Tarot History Forum

Ross wrote: ...

Huck wrote:Well, not everywhere it's like the Tarot de Marseille. Between position 6 till position 11 it's partly different.

Clearly I never said that it did match it everywhere. I'm not sure why you think I implied it, unless it is to provoke a fight over a strawman for some reason.

Sorry, no offense intended. Lorredan's Alciato question emerged from the Temperance thread ... I just wanted her to be not confused. I assume, that you know, that Alciato didn't use the sequence of the Marseille Tarot. But for Lorredan it's likely quite a new topic.

But Fame or Temperance is "high" and that's some how the first indication of the sequence of Tarot de Marseille, if we exclude the "Triperuno", which is not totally clear.
Also late are or seems to be "Temperance with wings" (as in the Marseille Tarot) and "Temperance with elephant" (as in Etteilla), which both might indicate a "connection Temperance-Fame".

The Tarot de Marseille is just one example of the C or Western order (or family if you prefer), of which the other 16th century ones are (presumably) Susio (Pavia), Piscina (Savoy/Piedmont), and Catelin Geofroy (Lyon - same as Tarot de Marseille). In the 17th century we still get differences in the Western family with Vieville. The hallmark of this family is the placement of Temperance immediately following Death.

"The hallmark of this family is the placement of Temperance immediately following Death." This I wanted to express. And somehow he starts it ... at least to our eyes, if we exclude the complications connected to the Triperuno text.

I don't think it is possible to reconstruct the order of trumps that Folengo was using. It isn't even clear from the sonnets whether the Angel or the World is the highest card, which would give us at least a hint. Since he mentions by name the Pope and Popess, Emperor and Empress, it is likely he knew a B or C order (and therefore not that of Bologna or Florence).

Hm ... I personally think, that it is (relatively) clear, that he uses (for the 5 poems) the Ferrarese order with a high Justice, but he presented it with an intended error in the position of Devil and Fuco. I wrote about this here in this jungle ...
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=768&p=11081&hilit=folengo#p11081
.... but I agree, that the whole Triperuno material is very confusing. For the larger concept I think, that he develops towards the Milanese order, with a fallen Justice. But again, that's all rather difficult.

Huck wrote: Sorry, no offense intended. Lorredan's Alciato question emerged from the Temperance thread ... I just wanted her to be not confused. I assume, that you know, that Alciato didn't use the sequence of the Marseille Tarot. But for Lorredan it's likely quite a new topic.

No problem then.

If she wishes, she can look at this comparative chart of Western orders Marco provided here -
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=552&start=10#p10961

But Fame or Temperance is "high" and that's some how the first indication of the sequence of Tarot de Marseille, if we exclude the "Triperuno", which is not totally clear.

"The hallmark of this family is the placement of Temperance immediately following Death." This I wanted to express. And somehow he starts it ... at least to our eyes, if we exclude the complications connected to the Triperuno text.

Yes, Alciato 1544 is the earliest dated witness to the C order. But I think it is naive to think he "started" it - he is only a witness to something that already existed. He says it is "commonly called" Tarocchi, indicating it is a common game, and he appears to believe it is a relatively ancient invention, since he searches for a Greek etymology for it. Alciato certainly didn't invent the C order.

"Interrogatus saepissime sui, an veteres lusum chartarum haberent, quo transigere tempora otiosi maxime tolent. Respondi, nusquam me hoc legisse: habuisse quidem alios lusus, quos Jul. Pollux lib. IX recenset: hunc verò, quod equidem sciam, nemo prodidit: tam et si ille, qui vulgò Tarochorum dicitur, Graecum etymum habeat. possunt enim [hetarochoi] ii sodales dici, qui cibi causa ad lusum conveniunt, & chartulas hoc serè ordine lusitant:"

One very often wonders whether the ancients had playing cards, with which they passed a great deal of idle time. In response, I must say that I have never read of them. They certainly had other games, which Julius Pollux enumerates in Book 9; thus, as far as I know, nobody had yet made them, and moreover, if that which is commonly called Tarocchi, has a Greek etymology. Namely, they can be called "the companions", [hetairochoi], those who, for the sustenance, come together to play. This is the order of the cards in the game:
(the verse given above)

Note that he wasn't alone in thinking that the game of cards was ancient - both the Anonymous discourse (circa 1565) and French preacher Lambert Daneau (1566) thought that Tarot existed in classical times, and that it was the first card game. Anonymous also gives it a Greek etymology, although a different one.

If she wishes, she can look at this comparative chart of Western orders Marco provided here...

-
Exactly what I needed. It stops me becoming cross eyed or drunk with confusion.
Grateful to Marco.
~Lorredan
Ps. Ross, I did not take your order for the 5 first cards as indicating Alciati Sequence as Tarot of Marseille- Just explanation of the Latin- giving 5 cards not 4. Your example made it clear.Thanks.

Lorredan wrote: Ps. Ross, I did not take your order for the 5 first cards as indicating Alciati Sequence as Tarot of Marseille- Just explanation of the Latin- giving 5 cards not 4. Your example made it clear.Thanks.

I didn't think you did, or suspect you would. I was surprised Huck might have thought so. I think he really wanted to take the opportunity to note the fact that Alciato is the earliest witness to the C or Western order, but that it is not the same as the Tarot de Marseille order. So I took the opportunity to point out that Alciato is reporting a well-known custom of uncertain age, rather than making an innovation.

Ross G. R. Caldwell wrote:

Lorredan wrote: Ps. Ross, I did not take your order for the 5 first cards as indicating Alciati Sequence as Tarot of Marseille- Just explanation of the Latin- giving 5 cards not 4. Your example made it clear.Thanks.

I didn't think you did, or suspect you would. I was surprised Huck might have thought so. I think he really wanted to take the opportunity to note the fact that Alciato is the earliest witness to the C or Western order, but that it is not the same as the Tarot de Marseille order. So I took the opportunity to point out that Alciato is reporting a well-known custom of uncertain age, rather than making an innovation.

... :-) .. I confess, I wanted to mark this, but your isolated formulation "In other words, just like in the Tarot de Marseille." might have made SOME reader (if not Lorredan) believe, that it is talking about the whole Alciato text and not only about the final words of this very short passage.
Indeed the Alciato text (short as it is) is remarkable, cause ...

a. it's the first order, which moves towards the Tarot de Marseille order with a "sort of Temperance" at position 14

b. it's unusual, cause this "sort of Temperance" is called Fame

c. the use of Fame indicates, that this Temperance had wings, and wings are rare for Temperance, as far I see it, for this early time

d. it had led us to think about Fama Sol or Sol Fama in the Vieville and the Belgian Tarocchi, and we found such passages for Folengo and Boiardo

Well, I don't believe, that Alciato invented this row. I think, we cleared this already earlier, that this can't have been his invention, already in the "Fame riddle" thread ... (? though I've trouble to find the passage). Nonetheless it's seems to be the earliest clear evidence for Temperance at position 14.

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

Part of the problem is the search for a winged Temperantia (when the other virtues are not "winged"). For the moment I found this as the earliest:

Temperanzia / Majollica Faenza 1565-75


http://www.bildindex.de/obj08046320.html#|1

b. it's unusual, cause this "sort of Temperance" is called Fame

I do not believe Alciati meant that or that Temperance on that card is called Fame.
What was the most famous Temperate Day? Good Friday.
Apparently Jesus was goaded- if you are the Son of God, get down from the Cross.
Christians believed he could have, but restrained(used Temperance his perfect Virtue) himself to complete the sacrifice.
So as a heavenly Virtue - it would have wings. As an Aristotlian Virtue it would be down the order and no wings- is best I can describe it- as a civil Virtue as maybe in Visconti -no wings.

~Lorredan

Lorredan wrote:

b. it's unusual, cause this "sort of Temperance" is called Fame

I do not believe Alciati meant that or that Temperance on that card is called Fame.
What was the most famous Temperate Day? Good Friday.
Apparently Jesus was goaded- if you are the Son of God, get down from the Cross.
Christians believed he could have, but restrained(used Temperance his perfect Virtue) himself to complete the sacrifice.
So as a heavenly Virtue - it would have wings. As an Aristotlian Virtue it would be down the order and no wings- is best I can describe it- as a civil Virtue as maybe in Visconti -no wings.

~Lorredan

Alciato said "Fama", and, as he said "Fama", he likely meant "Fama", but perhaps in a meaning, that might sound unusual to us.
In the "Triperuno" we have "funeral orations" at the given position ... well, these orations spread the fame of a person, who has just died.
In the Piscina text a passage is noted, that the "Hanging Man" (the "traitor") has "lost all his fame", so fame seems to have been a factor already during life time, something like a "good name" or an idea similar to the "Chinese face", which might have become lost.
Naturally a crucifixion in the Roman world was a sign, that somebody has lost his "face" or his "fame", and was punished according the laws of the ruling society. With Jesus and following martyrs, which became saints, the medieval world had examples, that this punishment could make famous. Nonetheless there were other new martyrs of a "new thinking", who lost "face" and "fame".
In the contemporary time of Folengo and Alciato these were often protestants, so the conflict in the "definition" was rather actual.

How do we know that that majolica shows Temperance?

Ross G. R. Caldwell wrote:How do we know that that majolica shows Temperance?

The "bridle" is a traditional symbol. Possibly also "one free breast".

compare:
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=397&p=12509#p12509

There you go- a Plate showing Temperance as the Lynchpin of Generosity- resulting in Charity- A Heavenly Virtue.
Not the Christian view of Theological Charity- but the results are the same. Thats the thing about Virtues- the emphasis on life on Earth versus Heaven.
I think at the beginning- before Visconti for example (not that there is any actual proof) Tarot was about civil life- not Christian life. Cards 2/3/4/5 show how close to in appearance the Christian Church was to the Ancient Roman Civil life and their religion. Then as the years went by (not many) the images were mistaken for an actual Christian heirachy. They looked very alike. Maybe it was originally some sort of political statement. Like that the Church was acting like it was still the Roman Empire and swallowing up Land and wealth.Virtues and the survival of the ancient Gods under the guise of Christianity; I think this was easily recognised in 15th Century. The Virtues might be a main clue.
~Lorredan