The "Soprafino Tarot" pattern

filipas

Inspired by Mari's thread on Gumppenberg decks, there was a sense that a thread could be started which discussed the "Soprafino" pattern specifically. This would include Carlo Dellarocca's original design as well as the subsequent designs which followed that pattern. Because of its beauty, its popularity, and puzzling questions regarding its iconography, this pattern easily merits its own thread! Below is a very brief synopsis of the pattern (with edits and additions to the comments I posted a few days ago on another thread here.)

Gumppenberg was a publisher of decks from the end of the 1700s into the mid 1800s. He published the designs of various deck artists (Carlo Dellarocca being one of them) in much the same way as Kaplan has published various deck designs over the last three decades. It would be inaccurate to refer to one of his designs as 'The Gumppenberg Tarot' since Gumppenberg published so many different designs -- it would be like referring to one of the several USGames decks as "The Kaplan Tarot".

It's important to distinguish between decks which Gumppenberg published and those which Dotti published. Edoardo Dotti and his father Teodoro were Italian cardmakers contemporaneous with Gumppenberg but their versions of the design were published between 1836 and 1865, slightly later than the earlier Gumppenberg/Dellarocca deck. In other words, Dotti's version was appropriated from Carlo Dellaroca's original 1835 design, the one to which the appellation "soprafino" (meaning "very refined") was actually applied. This chronology becomes more interesting as we consider the many enigmatic details of the Dellarocca trumps which were not carried over into the designs of subsequent versions. This "de-evolution" of the original designs is a topic I plan to return to in a later post.

It can be helpful here to distinguish between the different patterns published by these cardmakers. Gumppenberg, for example, published the deck we know as "Tarocco Neoclassico Italiano" in 1810:

http://www.SpiritOne.com/~filipas/Masquerade/Reviews/neoclass.html

the deck we know as "Trades and Sights of Milan" in 1820:

http://www.SpiritOne.com/~filipas/Masquerade/Reviews/trades.html

and the deck dubbed "Soprafino" in 1835:

http://www.SpiritOne.com/~filipas/Masquerade/Reviews/soprafin.html

all of which are wholly different in design. Adding to confusion is the fact that modern publishers have applied more than one title to reproductions of a single design! ("The Classic Tarot", for example, is Lo Scarabeo's reproduction of Dellarocca's original "Soprafino".) Dellarocca's designs (perhaps the Waite-Smith of its time?) must have been quite influential because many similar decks were immediately spawned from it, including Dotti's version:

http://www.spiritone.com/~filipas/Masquerade/Reviews/dotti.html

as well as subsequent and simplified versions by Gumppenberg and later cardmakers.

It is my understanding from Bob O'Neil that the pattern represented by the various "Soprafino" designs is officially known as the Tarocchino Milanese pattern. Technically speaking, then, it would have been more accurate for me to title this thread "The Tarocchino Milanese pattern" since the "Soprafino" is a specific deck, not a pattern. But since the name "Soprafino" is probably more generally known, and in deference to the deck which actually birthed the pattern, the thread title seems fitting.

We can get some idea of the popularity and evolution of this pattern by browsing Kaplan's Encyclopedia Volume II, where several versions of it can be seen. Dellarocca's 1835 engraved deck has also been reproduced by Solleone in 1981 as Tarocchino Lombardo, by Il Meneghello in 1992 as Tarocco Soprafino, and more recently as Lo Scarabeo's Classic Tarot. Shortly after the original publication of Dellarocca's deck, the father/son team of Teodoro and Edoardo Dotti published their engraved version of the pattern, which has been reproduced as Il Meneghello's Tarocco Italiani and as a large edition by De Vecchi Editore. Here is a comparison from these early versions by Gumppenberg and Dotti:

http://www.spiritone.com/~filipas/Masquerade/Reviews/dotti2.html

We then find the pattern being simplified for purposes of woodcut reproduction; one version by Gumppenberg can be seen in Kaplan p.360 and three versions by Dotti can be seen on pp.369, 373. We also have the Pietro Milesi version (p.361), the Lamperi version (p. 370), and the P. Negri version (p. 378). These later modifications are visually elegant and were copied with relative consistency among various different woodcut versions. But all versions of the pattern originate with the 1835 deck, published by Gumppenberg and engraved by Carlo Dellarocca.

Thanks, and please feel free to post observations, questions, research, musings, etc. This doesn't have to be a strictly historical thread.

- Mark
 

Cerulean

On the Dotti reproductions colors

Hello Mark,

Thanks for your wonderful descriptions and detail--it's as good as reading the reviews that first inspired delight in these more modern Milanese designs.

At the moment I'm enchanted with pairing the Il Meneghello laminated and smaller Teodoro Dotti 1835 in the 'minature book' packaging with ribbons with a book by Laura Tuan. I have the Di Vecchi edition of the Giant Dotti with Laura Tuan's commentary in an Italian language 'book'. She writes in a way that makes me believe she is looking at the colors of the costumes of the majors--for instance there are predominantly green dresses for L'Intemperanza (Temperance) and L'Force (Strength/Force) and L'Imperatice (Empress). I believe that I see references to verde (green) in descriptions of Temperance and the Empress.

I don't know if you have similar sets, but I was curious if you had any general comments about the Dotti trump or other cards' coloring...is it just a coincidence later that a tarot such as Trevisan's Tarots of the Renaissance would choose to have Strength in a green dress? Thanks.

Mari Hoshizaki
 

Jewel-ry

Hi Mark and Mari,

I shall have to come back to this thread later (work calls!) but want to let you know how excited I am that it has been started.

As you know, I have the Classical (or is it Classic, it seems to be called different names in different places) which is a reproduction of the Dellarocca deck. Some of the cards are IMO the best cards I have seen.

I'd like to know if either of you know of a good book on these decks (written in English). I know so little about them but really find them quite exquisite and am thirsty for more knowledge.

I shall be following this thread with interest and will hopefully be able to chip in from time to time.

Thanks

J :)
 

Macavity

Thanks for highlighting these, Mark.

Yes, it took me quite a while to (independently) work all these out! I see the "Selleone" Soprafino 1835s seem to be getting rarer? Quite the most lovely Tarot in my opinion. Also, the (slightly more understated?) Dotti ones, certainly have their merits - The people are so good-looking! I have to look again soon at the Meneghello versions, which I have lusted after for a long while. Would't one of those GIANT (Majors only) decks make nice wall-art? Have I got the 22 rooms needed for display? :laugh:

I also do like the (reasonably priced and produced) LoS "Ancient Tarot of Lombardy" pattern. Another "quiet one" that certainly grows on you... ;)

Macavity
 

felicityk

I am particularly interested in the Dotti decks that follow the Dellaroca pattern but are woodcut instead of engraved. It is my understanding these came after Dotti's engraved deck. Is this part of the "de-evolution" you spoke of, Mark?

Many of these woodcut decks are pictured in Kaplan's Encyclopedia Vol. 2. I have a miniature, majors-only reproduction of this type, Lo Scarabeo's Lamperti Mignon:

http://www.playingcardsales.co.uk/cards/frameitem.asp?catref=11351

Felicity
 

filipas

Re: On the Dotti reproductions colors

Mari wrote:
I don't know if you have similar sets, but I was curious if you had any general comments about the Dotti trump or other cards' coloring...is it just a coincidence later that a tarot such as Trevisan's Tarots of the Renaissance would choose to have Strength in a green dress?

Hi Mari, thanks for the kind response.

I do have these two Dotti sets, but have not looked closely at the colors until now. I notice that the coloring is identical between the two sets -- down to the brushstrokes originally used to apply the color, details of which can be seen, for example, in the green areas beneath Il Bagatto and beneath the horses of Il Carro. This indicates that the two editions are reproductions of the same Dotti deck. Expensive decks such as this were sometimes colored by hand rather than with stencils, and there are details here -- such as freeform edges of color and the apparently hand-dabbed areas such as that beneath the feet of La Giustizia -- which suggest this deck was originally handcolored. Even if stencils had been used the idiosyncracies in color viscocity is identical between these sets, which convinces me personally that Il Meneghello and De Vecchio Editions have reproduced the same original.

As for color symbolism, I have no idea if any was intended here. I personally doubt it. My sense about historical decks (and I may raise some hairs here!) is that color symbolism in the "occult" sense was simply not an interest among cardmakers, with the exception perhaps of some Marseilles versions where I think that argument could be made. Frankly, I think the concern for color symbolism is predominantly a modern one (last 100 years).

As for Tarots of the Renaissance, I don't really see Trevisan's deck making allusions to Dotti and so would assume there is no connection with the two dresses being green.

Thanks,

- Mark
 

Jewel-ry

Mark,

I note in your link to the 'Trades and Sights of Milan' deck that the cards were double ended. Is this normal for these Italian decks? For some reason, I thought that style was peculiar to French decks. If it is the norm, does it still come under the remit of 'Soprafino'?

J :)
 

filipas

Jewel-ry wrote:
Hi Mark and Mari,

I shall have to come back to this thread later (work calls!) but want to let you know how excited I am that it has been started.

As you know, I have the Classical (or is it Classic, it seems to be called different names in different places) which is a reproduction of the Dellarocca deck. Some of the cards are IMO the best cards I have seen.

I'd like to know if either of you know of a good book on these decks (written in English). I know so little about them but really find them quite exquisite and am thirsty for more knowledge.
Hi Jewel-ry,

I saw your post about justifying your purchase of the Classic Tarot -- clearly you've already become enamored with it and we're right there with you!

I know of no books which focus on this pattern or the cardmakers involved, although there is certainly helpful info in Kaplan's volumes (especially Vol II). But perhaps there are sources not in English which might be uncovered through our discussions here? I am particularly interested in Carlo Dellarocca and plan at some point to delve into researching him.
Jewel-ry wrote:

I note in your link to the 'Trades and Sights of Milan' deck that the cards were double ended. Is this normal for these Italian decks? For some reason, I thought that style was peculiar to French decks. If it is the norm, does it still come under the remit of 'Soprafino'?
The 'Trades and Sights of Milan' doesn't fall into the "Soprafino" category. What I was trying to show in my previous post was that cardmakers such as Gumppenberg generally published more than one pattern of Tarot, and that distinguishing these different patterns can help us mentally isolate the particular pattern we want to focus on here.

Thanks,

- Mark
 

filipas

Macavity wrote:
Yes, it took me quite a while to (independently) work all these out! I see the "Selleone" Soprafino 1835s seem to be getting rarer? Quite the most lovely Tarot in my opinion. Also, the (slightly more understated?) Dotti ones, certainly have their merits - The people are so good-looking! I have to look again soon at the Meneghello versions, which I have lusted after for a long while.
Hi Macavity,

The Solleone version is very nice, my one gripe is that its images are somewhat blurry in comparison with the Il Meneghello version. I originally assumed this was because the Solleone cardstock was left unlaminated but I have since found an alternate edition of the Ill Meneghello Soprafino in which the cards were left unlaminated (and housed in a full hard-paper box as opposed to the wrap-around packaging.) And, the unlaminated Il Meneghello cards are crystal clear. If you like the Solleone, I suspect you will love the Il Meneghello reproduction.

I agree about the Dotti personages; on the whole, I personally prefer the artwork of the Dellarocca deck but some of the Dotti cards are extremely pretty.

Thanks,

- Mark
 

filipas

felicityk wrote:
I am particularly interested in the Dotti decks that follow the Dellaroca pattern but are woodcut instead of engraved. It is my understanding these came after Dotti's engraved deck. Is this part of the "de-evolution" you spoke of, Mark?
Hi felicity,

By de-evolution I mean that several details of Dellarocca's original engravings were apparently not deemed significant enough by later cardmakers to include in their versions. This is a puzzling fact for several reasons.

While it is true that any card pattern is bound to lose iconographic detail over time, that loss is an enigma in this case because 1) it occurred immediately, 2) because the missing elements were presumably ones which helped make the original so interesting and popular in the first place, 3) because at that time there was not the same sense of copyright infringment which would have deterred such elements from being copied along with the rest of the imagery, and 4) in contrast to most other patterns at the time, the Dellarocca engravings were so naturalistic and precise that it rules out later cardmakers being unable to identify any of its iconographic elements -- one cause of the "de-evolution" which occurs with the transmition of more archaic-looking patterns such as the Marseilles.

I myself posit that the reason these details were left off was because Dotti and later cardmakers never realized that their original inclusion had any significance. I'd like to continue with this topic soon, as time permits.

Thanks,

- Mark