Marcolini, Francesco.

Ross G Caldwell

Re: 1540 ?

Fulgour said:
(as per above) according to the following article:

The earliest work on cartomancy was written or compiled by
one Francesco Marcolini, and printed at Venice in 1540.
THE FOLKLORE OF PLAYING CARDS


The difference between Marcolini's method in "Giardino di pensieri" and the method (apparently) described by Rowland is subtle, but profound - Marcolini uses only a few cards of a certain suit, or a spinner in the book, to obtain a random result that directs the reader to a written oracle; Rowland describes a reader interpreting random cards *themselves*, apparently from a full deck, without any pre-devised oracles to refer to, which is just as a modern cartomancer does it.

The use of cards as lots to obtain a random written oracle is not doubted to be early, but the idea of *reading* the cards cold, any cards that fall, is close to what we normally mean by cartomancy, and so Rowland's would be, in that sense, the earliest.

Kaplan describes Marcolini's book in his bibliography to volume I; here is Greer/O'Neill's description at Little's website -

"Francesco Marcolino da Forli, Le Sorti di Francesco Marcolino da Forti in Il Giardino di pensieri (Le Ingeniose Sorte), W 159. No Tarot cards--but definitely cartomancy--cards/pointer + book. Dummett p 94; Kaplan I/28; W. H. Willshire 1876. A descriptive catalogue of playing and other cards in the British Museum (Emmering, Amsterdam, 1975) refers to a complex fortune-telling system using playing cards. “Marcolino uses cards only as a randomizing device, ascribing no particular significance to the cards themselves (of which he uses only the suit of danari and the king, knight, knave, ten, nine, eight, seven, two and ace); they direct a questioner to the pages in the book that tell the future.”"
http://www.tarothermit.com/more.htm
 

Huck

Ross G Caldwell said:
The "van Eyck" story was solved in the 1970s by Detleff Hoffmann; the painting is held to be by Lucas van Leyden, and the engraving first appeared in the Magasin Pittoresque in the 1840s.

You can compare the two images here
http://www.angelfire.com/space/tarot/leyden.html

(I scanned the engraving from a copy of the Magasin Pittoresque, and the original painting from Lhôte's "Jeux de société")

Dummett published Hoffmann's findings in "Game of Tarot" in 1980, and noted that the painting seems to show a game of cards, whereas the engraving is made to seem more like divination.

You will note also that the *original* engraving in French merely speaks about "Philippe le Bon", whereas the English version makes him Archduke of Austria! This is clearly some English person's misunderstanding of which Philippe was being shown.

We had a long thread about this very thing at TarotL in late July of 2002; all of the details are there.

Wonderful ... :), Ross. Problem solved.

In contrary to Fulgour I also don't see any reason to interprete the picture as an act of divination.

The man seems to give a flower to the lady, this he doesn't do to a cartomancer.

That's one of the usual "cards and courting" motifs.

In the case, that the flower is given by the lady (seems unrealistical) , then there is no reason to assume a flower-spending cartomancer.
 

Ross G Caldwell

Re: 1540 ?

Fulgour said:
But as for Cuffe, how shall we verify the verification?

I'm not sure what you mean by "Cuffe" - you mean whether it can be verified that he actually uttered the story Rowland relates? That wouldn't be necessary - the only interest is that Rowland relates it himself in 1652; he expresses no wonder about it, so it seems he takes it for granted, and expects his readers to take for granted, that cards could be used for divination, and had been since Cuffe's time (before 1601).

If you or anyone can find Rowland's book and quote it, I doubt anyone will need a further verification than that.

The point for me is not radical doubt or scepticism - I just want to know everything that can be known with certainty about the subject - what can be found in history. It begins to fill out the picture, and gives a basis for a "history" to be written - necessarily incomplete, but no less interesting for all that.
 

Ross G Caldwell

Fulgour said:
Artist and date of composition not withstanding,
this is definitely a card reading being shown here.

She is reading the cards.

If by "reading the cards" you mean as a card player "reads" the cards, in order to pick the best card to play next, I agree with you fully.

If you mean that she is giving a prediction about the future based on the images in the cards, I don't think so. The card in the foreground looks like somebody else played it to a trick; in the painting, it doesn't look like divination to me.

I am sympathetic to divination with cards, at an early date - but this picture doesn't look like a portrayal of it to me. Furthermore, this genre of painting, cardgames, was a favorite of the northern painters starting in the late 15th century. There are several by van Eyck and van Leyden.
 

Ross G Caldwell

Huck said:
Wonderful ... :), Ross. Problem solved.

In contrary to Fulgour I also don't see any reason to interprete the picture as an act of divination.

The man seems to give a flower to the lady, this he doesn't do to a cartomancer.

That's one of the usual "cards and courting" motifs.

In the case, that the flower is given by the lady (seems unrealistical) , then there is no reason to assume a flower-spending cartomancer.

:) It looks to me like she is giving him the flower... her favor. Normally flowers are received by the head, not the bottom of the stem, in my experience :) He is accepting graciously.
 

Fulgour

[note: we seem to be talking about two different pictures]

Actually, to me the picture is childish fantasy anyway.
Probably done in a few minutes to sell some pamphlets.
Why so much concern, and deep gazing interpretation?

Whatever it is, or was created to go along with as a picture,
it really is an illustration of a young lady reading the cards.
She sits alone at the table, and her audience is attentitive.

I once saw a book such as you describe, to be used with
a wheel of sorts as an oracle ~ very well illustrated too!
Now if we could only get a few images from that old book...
 

Huck

Ross G Caldwell said:
:) It looks to me like she is giving him the flower... her favor. Normally flowers are received by the head, not the bottom of the stem, in my experience :) He is accepting graciously.

He's disturbing her at the cards-table, I would guess, she accepts sceptical.
I agree, that flowers are in the tendence taken usually at a higher point and the giving hand is lower to it. In this case, however, the girl is sitting and the man stands, so it's somehow natural, that she touches the lower part.
 

Huck

Fulgour said:
Actually, to me the picture is childish fantasy anyway.
Probably done in a few minutes to sell some pamphlets.
Why so much concern, and deep gazing interpretation?

Whatever it is, or was created to go along with as a picture,
it really is an illustration of a young lady reading the cards.
She sits alone at the table, and her audience is attentitive.

I once saw a book such as you describe, to be used with
a wheel of sorts as an oracle ~ very well illustrated too!
Now if we could only get a few images from that old book...

I feel insecure, if you saw the original coloured oil painting, which was given by Ross as a link.

http://www.angelfire.com/space/tarot/leyden.html

The man has his hat in his hand, greeting the woman and passing a flower to her. That's the main action on the picture, not anything with the cards.

Or, if Ross is right: The woman gives the flower, then the man says "thank you", by lifting his hat. But I doubt that, the giving hand does seldom sit.

It's a courting scene. Cards are often seen in courting scenes. Probably cause "cards" were the game for women and "chess" was for men.
 

Fulgour

I bow to the Academy

Huck said:
The man has his hat in his hand, greeting the woman and passing a flower to her. That's the main action on the picture, not anything with the cards.
So then what you are saying is, the man with the hat is
Francesco Marcolini? Is that why this thread became
obsessed with clip art from a magazine article instead
of the 1540 book on cartomancy, or is there some reason
that date doesn't jive with what works for the academy?