Re: Shame of Time

#4
Huck wrote:
Ross G. R. Caldwell wrote:Top looks like Prudence - cards could be part of a Minchiate.
Of course, a Minchiate. Why "Shame of Time"?
I don't know. This riddle is too subtle for me.

What clue am I missing?

Prudence is over Time - okay, but many things triumph over Time in Tarot. If he were not shamed before, I don't understand why he would be now.

He looks a little flustered, desperate perhaps, maybe just tired - but I can't interpret it as "shame".

I don't see anything obviously shameful about the image.

Is he ashamed that Prudence appears to have an exposed breast?
Image

Re: Shame of Time

#5
What am I missing? In what context, who calls it 'shame of time'? The shame of time usually refers to time being wasted, abused, ill-spent on idol vanities, wanton loves - is prudence being interpreted as vanity perhaps?
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Shame of Time

#7
Huck wrote:It took about 29 years till that reached us ...

http://www.bibliotecaviterbo.it/Rivista ... _Orazi.pdf

... or at least me
Ah, I get it - it is a "shame" that it took so much Time to get notice of this deck.

It is not noted much in the literature. Only Dummett and McLeod, HGT p. 360 know it, out of the sources I have.

They cite a paper by Alberto Milano from 1989, "Ronciglione: playing cards of a XVII-century Italian state", The Playing Card, Vol. XVII (1989), pp. 78-85. Milano apparently gives additional information, since HGT says that the sheets of this deck were found in the binding of a book dated 1585.

Milano must cite this 1982 article by Carlo Maria D'Orazi that you linked us to -
http://www.bibliotecaviterbo.it/Rivista ... _Orazi.pdf
(but your images are much better - you must have a secret partner ;)

It is interesting that this Minchiate still has an Empress, and apparently a Pope (D'Orazi notes that this card is badly damaged and wrongly (I believe) considers it a Popess. It would be strange to have a deck with a Popess but no Pope! All I can make out from the image in the PDF is a bit of the triple crown, no face).
Image

Re: Shame of Time

#9
Is that a Fool with wings? I have never seen such a thing. If so, it is one after my own heart (the volatile, in alchemy represented with wings). Does he have a monkey face? And what is between his legs? The stream that separates this world from the other (as in the "Chosson" Fool)?

Re: Shame of Time

#10
mikeh wrote:Is that a Fool with wings? I have never seen such a thing. If so, it is one after my own heart (the volatile, in alchemy represented with wings). Does he have a monkey face? And what is between his legs? The stream that separates this world from the other (as in the "Chosson" Fool)?
Yes, there are wings. The suspicion goes to the direction, that it is a Roman Fool, perhaps this has something to do with it.

But the face is obviously disturbed, no monkey ... Also the stream between the feets is not a stream, but a disturbance of the picture ... :-) ... totally there are 10 cards, the Fool and Magician don't appear together, but at distant parts. I've arranged them together.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 40 guests

cron