Two Popes/Two Emperors?

DoctorArcanus

The Augustine images are beautiful! :)
Thank you Rosanne and Robert!

In particular, the blue cappa Augustine is quite similar to the Charles VI pope.
I think the most important difference is the crown that appears in the Charles VI card and seems to be missing in all Augustine images.

Marco
 

jmd

The 'crown' aspect is indeed missing, DorctorArcanus - important obsvervation!

Yet I wonder if this is significant in itself, and may have been used on the deck to symbolically 'simply' show that this character (whoever he was intended to be) was a 'prince of the Church'.

This would seem to me not too distant from other representations, such as one of the images posted earlier by le pendu (post 1, lower left-hand side), as well as the Cary-Sheet - that ALSO has that crown (though I cannot tell it the Cary-sheet version is intended as ducal rather than princely).

The book aspect is important, as mentioned above - but why has it become so linked to the card that has developed as Papesse? and has the transformation (if transformation it is) from masculine to feminine also allowed an altered consideration of depiction as possible annunciation image with its standard depiction of Mary with, indeed, a book?

So there are a few issues here, one the earliest of intended depiction, and then its transformation to perhaps a card with a different intent.

With regards to the Cary Sheet, I personally have misgivings that the full card is what came to be card V, and the partial what came to be card II. I accept that their relative position in the sequence suggests this (something that is also consistent with the other cards and their numbering), but the partial figure is tooo similar to the image of 'God' I previously added to the V thread a few years ago, shown again here:

GodV.jpg
 

Rosanne

Hi DoctorArcanus- on the Charles V1 card that is the earliest form of Mitre: it is not a Papal crown...
A papal crown has some alluding to three tiers- it might just be three lines etched in the metal.
As regards shape, there is such difference between the mitre of the eleventh century and that of the twentieth that it is difficult to recognize the same ornamental head-covering in the two. In its earliest form the mitre was a simple cap of soft material, which ended above in a point, while around the lower edge there was generally, although not always, an ornamental band (circulus). It would also seem that lappets were not always attached to the back of the mitre. Towards 1100 the mitre began to have a curved shape above and to grow into a round cap. In many cases there soon appeared a depression in the upper part similar to the one which is made when a soft felt hat is pressed down on the head from the forehead to the back of the head. In handsome mitres an ornamental band passed from front to back across the indentation; this made more prominent the puffs in the upper part of the cap to the right and left sides of the head. This calotte-shaped mitre was used until late in the twelfth century; in some places until the last quarter of the century. From about 1125 a mitre of another form and somewhat different appearance is often found. In it the puffs on the sides had developed into horns (cornua) which ended each in a point and were stiffened with parchment or some other interlining. This mitre formed the transition to the third style of mitre which is essentially the one still used today:

Interestiningly Pope Clement V11 had all the Papal Crowns melted down in 1527 to raise money.
 

jmd

The triple crowned (or triple marked) mitre was not at all times used for the Pope (Roman Pope, that is, rather than the other popes in other factions) - so I'm not sure how this really plays in.

One of the considerations that for me is becoming increasingly clear is that the early decks are likely to have depicted the two sees that resulted from the schism between East (Constantinople) and West (Rome).

I also have no personal doubts that this also rather quickly became transformed to Papess and Pope.

One of the key distinctions between West and East was that the Western Pope was shaved, the Eastern was not. The other variations probably became overlapped elements of confusion with time - but what seems 'clear' is that two masculine forms are often depicted, unlike the clearly feminine Visconti Papesse.

If we look again, for example, at the two cards from the Jacques Vieville 1650s deck, there is apparent clarity (I have to say apparent, for it can of course be quite faulty as the wonderful reasoning of Ross Caldwell shows in post 3 - that I am taking as simply read... and re-read):

compare_vieville_popes.jpg


Here, the character on the left-hand side has NO obvious feminine traits at all, and the character on the right-hand side cannot be a Roman Pope of the period due to his beard.
 

le pendu

Here's another image to futher complicate things!

This is from Kaplan II, page 276, indentified as Italian Tarocchi Cards from the Collection of Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest. It matches the same cards from the Metropolitan (Dick) cards.

budapest.jpg


The assumed images are.. (partial) Emperor, Pope, Empress, Popess.

Note that the Popess in this case has the Crossier. I don't see a book. The Image of the Pope is really hard to make out, but it looks like there are two small figures holding a shield with with two keys in front of the figure. The Popess is listed as III, and the Pope as V.
 

Rosanne

jmd said:
The triple crowned (or triple marked) mitre was not at all times used for the Pope (Roman Pope, that is, rather than the other popes in other factions) - so I'm not sure how this really plays in.
OK I must not be explaining myself clearly. The person on the Charles V11 Card is being depicted as a Bishop. That could be of course, because Popes wore the Bishops Mitre for occasions other than when they wanted to be depicted as Pope. It would seem to me that the Artist of the Painted card, would have known that- so if he wanted to depict a Pope the painted card would have had two things- a Mitre that was Papal and a crosier/rod other than the curled shepherds crook type/ (or if the shepherds crook then facing inwards) -a tau shaped one for instance.He might have also painted in the gold and the silver Keys to be direct. So on face value this card is painted as if it was a bishop, who knew Canon Law, and could be called Le Pape. The only Person who that applies to is St Augustine.~Rosanne
 

le pendu

Rosanne said:
OK I must not be explaining myself clearly. The person on the Charles V11 Card is being depicted as a Bishop. That could be of course, because Popes wore the Bishops Mitre for occasions other than when they wanted to be depicted as Pope. It would seem to me that the Artist of the Painted card, would have known that- so if he wanted to depict a Pope the painted card would have had two things- a Mitre that was Papal and a crosier/rod other than the curled shepherds crook type/ (or if the shepherds crook then facing inwards) -a tau shaped one for instance.He might have also painted in the gold and the silver Keys to be direct. So on face value this card is painted as if it was a bishop, who knew Canon Law, and could be called Le Pape. The only Person who that applies to is St Augustine.~Rosanne

(whoops Rosanne, I hit edit rather than quote.. that's why your post looks edited..)

And I guess my question is What "card" is it? "Pope" or "Popess"? Reasons for thinking it is the Pope... male figure, keys (I think I see two), two attendants. Reason for thinking it is the Popess.. Book, No staff, No hand raised in blessing.

I'll go into this more..
 

Rosanne

Hehehe Robert, that is the 64 thousand dollar question. If I was to think of this card (Charles V11)evolving I would have to say it is into the Popess, because- St Augustine depicted FAITH and represented the concept Mother Church. So in the woodblock type you would have a Pope with two keys,- not one, no book; and another card representing Mother Church- No staff, with possibly a book, harking back to St Augustine- aka the Popess. They would both have a Papal Crown then.~Rosanne
 

le pendu

See.. what I find interesting and frustrating is how inconsistant the iconography really is!

What I'd really like is to say that there are two popes (either both male or one male and one female). And that the difference is that one of them holds a book, and the other one gives a blessing. Or that one of them holds a book, and one of them holds a staff. Or that one of them holds a book, and one of them wears a triple crown. None of this is "true"

For the iconography, we have a mixture of many things. Single Key, Double Keys, Triple Cross, Single Cross, Crossier, Book, One Attendant, Two Attendants.

I look at the Mantagna.. and we see "The Pope" shown with a book and keys. Maybe a triple crown. So what this says is that the book and the keys can be said to represent "a pope". Fine. Interestingly, note the chair with the animal heads in the Mantagna and the chair in the first image I found of Augustine. Not saying it means anything.. just interesting connection.

I'd like to be able to say.. *in the Tarot*.. Book = Popess Card and/or Doctor of Canon Law. Most of the images of the "figure with the book" are identified with the Popess. The Cary-Sheet, and Budapest, and Bologna we are not certain. IF we want to say that the full figure in the Cary Sheet is actually a Popess.. (she has the Crossier like the Budapest, she has the book), and the other partial figure is the Pope... and we want to say that the figure with the Crossier is the Popess in the Budapest. Then that opens up.. to me.. the option that the Figure on the Charles VI may be a "Popess" card.. which is showing a Doctor of Canon Law.

But the crossier itself isn't clear enough. If we want to say that the figure with the crossier in the Cary Sheet is the Pope, that conflicts with the Budapest... unless we want to say that the figure in the Budapest with the crossier is the Pope. If so, that means that the figure in the Budapest with the shield with two keys held by two attendants is the Popess.

You mention that the image you have of Augustine shows One Key and a book. That matchs the Geofroy and Paris Popess. It also matches the Charles VI card, unless the Charles VI shows two keys.

Lots of questions here. We have several early cards with a Single Cross (bologna and Visconti), we have several with a triple cross (Conver, Geofroy, Paris), and we have several with a Crossier (Budapest, Cary-Sheet, Vieville, Noblet, and Dodal)
 

Rosanne

The Church was more rigourous about Regalia than the card designers I feel. If you look at jmd's Jacque Vieville 1650 Cards at face value- I would say Le Pape with beard and temple behind, Sherpherds crosier and two attendents(poosibly Franciscians or Dominicans Monks) Bishop's Mitre and the word Le Pape- You have another depiction of St Augustine later in his life when he had a beard. How then Le popess came about might be as Mrs St Augustine- the Mother Church with his book that shows the connection. Maybe even it is another Canon Law person as partner like Pedro de Luna- French crossed Pallium who had book- was a Pope but looked female as the years went by- to the designers. They then made them Mr and Mrs Pope and Popess. My instinct tells me that most TdM's Le Pape was St Augustine- how the Papess came about is puzzling to say the least. ~Rosanne