Questions about Marsielles & Sforza

Uskglass

Okay, I've been lurking around these forums for quite awhile now, but this is the first time I've actually said anything!
Anyway, I'm working on a paper for college which is roughly about the history of Tarot. It has to be a question rather than an exploration so it's going to be something either about how far Tarot has changed over time, or how standardized it has become, whichever is easier to answer.
I'm 3.5k of words in, roughly, so all of my non-Tarot based historical source research is done (apart from a little bit about Gébelin, and a bit about Waite and modern day Tarot, but an overview is easy enough to write.) But, I'm curious about Marseilles decks, as I can't seem to find much information about their beginnings. (Which, I suspect is because there isn't much information to be found.)

But, were typical Marseilles decks such as the Jean Noblet, and Jean Dodal decks produced individually and commissioned like the Visconti Sforza decks? Or were they produced by card makers who created multiple sets? Do we know? Are the Marseilles decks for a different class of person than the Sforza? (I understand there's a huge time gap between Sforza decks and Noblet.)

Would it be correct to speak of "styles" of Tarot? So, they go from Visconti Sforza style (guilt backgrounds, painted renaissance figures) in cards like the Cary-Yale, Pierpont-Bergamo, and the (non-Sforza) Guildhall Library Tarocchi Cards. And then they move from that to Marseilles decks, Noblet, Dodal, and Carlous Zoya. Except where there's odd "exception" decks like the Rosenwald or Sola Busca decks? (After Marseilles we'd assumedly go to the first decks produced for esoteric purposes, so the multiple Etteillas?)


I think this is probably really scattered and doesn't make a lot of sense, so I'm sorry about that! (I don't have many resources for my research, so this is mostly internet based and a bit from the 1st volume of the Kaplan Tarot Encyclopedia.) I have an easier question for you, if that helps:

In your opinion, was Tarot standardized by 1500?

Because you've got clear examples of "standard" Tarot in the Pierpont-Bergamo Sforza deck, but you've also got weird anomalies like the Cary Yale which has extra cards (plus female "knights") but not enough for a minchiate. There's the Sola Busca tarot, which also has extra cards and just confuses me no end.
Also, you've got this bit of poem from 1460, which gives a description of tarot which seems to be fairly "standard":
Four passions of the soul, milady,
Are forty cards in this game.
The lesser gives place to the worthier,
And their meaning gives them their suit.

Each suit also has four figures,
Each of which I place in the due role,
With twenty and one triumphs; and in the meanest place
Is a fool, because the fool the world adores.


Basically: the history of Tarot is very confusing, and I'm confused about it.
 

Abrac

It's my personal belief that the "Marseille" type cards came first. They were made on large sheets and colored by stenciling, then cut into individual cards. It was a form of "mass production" in its time. The cards would have been for game playing. I don't know if there was a "target" class in the beginning, probably anyone who had the money to buy a pack. There's some evidence, as Huson points out in Mystical Origins of the Tarot, that a lot of the imagery has Christian roots. As time went by they did catch on with the upper class; the fancy hand-painted cards were commissioned as sort of high-class imitations.

If you have Kaplan's Encyclopedia Vol. 2, there's an interesting article about the so-called "Sforza Castle Cards," some old Marseille styled cards found in the walls of the Sforza castle. If not, there are some references online.

I realize a lot of it is speculation and won't help for your purpose, but hopefully something "sticks." Others who know more about it will surely have more concrete info. :)
 

Huck

In your opinion, was Tarot standardized by 1500?

We've the first notes of "Tarochi" (Ferrara) and "Taraux" (Avignon), both appearing in the year 1505.
http://trionfi.com/0/p/23/
(the article needs to be updated, but 1505 is still the oldest date)

We have a list of 22 trumps (the "standard 22", more or less) in a sequence (which is called "Ferrarese row", which is not the standard of the later "Tarot"), from a Franciscan preaching against cards, and it's not precisely clear in its date. One might expect "around the same time as the above mentioned 1505" or some time earlier. The probable region is (likely) around Ferrara.
http://trionfi.com/0/p/17/

We've from the time before 1505 the use of words like "Trionfi (cards), ludus triumphorum etc.", from which is assumed, that they "somehow" relate to similar objects as the Tarot cards (maybe around 250 and little more documents for 15th century), also including objects like Boiardo Tarocchi poem and Sola Busca Tarocchi, which both have the "standard structure" 4x14+22, but are rather different in their motifs.
From the documents one may assume, that not all decks of 15th century used 4x14+22, but some decks might have had only 14 or 16 trumps (or other).
The first sure appearance of the 4x14+22-structure is the Boiardo Tarocchi poem, you suggested 1460 for it, but I think, I've good arguments, that it was produced for an opportunity in January 1487.

"Minchiate" as word for playing cards is used in 1466 for the first time, it is not clear, if such decks also were called Trionfi occasionally. Also it's not clear, what content these decks had in the early time.
A list of the earliest Trionfi documents (1440-1465, 2 new findings from the 1444 are still missing):
http://trionfi.com/early-trionfi-cards-notes

Basically: the history of Tarot is very confusing, and I'm confused about it.

It's a complex object with many variants ... :) ... and this demands a complex study.
 

Uskglass

Abrac: No, that's quite useful. Thank you! I kind of just wanted some back ground information on them, because it was confusing me. As for "target" market, I guess I was referring to the kind of people that would have been able to afford them. From what I've read I'm assuming that all cards (playing, tarot, etc.) were expensive during the early days of European production?

Sadly I've only got vol.1, I found it cheap in an old bookshop, and sadly my budget is a bit limited. But that's really helpful, I'll definitely do a bit of research!

Huck:
Let me make sure I've understood you right:
The first mention of the word "Tarochi" specifically is in 1505. Also around this time is a concrete(ish) list of the trump cards from a Franciscan monk preaching against the cards.

Before this date we have references to "trionfi" etc. These are not necessarily the 4x14x22 deck we'd recognize. These include the Boiardo poem, which mentions the 4x14+22 but may not refer to a Ferrara-style Tarochi, also the Sola Busca which has different trumps cards etc. The Cary-Yale would also fit under the "trionfi" label, but would not be a typical Tarochi, then (as it probably had more than 22 trumps?).
As for the poem date, I saw a few. In my essay I have it down as probably 1460's due to the naïve style it was written in, but if you have better evidence for a later date, feel free to point me in the right direction.

Is that right?

((Sorry if this is rushed, I'm at college. So, if I've missed something I apologize!))
 

Huck

Huck:
Let me make sure I've understood you right:
The first mention of the word "Tarochi" specifically is in 1505. Also around this time is a concrete(ish) list of the trump cards from a Franciscan monk preaching against the cards.

Before this date we have references to "trionfi" etc. These are not necessarily the 4x14x22 deck we'd recognize. These include the Boiardo poem, which mentions the 4x14+22 but may not refer to a Ferrara-style Tarochi, also the Sola Busca which has different trumps cards etc. The Cary-Yale would also fit under the "trionfi" label, but would not be a typical Tarochi, then (as it probably had more than 22 trumps?).
As for the poem date, I saw a few. In my essay I have it down as probably 1460's due to the naïve style it was written in, but if you have better evidence for a later date, feel free to point me in the right direction.

Is that right?

((Sorry if this is rushed, I'm at college. So, if I've missed something I apologize!))
No problem. I see from your personal info, that you're quite young and you've interests in history. That's really good, cause most of the persons with interest in Tarot history are old men ... :-(
The Boiardo Tarocchi poem was first a poem, and became a deck some time later (as far we know it ... around 1497). Some cards are still extant, though none of the trumps. This is one ...

fandar.jpg


... others are available at http://trionfi.com/0/j/d/boiardo/
(this part is from an older time and is not updated; some functions don't work)

The Boiardo deck once (17th century) was also called "game of passions", cause the 4 suits present 4 Stoic passions ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoic_passions
Love, Jealousy, Hope, Fear

The idea, that this deck was made in 1487, comes from the observation, that the last trump (the highest trump) relates to the Roman Lucrezia, who killed herself to save her virtue. The result of this action was, that the Roman king Tarquinius Superbus lost his kingdom, and Rome got a republic instead.

The relevant short poem was:

Fortezza d'animo in Lucretia liete
Exequie fece: per purgar sua fama
Se uccise, e all'offensor tese atra rethe,

Dando exempio a chi 'l nome e l'honore ama.

English:

Inner strength made happy the death of
Lucretia: to clean her fame
She killed herself, and she prepared for the offender a dark net,

Giving an example to those who love their own name and honour.

There was not only a Roman Lucrezia, but also Lucrezia, the illegitimate daughter of Ercole d'Este, duke of Ferrara (ruled 1471-1504). She married in January 1487. The poet Boiardo worked all his life for the d'Este family and was the most famous poet in Italy in his time.
One may assume, that he had some educative function for the children of Ercole. Lucrezia was the oldest of them.
Ferrara had a bad war in 1482-84 and it suffered considerably. The finances were ruined. There was even famine in a usually well structured region. Ercole saved himself with (cheap, but extraordinarily good) theatre shows and marrying 3 daughters and a son to high noble houses.

1487 Lucrezia to Bentivoglio in Bologna
1489 Isabella to Gonzaga in Mantova
1491 Alfonso to Sforza in Milan
1491 Beatrix to Sforza in Milan

Lucrezia was the first, who married. A lot of poems were written to her for the wedding. The Tarocchi poem is NOT mentioned between them, but it naturally was the moment, when it made sense to have the name Lucrezia appear in the highest trump description.

The poem had a special structure:
The trumps 1-3-5-7-9-11-13-15-17-19 relate mainly to famous men, and these have errors or are little bit stupid.
The trumps 2-4-6-8-10-12-14-16-18-20 relate mainly to famous women, and these present virtues or wise behavior.

This special issue "women are better than men" seems to have been a novum in Italian literature (around 1487-1490). Werner Gundersheimer, a specialist for Ferrara in 15th century, observed this trend for Bartolomeo Goggio, who wrote his women-admiring work in 1490. Earlier women-literature only went to the point, that women might be as good as men. Gundersheimer (likely) didn't know the Boiardo poem (generally it runs under "minor works" and didn't find too much attention) or he detected not this special aspect in it.

This women-enthusiasm in Ferrara had the background, that Eleonora of Aragon (Ercole's wife) had shown special personal power in a situation in the Ferrarese war (as already stated, 1482-84), when her husband was sick and out of order. A series of paintings with this womeman-power feature were done in Ferrara around this time by Ercole Roberti. This one relates to Lucrezia ...

intera-grande-wpcf_300x417.jpg


Two other paintings are known.

Two independent observations on the poem lead to the same time period ... so, plausibly, the poem was done then, c. January 1487.

This women-power feature also went into the education of the daughters of Eleanora . Especially Isabella d'Este became the dominant female figure in the first part of 16th century in Italy. She had a special favor for playing cards, especially Tarocchi cards.

***********

In the question about the number of trumps in the Trionfi decks there are 2 kinds of documents. Extant cards of decks dated to 15th century (which are often incomplete decks) or written documents. Only very few of the Trionfi documents speak directly or indirectly about the structure of the used decks.

Important documents:
******************

A fore-runner deck (till 1425) called Michelino deck included a row of 16 trumps (these were Roman gods). It was made for Filippo Maria Visconti, and a Venetian provedittore Giacomo Marcello called it in 1449 a "new ludus triumphorum".
http://trionfi.com/jacopo-marcello-letter-1449

A document of 1441-1-1 (first of January) speaks of 14 pictures, which were made for Bianca Maria Visconti during a longer stay in Ferrara. It's not noted in the document, that these were playing cards, but the "first of January" was generally dedicated to gambling and games. It's suspected, that these were 14 Trionfi cards as part of the a deck structure with 5x14-cards.
http://trionfi.com/0/d/

A document of July 1457 reported the production of 2 expensive Trionfi decks (likely made for the visit of the young Galeazzo Maria Sforza. This deck had each 70 cards only (5x14 = 70).
http://trionfi.com/0/e/16/

A document of 1477 reports a contract about the production of a larger serious of playing cards and Trionfi cards. The price relation between Trionfi cards to "normal playing cards" was 5:4 ... a condition, which would indicate the same number of cards for the additional trumps as in the suits (as for instance in the 5x14-deck).
http://www.naibi.net/A/323-BONOZZI-Z.pdf (only in Italian)

None document speaks of a "22" till the Boiardo Tarocchi poem.

Extant cards
***********

1. Brera-Brambilla Tarocchi ... has only 2 Trump cards. Nothing can be concluded from this.

2. Cary-Yale-Tarocchi ... clearly outside of the standard. The suggestion had been done, that this had been a 5x16 deck.
http://trionfi.com/0/c/35/

3.Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo deck ... 20 trump cards, totally 74 still exist, so nearly complete. However, the trumps were made by 2 different artists, the first made 14 cards and the second (probably some time later) made 6 cards.
The assumption is given, that this had been a 5x14-deck originally. The extant trump cards of the first painter would have with the numbers of the Marseille Tarot this sequence ...

0-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 ... 12-13 ........... 20

The six cards of the second painter are ...

Star-Moon-Sun (all in the category "heavenly bodies") and Fortitudo-Temperantia-World (all cardinal virtues if World would mean "Prudentia).

Indeed ... in the Charles VI Tarot (also one of the earliest decks) the card World is painted in the manner of a cardinal virtue:

039.jpg


040.jpg


041.jpg


049.jpg

http://expositions.bnf.fr/renais/arret/3/

The virtues are recognized by the polygonal halo. With this detail many Florentine virtues presentations are decorated. For instance this Minchiate card, clearly known as Prudentia:

d0511317.jpg


0016justiceprudence.jpg

Justice and Prudentia at the church door of the Baptistery in Florence

From this consideration it seems clear, that the second painter added 3 bodies of heaven and 3 cardinal virtues ... and this looks more like a later action.


4. The Charles VI Tarocchi (16 trumps + 1 court cards) ... it is suggested, that the original knew 16 trumps only and that it had some relation to the Cary-Yale Tarocchi (considered as a 5x16 deck). The suspicion exist, that both had some relation to the chess game with 16 figures.

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

From all this: there is no early evidence for the game structure 4x14+22. Other game structures (5x14 or 5x16) have some evidence, but totally NOT MUCH EVIDENCE. It's possible, that other lines of developments existed and that we don't know anything about them.
Really much evidence we've meanwhile for "decks called Trionfi" ... since 1440. But we don't know, what they were. The fashion was thin in the 1440s, but exploded around 1452 and became a constant factor (at least till 1465). It might be, that it was constantly growing, but that's not a guarantee. Between 1476-1486 there were many wars in Italy, not only in Ferrara. Maybe, that the development of the Trionfi cards was blocked. Boiardo's poem (1487) might have been already a revival of an earlier successful genre.

For the 1440s we observe parallel an explosion of pictures connected to the Trionfi poem of Petrarca (written 1355-74, unfinished).
Petrarca had 6 allegories: Love-Chastity-Death-Fame-Time-Eternity.

Love ... Tarot: Love
Chastity ... Trionfi cards: woman on a Chariot
Death ... Tarot: Death
Fame ... : Minchiate: highest trump is Fame
Time = Father Time ... Tarot: Hermit
Eternity ... Tarot: World

Petrarca became famous as a scholar, not as a poet. His poetry was detected in smaller steps. The Trionfi poem likely became more intensive known in the 1430 and for 1441 we have the oldest document about a Trionfi poem edition with all 6 allegories.

Further we've an increasing appearance of "triumphal celebrations", called Trionfo as singular and Trionfi as a plural.
An intensive year with "triumphal celebrations" was 1439, accompanying the council of Ferrara/Florence 1438/39. The council got some glamour, when it was moved from Ferrara to Florence ... the Medici paid for it, and they had a lot of profit from it. Somehow in these actions (related to Petrarca's Trionfi, related to the triumphal celebrations) likely the idea was born to name specific playing card decks with many pictures for trumps "Trionfi cards".
From the Florentine records we have, that 2 persons were punished for playing Trionfi in 1444 (a recent finding by Franco Pratesi). For 1450 we have an official allowance to play this game, repeated a short time later in Siena (1451). After this one can observe from sale records, that this game fashion exploded.

Well, that's only for the name ("Trionfi cards"). Similar (comparable) decks (like the Michelino deck) might have existed long before.
 

Abrac

Huck, from the sound of the letter re the Michelino deck, it (the deck) was based on an earlier version. Is that how you understand it or am I wrong?
 

Huck

Huck, from the sound of the letter re the Michelino deck, it (the deck) was based on an earlier version. Is that how you understand it or am I wrong?

I wrote:
"A fore-runner deck (till 1425) called Michelino deck included a row of 16 trumps (these were Roman gods). It was made for Filippo Maria Visconti, and a Venetian provedittore Giacomo Marcello called it in 1449 a "new ludus triumphorum".

I meant in this context with the "fore-runner deck" the Michelino deck, not any other deck.

Well, there is a deck, which was a fore-runner deck to the Michelino-deck, about which we know something, if you're interested.

John of Rheinfelden (1377) presented a deck with 4x15 structure, 10 number cards and 5 court cards for each suit.

The report about the Michelino deck (translation of Ross Caldwell at ... http://trionfi.com/martiano-da-tortona-tractatus-de-deificatione-16-heroum
..) isn't totally clear, but I suspect, that it had also a 4x15 structure, with the trumps added in groups of 4 to the 4 suits.
for instance ...
suit "Virtues" = 1 King + 4 gods (Jupiter+Apollo+Mercury+Hercules) + 10 numbers (with"eagles")
according the system ...

mic-01.jpg
 

Abrac

Huck, appreciate the feedback, and all the work you do for the tarot community. I understand now. :)
 

Uskglass

Okay, that makes sense! Thank you, Huck! So trionfi refers to any card deck of that period with some sort of suit of trump cards then, and they may or may not have had similar imagery/cards to standardized Tarot. So the Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo deck started out life as a trionfi, but was made into a tarrochi as that became popular (by the addition of the heavenly bodies and the cardinal virtues?)

Also, is tarrochi just used for Tarot or is it another term that can be confused?

And yeah, I suppose! Though, the benefit of being older and being interested in Tarot history is that you're more likely to be able to afford the books. I'm on a meager students budget. Heheh.

Also, I'm sorry for all of the questions. If you mind please let me know!

By the way, the Michelino deck has birds as the suits, correct? Was this common or is it a rare feature. (I know there's the Catelin Geofroy Tarot uses this 100 years later, is that isolated as far as we know?

Out of curiosity do these 4x16/other decks in the continuing centuries or do they fall out of favor? I'm assuming that they've been lost to history by the time of Gebelin? Admittedly my knowledge of the time between the really early Tarot decks to 1781 is a little dodgy, so I might have missed something.

Thanks again!
 

Huck

Okay, that makes sense! Thank you, Huck! So trionfi refers to any card deck of that period with some sort of suit of trump cards then, and they may or may not have had similar imagery/cards to standardized Tarot.

More or less right.
We have in 15th occasionally the appearances of other words (for instance Minchiate - once in 1466, in 1471 and in 1477), from which we assume, that these were specified against the Trionfi expression. The 3 notes occurred all in Tuscany, it might be, that such decks, if they appeared outside of Tuscany, also got the Trionfi name.

For Rome we have a lot of Trionfi notes from registry books of paid customs taxes (also for playing cards). The expression "Minchiate" doesn't appear, although we know, that a lot of these decks were imported from Florence (Tuscany). It seems plausible, that also Minchiate reached Rome, but these decks should have been called Triunfi there.

We have the appearance of the word "Imperatori" (in Italy only in Ferrara). In 1423 it's noted in the context of the number "8", possibly indicating "decks with 8 trumps". In Germany it appears only once with this name, otherwise it seems to be called Keyserspiel (that's synonym to Imperatori) or Karnöffel. Karnöffel is first mentioned in 1427, so close to the oldest Imperatori, in c. 1450 appears a poem, in which it sounds, as if the used deck had special Trump cards (Emperor, Pope, Devil, Karnöffel, and possibly 4 "heilje lerer" - "holy teachers"), possibly 8 cards. Later descriptions of Karnöffel don't use "special trump cards", just usual playing cards, and the number of trumps seems to have been around 7 or 8 (4 Emperors, Pope, Devil, Karnöffel).
Karnöffel was very popular in Germany a longer time, Imperatori was only known in Ferrara in Italy till the mid 1450s.

Florence/Siena had the appearance of a card deck "chorone" and we don't know, what it was (appears only twice in the 1440s).

"Names" are subjective views of different speakers, and names of games had a lot of changes - generally. The jump from Trionfi to Tarocchi is not a single case.

So the Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo deck started out life as a trionfi, but was made into a tarrochi as that became popular (by the addition of the heavenly bodies and the cardinal virtues?)

Likely the 6 cards were added before the word Tarochi or Taraux existed (1505).

Also, is tarrochi just used for Tarot or is it another term that can be confused?

"Tarocchi" became the common Italian form (around 1520 the first appearance), Tarot became much later the common French form. A lot of different writing forms exist.

And yeah, I suppose! Though, the benefit of being older and being interested in Tarot history is that you're more likely to be able to afford the books. I'm on a meager students budget. Heheh.

... .-) ... the web offers a lot of material and mostly more than books. But: Somehow it's good to have the Kaplan Encyclopedia I at hand (together with Nr. II it's naturally better). It's not so expensive.

Also, I'm sorry for all of the questions. If you mind please let me know!

By the way, the Michelino deck has birds as the suits, correct? Was this common or is it a rare feature. (I know there's the Catelin Geofroy Tarot uses this 100 years later, is that isolated as far as we know?

The number of extant decks from the early time is limited, some of these few use animals as suit signs, not only the Michelino deck. It seems, that it was more common in 15th century than later.

Out of curiosity do these 4x16/other decks in the continuing centuries or do they fall out of favor? I'm assuming that they've been lost to history by the time of Gebelin? Admittedly my knowledge of the time between the really early Tarot decks to 1781 is a little dodgy, so I might have missed something.

Thanks again!

Likely it's true, that very early card producers and commissioners had more fun in playing card experiments than in later time. Or alternative: Curious and very worthwhile decks had more chances to stay extant by the attention of early art collectors. The result in both cases is that, what we know.