Analyses of Documents

Main conclusions out of the following considerations:

• The state before 1442 is a riddle, but it should be suggested, that the idea to Trionfi decks developed at the court of Leonello in Ferrara, where it met at begin no great interests.
• Trionfi decks are rare but existent between 1442 - 1449
• The interests explodes at various places around 1449 till 1452
• The height of interests is probably around 1454 - 1456, perhaps till 1460
• After that the game becomes to be a normal game
• The Trionfi deck probably had mostly a 5x14-structure in that time.

• 1449 Marcello-letter (related to Milano-Venetia-Padua)
• 1450 Sforza-letters (related to Milano and Lodi near Milano)
• 1450 Statute in Florence
• 1452 Malatesta-letter; (related to Rimini, Milano and Cremona)
• 
  1459 Rapture in Bologna
  
  There is a clear peak of events outside of Ferrarain the years 1449 - 1452, additional to that also the entries in Ferrara restart after the above observed gap in time. All this together again seems to be remarkable, and looks like a rare, not accidently result, and it seems justified to drag from it conclusions above the distribution of Trionfi cards at this time.
  
  Generally: A thing has a good chance to be mentioned somewhere (in this case mostly letters), when it is new to many people. So the later (after 1452) missing of Trionfi-notes outside of Ferrara beside the "rapture in Bologna" is "naturally", Trionfi had left then the state of being a novelty.
  The entries from Ferrara one should exclude from this consideration, because there was a steady production of Trionfi and Trionfi-notes in Ferrara - cause the account books there reported simply expenses. From the entries in Ferrara alone one should assume, that the interest in Trionfi is highest around the time of 1454, when a sort of Trionfi card manufacture existed at the Ferrarese court. In the political time this is parallel to the peace of Lodi 1454, which ended a periode of long wars and opened a longer phase of peace between the Italian cities, probably the Trionfi cards as a social phenomen helped to channel the aggressions in playing war only at the playing card table and not in reality.
  
  From this the hypothesis can be builded, that Trionfi decks are new to most people in Italy in this time 1449 - 1452. As the decks are noted already in 1442 the years between 1442 and 1449 must be evaluated as a time, when the decks either existed only in small number or were only reachable to a smaller cycle of people, either chosen by location or social group.
  
  On the basis of this hypothesis one can take a near look at the documents, if something could be detected, which contradicts the hypothesis or something, which supports it:
  
  1449: Scipio Caraffa (appears in Marcellos letter, document 03 ) doesn't know the game (this suggests, that the type of deck type is new). Marcello himself already knows it. Marcello is from Venetia/Padua, if one assumes, that the game spread from Ferrara (near Venetia), his acquaintaince with the new sort of deck is explainable.
  Marcello searches for manufacturers, who could produce a deck (it seems, he knows more than one, but it is unclear, if this are just manufacturers for playing cards, who could also do Tarot cards, if necessary).
  New or not new ? This entry suggests, that there is already some acquaintance with the deck, but it might be a "local condition" (Venetia and Ferrara have a distance of ca. 80 km).
  
  1450: (Sforza, document 06 ): In Sforzas letter it seems, that the great duke with all his possibilities has obviously problems to get a simple Trionfi deck. He's in Lodi, when he writes the letter (somewhere on the country, 30 km from Milano), not in Milano. It seems, there is no deck on the country, but possibly in Milano.
  New or not new ? It seems clear: In Milano are not many Trionfi decks (however, there is the plague in Milano at that time and that might have caused the rarity, see below).
  
  1450 (Florence): A statute allows Trionfi and some other games after the late 40ies seemed to have been a time of stronger card prohibition than before. A general theory about Florence and the rest of Italy assumes, that "in Florence all things were earlier than everywhere else, there was more creativity". A statute signals a broad stream of Trionfi cards - in Florence.
  But let's look precisely at the situation of 1449 - 1450:
  
  Nov. 1449: Marcello writes his letter. The political situation is very critical - all eyes watch Milano. Sforza tries to capture the city. There is famine in the city. Some thousand people will die soon, before Sforza is successfull (Feb./March).
  Venetia tries to intervene, but it doesn't work. Florence is happy after Sforza's victory (Cosimo de Medici had helped Sforza, now there is a new alliance possible, where 25 years had been more or less war between Florence-Milano).
  Short before Milano had a political experiment: trying to become a republic 3 long years, getting rid of a reigning duke in 1447 at the death of the unloved Filippo Visconti. If the experiment would have had been
  successful, then Milano would have been the 3rd great republic of Italy beside Florence and Venetia. Under this condition other smaller cities would have thrown away their reigning nobility soon and the whole course
  of renaissance might have become rather revolutionary. This didn't happen, Sforza reestablished the dukedom in his own interests and reached a new, relatively peaceful balance between feudalism and republics.
  The anarchical state, that accompanies political changes, gave Sforza the opportunity to seize the power.
  
  In the year 1450 soon a plague reached Milano. 30 000 - 60 000 people (!) died in Milano. Probably that's the reason, why Sforza is not in Milano, but in Lodi. And the relatively chaotic conditions in the city:
  
  a. death of Fillipo Visconti in 1447, the funeral ended in a revolt
  b. 3 years Ambrosian republic
  c. with a 3/4 year siege + famine + victory of Sforza
  d  with a plague with horrible much victims later in the year 1450
  
  result in the condition: difficulties to get a Trionfi deck in Milano. The city is still a little chaotic in this year.
  The plague was not only regional, but I've no data, if Florence was involved. In times of the plague games had a great chance - see the Decamerone of Boccacchio. In Florence is in the late 40ies strong "playing card prohibition". Perhaps with the success of Sforza in
  Milano the general context demands "more liberal laws", so we have a release for players. Perhaps the plague and the play during the plague took an influence.
  And Florence is a place, where people reacted quickly: In 1377 Florence was the first city, that prohibited cards.
  New or not new? Trionfi might be new in Florence, although the statute signals: it is well known.
  
  1452: Malatesta writes to the Sforzas, if he could have a connection to the trionfi producers in Cremona. This means: Malatesta - probably at that time in Rimini or in militaric mission in the region of Naples or Florence, far away (that's not totally sure) - invests considerable engagement to get such a deck. This he probably wouldn't do, if the Trionfi were reachable all and everywhere.
  Local condition in Rimini or Naples (in Florence Malatesta wouldn't have the problem, one should assume): no Trionfi deck reachable or at least no quality Trionfi deck reachable. Or Malatesta is a card gatherer, another possibility.
  Local condition in Milano: The Sforzas seem to have solved their card problem.
  New oder not new? This story tells, that Trionfi are relatively new, still.
  
  And now to Ferrara: although in the years 1450 - 1463 there is constantly something about Trionfi noted in Ferrara, there is NOTHING between 1442 - 1449. And the interest seems to develop slowly: 3 decks are produced in 1450 ( document 04 ) and one in 1451 ( document 07 ) and that's all before 1454, when Ferrara tried to start a mass production (in small dimensions, but the production of ).  In concurrence to these documents appear in Ferrara also notes about the Imperatori deck, which disappears soon after the raising Trionfi success from Ferrara.
  Looking precisely at the first 2 entries from Ferrara 1442 (document 1 and 2): Document 01 starts optimistically with 4 Trionfi decks,
  Dokument 2 speaks of a deck for two boys, 9 and 11 years old. Additionally the document B points to a creative situation around 1st of January 1441, where the Trionfi deck idea might have been born. 
  
  Conclusion out of these contexts: The very early Trionfi in Ferrara isn't taken serious by adult players and stayed as toys for younger humans. The court of Leonello (1442 - 1450) didn't show great interest, instead of this we see a greater interest for Imperatori decks in 1443 and after that no other document, which might indicate, that the courtly interest in playing cards generally was very weak between 1443 - 1450, that means till the death of Leonello. Looking precisely at all notes of Ferrara, we see a Parisina-phase between 1422 - 1424, a periode of nothing about playing cards after her death till 1434, and then a periode of playing card interests till 1443 with enough young persons in the right age at the court and then a pause again till 1450 - perhaps simply cause a desinterest of the regent Leonello in these years. In 1450 this changes, perhaps with Borso (although document 4 still happened under Leonello), but the Ferrarese documents do not reflect "Trionfi-enthusiasm", as one might read out of the Marcello-letter, the Florence-statute and the Sforza-letters. Perhaps one can interprete this as "less interested as elsewhere" at this time, and perhaps this refers to the condition that "around Ferrara the deck is NOT a novelty".
  
  A subground stream leads from the Ferrarese situation in 1442 to a situation in 1449/1450, where some trionfi decks exist, but this kind of play is not known everywhere and not existent in great number.
  
  A communication between Pier Candido Decembrio and Leonello after the death of Filippo Visconti (1447) about Decembrio's "Vita di Filippo Visconti" gives some further information about the state of Trionfi decks around that time, compare Ross Caldwells article at Document 28 (Polismagna).
  
  There are 6 (perhaps only 4) documents which give informations about the deck structure of Trionfi decks, 3 of them are fragments of playing card decks:
  
  1. Brera-Brambilla deck: very unsecure in his informative worth, even allows a 4x14 + 4 - deck
  
  2. Cary-Yale deck: has 24 courts and 56 pips, the number of trumps is unclear, motives vary of the "standard" probably a 5x16-structure)
  
  3. Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo deck: The first artist (Bonifacio Bembo) produced (probably) 70 cards and 14 trumps, all trumps are known.
  
  4. Document B : ://www.geocities.com/research_of_tarot/tri28.html">
  
  5. Document 03 : Marziano describes 16 gods and 4 court cards and 40 pips, with some insecurities this would be 60 cards totally.
  
  6. Document 16 : 70 cards are mentioned, probably refering to a 5x14-deck
  
  2 documents and one unsecure document suggest a 5x14-structure
  1 document and an unsecure document suggest experiments with the number of 16 trumps.
  
  No document really suggests the existence of 22 trump cards.