs," i.e. woodcuts. The book Tarots illumine begins its accoutn of the Rothschild cards (p. 122): "Longtemps tenue pour des xylographies coloriees..." "For a long time considered colored woodcuts...". Even the Rothschild are not, in other words. The designs are first in ink, then colored.

How did Florentine numbers get on cards made for Pesaro? Well, they must have been put there by someone accustomed to the Florentine order as seen in both the "Charles VI" and minchiate, in which the numbers start with the Emperor as iii. How did they get to such a person? Families intermarried and even migrated. The Sforza only held Pesaro until 1512; Florence was an attractive place, once things settled down. And Rome used the same order, another place people went from elsewhere. How do the details even matter?

A case in point is a deck of trionfi (unlikely to be the one in question, because it's in parchment, but probably of heirloom quality) mentioned in the Florentine estate of Ginevra Pico, great-grand-daughter of Alessandro Sforza. Franco wrote about it, translated here at viewtopic.php?p=26584#p26584. Here is the family tree. And here is part of what Franco found in her biography:

Ginevra was then married to Gio. Battista Conti of Rome. Negotiations for this marriage had already begun in 1493. … She also lived with her husband for a few years, and after his death, between 23 April and 21 July 1501, she shut herself into the monastery of S. Orsola in Florence and there, it seems, she ended her career.

.
Rome and Florence were both common destinations for ageing nobles. Wherever it went for the numbers, the Alessandro Sforza deck then ended up in Sicily.

Thanks for the explanations. So the decks named Alessandro Sforza and Charles VIII aren't woodcuts. The deck of cards called the Rothschild Tarot isn't a woodcut either, but some scholars think it is. For example, Andy (if I remember correctly). I need to sort my thoughts out with this new information. It would be interesting to be certain the Rothschild cards aren't woodcuts.

So the Alessandro Sforza theory might be correct. It's been suggested that the Alessandro Sforza deck was commissioned in Florence by Borso or someone in the Este family during Borso's reign. Do you know of any reasons to deny this hypothesis?

Mikeh: you wrote "Tarot Illumine" but I chek that the spelling in Klein and in the modern exhibition catalogue is "Tarots enluminés". I dont know if english was "iluminated tarot" but original title is french in both cases.

PS: I show you something new in "Bolognese Sequence" (THF) about latin word and river theory. Thanks

viewtopic.php?t=334&start=450

In bottom picture we see the Provençal deck I mentioned, which features a centaur. It's a deck dating back to around 1550. I'm currently searching for it on Google, but I can't find it, and I don't know where I found it a while ago. The problem is that I don't know if it has a name or where it's preserved, but I assume that you know this cards.

An older Provençal deck, found in Seville (Spain) and preserved in Fournier museum (Vitoria en España), don't have centaurs. Therefore, I imagine the centaur or centaurs in this deck (1550) could have been inspired by the designs of Rosenwald (Humbria), Assis Deck (Humbria), and Germini (Florence).

I think the theory that the design of the Germini suit cards came to Florence from Humbria is likely. But I have doubts about the similarities with Bologna: for example, the Ace of Coins. Nathaniel thinks the design of the Bologna suits came from Humbria? Perhaps that's possible. On other hand, I can imagine that perhaps the centaurs came to Florence from Humbria, but other details had reached Humbria from Bologna. This seems a bit strange. I don't know how to understand the matter, considering Bologna.