Re: Dummett and methodology [was Re: The Sun]

141
My children still had read a big part of the Ducks, I don't know, what the next generation did, in my own youth we hadn't so much of them. Well, they modified the texts, as I've heard, and adapted it to German interests. I'v heard, that the German texts are considered better than the English.
mikeh wrote: Yes, there is always a "lowest trump". But if the Fool was the Excuse, then the lowest trump was the Bagatella, the "Trifle", so called, according to Dummett, because he was the lowest trump (The Visconti-Sforza Tarot Cards, 1986, p. 102):
In the early sources, it is almost always called il bagatella, probably referring to the feeble trick taking power of the card, as the weakest trump, rather than to the subject it depicts.
Technically, El Bagatella, in the Steele Sermon. But it makes sense to me. That's another reason--not decisive, to be sure, but a reason--for thinking that the Fool wasn't originally the lowest trump.
For the Minchiate development the theory has developed, that it possibly had only one card with a combination of Magician (table) and Fool (hat). Rosenwald Tarocchi, possibly Florence).
For the Charles VI we have, that it had with its 16 cards only a Fool and not a Magician, and that the Fool possibly associated Morgante, the giant figure of Luigi Pulci.

For Chess iconography we have a poor gamester with 3 dice.

For Stratego (modern game) ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratego
... we have a hierarchy between the figures, but a "spy", who can beat the highest opposite figure, but is beaten by all others. Beside that there are bombs and a flag (not moving figures) and a miner, who can kill the bombs as unusual figures. The "spy" is really technically necessary, otherwise the game would be boring.

Pagat and Fool have a similar function as the "spy", balancing the "very strong trumps". In "Doppelkopf" often is played, that the second Dulle captures the first, this again is a rule to avoid, that the highest trump could be played without risk. In some (or at least one, as I remember; Piedmontese rule ?) Tarot rules a similar rule exists for the trumps 20 and 21.

So there's some game logic, which demands to avoid boring situations.

For the Michelino deck we have, that Amor (lowest trump) in the myth fools Apollo ... he makes a good Fool, but is quite different.
For Daphne, second lowest trump, we have the condition, that she is hunted in the myth .... as the Pagat in the game. Again - Daphne quite different to the common Pagat. But it's the same game idea.

We just have to calculate, that, if we would know more about real decks of the time, that we would know more variants. The time, about which we know more or less nothing, is very long, about 50 years at least, alone then there might have been a horrible number of experiments. And possibly it had been a very creative phase, more relative to later times, when possibly some standards had developed, and the interests for experiments went down.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Dummett and methodology [was Re: The Sun]

142
I made some small studies about old games rules.

L'Hombre had been once the king of the card games. It's rather complicated, finally a mix of various games, in it's complexity (and also in its system) comparable to the German Skat. Like Bridge and others it contains a bidding process at the beginning, which decides, what game is chosen.

L'Hombre has (in subordinated games, which have trumps) three highest trumps (some "nolo" games have no trumps).

1. Spadille ... (black) Ace of spades
2. Manille ... lowest card of trump suit (2 or 7)
3. Basta ... (black) Ace of clubs

... other trumps follow these, if the chosen trump is black, then ...

Black:
Sp-2-Ba ... K Q J 7 6 5 4 3 (11 cards in all)

... if it's red, then ...

Red:
Sp-7-Ba ... A K Q J 2 3 4 5 6 (12 cards in all)

It looks a little bit, as if ...

Spadille mirrors in Tarot 21, highest trump, secure 5 points + secure trick
Manille mirrors in Tarot 1, lowest trump Pagat
Basta mirrors in Tarot 0, the Fool, secure 5 points, but gets no trick

Basta naturally has not so much features as the Fool, but Spadille and Manille meet the categories "highest" and "lowest", especially if Spades was considered as highest suit and Clubs as the lowest (as t used for instance in Bridge).

The game runs for tricks (as Bridge and Whist, somehow "typical English"), not for points (as Skat and Doppelkopf, somehow "typical German"). Tarot runs for tricks and points, as tricks also get points, even if the trick contains no cards wit points.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

How many papi in Florence and Rome?

143
I am back on how many trumps the tarocchi had in Florence and Rome in the 16th century.

Ross wrote, back at viewtopic.php?f=11&t=975&start=120#p14894
I don't know on what basis Dummett makes the statement the 78 card game was used in Florence until the 17th century. As far as I know, always willing to be corrected, Francesco Berni's Capitolo of 1526 is the last time tarocchi is mentioned in Florence.
In the same post he gives the strambotto, not known to Dummett and listing 20 trumps, as an argument for revising Dummett's statement.
But we have the numbering on the Charles VI and the Strambotto, which indicate already three papi by 1500.
The Charles VI is at issue, indeterminate in itself, but for which the Strambotto tends to support Ross's view that there were 3 papi in it rather than four.

Now I think I've found where Dummett gives his reasoning for why he thinks the tarocchi used in Florence until the 17th century had 78 cards. On p. 413l he says (I highlight the part I want to discuss):
Save for the Marchese di Villabianca, there is no known literary reference alluding to any type of Tarot game other than Minchiate played in Florence or in Rome during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Yet the Orfeo and alla Colonna packs testify to the continued existence in both cities of the 78-card pack. On Villabianca's testimony, the 78-card pack was introduced into Sicily by the Viceroy in 1663.
We know from Huck's citation of Franco that there is such documentation of tarocchi aside from Villabianca, whom. I do not want to discuss, because I agree that it is hard to infer anything definite from him for present purposes. But the numbering Dummett gives for the Colonna and Orfeo certainly looks as though there would have had to have been four papi and not three. Here again is Dummett's chart:
Image

The Orfeo, as much as there is, corresponds in its order to the Charles VI (remembering that the Charles VI Chariot is 10 and not 9). And the Colonna has a "Sultan" as number 5, which would seem to be correlated with a papa.

Re: Dummett and methodology [was Re: The Sun]

144
Dummett changed his mind at some point on the composition of the Orfeo pack of Lucca. He believed that it really was the only known example of a truncated trump sequence used as a standard playing pack. There is a Fool, but no number I or Bagatto, then the sequence 9 to 20 as in the chart, for 69 cards total.

Here is what he and McLeod write in 2004 (HGT pp. 353-354) -

"There are two baffling mysteries connected with Minchiate. In many collections, public and private, there are Tarot packs from Lucca, probably datable to the XVII century. For a long time these were classified as defective Minchiate packs. When their special character was recognised, they were at first called Orfeo packs, because the greater number of them had on their backs a figure of Orpheus with the word ORFEO, presumably all made by a cardmaker using that as his trade-name. But subsequently packs have been found with other back designs. In the Orfeo packs and all others of this type, the Jack of Swords holds a shield with the arms of Lucca; moreover, one of the other back designs, in the collection of David Temperley of Birmingham, bears the inscription DI LUCCA, leaving no doubt about the Lucchese origin of packs of this kind.

"The designs of the cards in these different Lucchese packs coincide; and most of them are exactly the same as those of the corresponding cards in the older pattern for the Minchiate pack. This does not hold good for the Fool or Matto, nor of the court cards or Aces of the suits: these all have designs quite different from their Minchiate counterparts. In particular, the Cavalli show genuine knights on horseback, not the half-human figures of their Minchiate equivalents, and the lowest court figure in each of the four suits is an incontestably male Fante. But the trump cards and the numeral cards from 2 to 10 in all the suits are exactly the same in design as those in the Minchiate pack. The most puzzling feature of the Lucchese packs is the composition of the trump sequence. This consists, in all surviving examples, of the trumps from VIIII (the Wheel) to XV (the House of the Devil or Tower), together with the five highest unnumbered trumps or arie, in ascending order the Star, the Moon, the Sun, the World and the Trombe (equivalent to the Angel), all with designs precisely the same as in the Minchiate pack. This selection of twelve trumps appears quite bizarre. No other case is known of a reduction in the ratio of trumps to suit cards; moreover, the suppression of the trump I, in all other Tarot games a crucial card, having a high point value but extremely vulnerable, seems inexplicable. Yet, although most of them are incomplete, the composition of the Lucchese packs is too uniform for the absence of the eight lowest trumps to be the result of coincidence: we must acquiesce in their possessing the usual 56 suit cards, the Fool and only 12 trumps. The solution of this mystery is hidden from us: we know of no source describing the mode of play of the game of Tarot in Lucca with its enigmatic 69-card pack."
Image

Re: Dummett and methodology [was Re: The Sun]

145
"In 1273 and again in 1277, Lucca was ruled by a Guelph capitano del popolo (captain of the people) named Luchetto Gattilusio. In 1314, internal discord allowed Uguccione della Faggiuola of Pisa to make himself lord of Lucca. The Lucchesi expelled him two years later, and handed over the city to another condottiere Castruccio Castracani, under whose rule it became a leading state in central Italy. Lucca rivalled Florence until Castracani's death in 1328. On 22 and 23 September 1325, in the battle of Altopascio, Castracani defeated Florence's Guelphs. For this he was nominated by Louis IV the Bavarian to become duke of Lucca. Castracani's tomb is in the church of San Francesco. His biography is Machiavelli's third famous book on political rule. In 1408, Lucca hosted the convocation intended to end the schism in the papacy. Occupied by the troops of Louis of Bavaria, the city was sold to a rich Genoese, Gherardino Spinola, then seized by John, king of Bohemia. Pawned to the Rossi of Parma, by them it was ceded to Martino della Scala of Verona, sold to the Florentines, surrendered to the Pisans, and then nominally liberated by the emperor Charles IV and governed by his vicar. Lucca managed, at first as a democracy, and after 1628 as an oligarchy, to maintain its independence alongside of Venice and Genoa, and painted the word Libertas on its banner until the French Revolution in 1789."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucca

Lucca had some BIG pride on its independence. And especially they didn't love Florence, which more than once had attempted to take it as Florentine territory. On the other hand it might be, that Lucca hadn't so much artists, so possibly there once were problems to have "cards from Lucca".
Playing just Minchiate, would have been against the "national honor", reducing the Minchiate cards might have been a way to proceed with a local game.

Lucca was attacked by Florence short before 1440, just the date, from which we have the first Trionfi note, possibly a time, when 5x13 or 5x14 decks with a special trump suit existed. Possibly they felt a reason to follow a long time their traditions, not following more modern Florentine developments.

There are a few things said about Lucca by Franco Pratesi:

http://trionfi.com/evx-playing-cards-lucca
Lucca has no Minchiate production in 1810-11

In the time "after Napoleon" a Florentine producer went to Lucca, so there was some confusion about the strange production numbers around this time. Minchiate was involved, I remember. This was "internal discussion", so I can't refer to it, and actually I've forgotten details.
This somehow was a specific problem for the article ...
http://trionfi.com/evx-tuscany-playing- ... -1815-1861

http://trionfi.com/evx-minchiate-export-tuscany
In the Minchiate export lists (1729-62) we have totally 182 Minchiate decks exported to Lucca (72 in 1732, 60 in 1742, 50 in 1746). Considering, that Lucca is close to Florence (about 62 km), that's not much (Siena got more than 6000) ... somehow it's plausible, that Lucca had an own production then.

Lucca had installed one of the best Italian city fortifications in Italy in 1504-1645 ... likely they felt a reason to have something like this. Generally ... from an important economical position during 14th century it dropped to far less importance.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: How many papi in Florence and Rome?

146
mikeh wrote:But the numbering Dummett gives for the Colonna and Orfeo certainly looks as though there would have had to have been four papi and not three. Here again is Dummett's chart:
Image

The Orfeo, as much as there is, corresponds in its order to the Charles VI (remembering that the Charles VI Chariot is 10 and not 9). And the Colonna has a "Sultan" as number 5, which would seem to be correlated with a papa.
I'm not sure why you think Lucca would have had - if it did indeed have the lower cards - four papi based on Dummett's numbering, or the order in which he compares them, except possibly for Colonna, which, while A, has no necessary bearing on the practice in Lucca (and surely doesn't need to be considered at all as a direct relation):

Bologna is the base -
in the Minchiate column, he puts a space between the "Tower" and the Star, so that the lower cards will be easily compared to Bologna;
in the Siciliano column, the card "Poverty" (usually named "Miseria"), unnumbered but not the Fool (who is called "the Fugitive" and is not displayed here), bumps up the Bagatto into a "papi" spot - there are still only three papi;
Charles VI we don't know what was below, but only two could have had numbers - either the Bagatto was unnumbered, or one of the papi had been removed by the time of numbering (the scenario I believe, although I think it originally had all four papi);
Rosenwald has all four, and of course the Virtues in the same order as Bologna (while the numbering of Charles VI has Minchiate et al.'s order, again suggesting that it was numbered at a time of transformation in Florence);
Colonna of course suggests four papi, or Sultans or whatever (Dummett suggests that this may have been a precedent for the Papal Legate's demand to change them to Satraps or Moors in Bologna in 1725) - note in Colonna (Kaplan I p. 134) that card 20 shows what could be a scepter, making the expected identification of this card as the World;
Orfeo may not have them at all;
finally Catania is no help, except again to suggest that with the Chariot as 10, the numbering was done around 1500, during the major changes to the composition and order of the pack in Florence.

So the fact that the Wheel is numbered 9 in Lucca means that there were probably only eight cards below, viz. three virtues and Love, a Bagatto and three papi.
Image

Re: Dummett and methodology [was Re: The Sun]

147
Ross wrote,
So the fact that the Wheel is numbered 9 in Lucca means that there were probably only eight cards below, viz. three virtues and Love, a Bagatto and three papi.
Thanks for the explanations about the Orfeo cards, Ross. I see your point; there didn't have to be 4 papi if the Wheel was number 9. There could have been 9 cards below the Wheel only if the Bagatto was unnumbered. But that is true only in Bologna. So probably, given the numbers, the Orfeo is derivative from Minchiate rather than from an earlier tarot deck with 4 papi. And so likely the numbers on the Charles VI are similar, either made to conform to Minchiate (which I think is likely) or a "transitional form" before Minchiate.

Re: Dummett and methodology [was Re: The Sun]

148
mikeh wrote:Ross wrote,
So the fact that the Wheel is numbered 9 in Lucca means that there were probably only eight cards below, viz. three virtues and Love, a Bagatto and three papi.
Thanks for the explanations about the Orfeo cards, Ross. I see your point; there didn't have to be 4 papi if the Wheel was number 9. There could have been 9 cards below the Wheel only if the Bagatto was unnumbered. But that is true only in Bologna. So probably, given the numbers, the Orfeo is derivative from Minchiate rather than from an earlier tarot deck with 4 papi. And so likely the numbers on the Charles VI are similar, either made to conform to Minchiate (which I think is likely) or a "transitional form" before Minchiate.
The only reason I'm hesitant to think that the numbers on Charles VI conform to Minchiate, rather than show a transitional phase in the configuration of the 78-card deck, is that the highest cards are numbered.
Image

Re: Dummett and methodology [was Re: The Sun]

149
Ross G. R. Caldwell wrote: The only reason I'm hesitant to think that the numbers on Charles VI conform to Minchiate, rather than show a transitional phase in the configuration of the 78-card deck, is that the highest cards are numbered.
Well, if there was a phase, that Lucca had difficulties to produce their own decks, they took them from Florence or another location.
There should have been some technical progress, which made decks cheaper ... and if the Lucca cardmakers hadn't these technologies, then they bought the cheaper versions of Florence.





Dummett/Mcleod:
"The designs of the cards in these different Lucchese packs coincide; and most of them are exactly the same as those of the corresponding cards in the older pattern for the Minchiate pack. This does not hold good for the Fool or Matto, nor of the court cards or Aces of the suits: these all have designs quite different from their Minchiate counterparts. In particular, the Cavalli show genuine knights on horseback, not the half-human figures of their Minchiate equivalents, and the lowest court figure in each of the four suits is an incontestably male Fante. But the trump cards and the numeral cards from 2 to 10 in all the suits are exactly the same in design as those in the Minchiate pack. The most puzzling feature of the Lucchese packs is the composition of the trump sequence. This consists, in all surviving examples, of the trumps from VIIII (the Wheel) to XV (the House of the Devil or Tower), together with the five highest unnumbered trumps or arie, in ascending order the Star, the Moon, the Sun, the World and the Trombe (equivalent to the Angel), all with designs precisely the same as in the Minchiate pack.
Perhaps one should see, what this deck has not:

No 12 zodiac signs
No 4 elements
No 7 virtues
No Love
No 3 rulers
No Bagatto

... but ...

Destiny (Wheel) or Victory (triumphal chariot)
5 bad things (age traitor death devil broken house)
5 heavens

This looks like a threat, a warning, what would happen, if Florence attacks Lucca again. And in this inspiration Lucca had built a strong fortification during 16th century.

The Fante contain no girls, they have real Foot soldiers. They have no fantasy knights, but real knights.

"Fama Volat" has wandered and the Fama city doesn't look like Florence ...

Image

Fama volat + city of Florence

Image

no Fama volat + city ...?
Image

Fama vola with Chariot

The Fama volat change seems to be a remarkable difference, considering how "Fama sol" at the Temperance card had caused considerable discussion earlier.
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=747
I read a "Fama Vola" at the Lucca card.

The Fool is different ...

Image


Image


*************
I stumbled about this ...
About the destiny of a stronghold: Montecarlo (near Lucca)
Looted and set on fire Vivinaia (1331) by Florentine army in retreat after the unsuccessful siege of Lucca, the inhabitants of that town, grew up around the ancient villa (eleventh century) of the Marquis of Tuscany and Countess Matilda, sought refuge on the top of the hill montecarlese at the fortress of Cerruglio, where a few years earlier (1328) eight hundred lances rebels had barricaded the Emperor Louis of Bavaria.

Here, with the support and encouragement of Prince Charles of Bohemia (later Emperor CHARLES IV), the government of Lucca began the construction of the village, surrounded by walls and guarded by a fortified wall with a triangular base, acting as pivot and closed MASTIO two towers, probably belonging to the ancient Cerruglio.In honor of the Bohemian prince (son of John and grandson of King HENRY VII) the new VILLAGE - CASTLE MGR was called CAROLI, Mount CARLO. The fortifications of the village, supported entirely by LUCCHESI, were carried out between 1333 and 1339.With the conquest of Lucca by Pisani (1342), Monaco became an important center of the Vicariate of the border, directly managed by the city of Pisa. In 1374, the recapture of freedom of Lucca, after the period of domination of Pisa, Monte Carlo became the capital of vicarious Valleriana and resided there, a few exceptions, the Vicars of Lucca. In this period (1393 - 1400), by the Master LANFRANCO from Como, was largely rebuilt the two towers connected to MASTIO and traditionally known by the names of the apparition of TORRE (towards LUCCA) and Tower of Santa Barbara (to PESCIA ). Given its extraordinary strategic importance, since the foundation, Monaco was the scene of battles between Pisa, Florence and Lucca, for the domain of Valdinievole and Lucca. In 1437 Monaco was conquered by Francesco Sforza, the future Duke of Milan and then headed by Captain General of the LEAGUE against LUCCA and FIRENZE VISCONTI: since then the castle became more state Fiorentino, up to national unity. COSIMO I, second Duke of Florence, he proposed to do a Monte Carlo munitissimo outpost of the Florentine dominion: with its military engineers designed and built the fortress nearest part of the country, arranged more grandiose works of fortification, repeatedly visited the fortress guarding personally execution of the work undertaken.Then, the growing importance of artillery and consequently nullified any strategy based on passive defense, tamed now considered harmless Siena and Pisa and Lucca peaceful, absorbed in its trade and defense resources from its cargo, the sovereigns of Tuscany Florence and the State abandoned projects initial defense of the Florentine state, at least in this.Since then Carlo came to meet him at a slow but inexorable decline, until in 1775 the LORRAINE smilitarizzarono Fortress and abandoned to its fate.
http://www.montecarloditoscana.it/en/Ar ... orence.asp

This Montecarlo got the name cause of emperor Charles IV.

By the researcher Hübsch (1850) Charles IV is connected to "very early playing cards" since 1340 with the addition, that already before playing cards were in existence and played in Poland. This had been confirmed in a weak manner by other insecure playing card notes about Werner of Orseln (a prohibition), a leader of the German knights before 1330, and a 1303 note about a lightning, which killed 3 card players in 1303 in Brieg (nowadays part of Poland).
The case is insecure ... but, if the notes about Chales IV should be correct, then it's quite possible, that Charles IV left a few playing cards in Italy and possibly just in this small Montecarlo and the connected Lucca.

We have the interesting note, that Prince Fibbia brought the earliest Tarocchino deck to Bologna as "another not confirmed story". "Tarocchino", when not identified with the known 62-card deck would translate as a "reduced Tarot deck", an expression, which perhaps could have been used for a Lucca Tarocchi (just as an example).
Well, I agree, that the word Taroch didn't exist in tis early time, but a later 17th century mind might have just described with Tarocchino the earlier existence of a deck with "reduced" cards ("reduced" in the comparison with the full Tarochi deck, which possibly/likely in the historical reality didn't exist in the time of Prnce Fibbia).

We had recently the Ottocento rules on the table, and I've given arguments, that specific parts of the verzicole rules point to a stronger relationship to the deck described by John of Rheinfelden (60 cards).
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=975&p=14843&hilit=ottocento#p14843

The JoR deck (60 cards) is also under suspicion to have influenced the game structure of the Michelino (60 cards, 16 trumps), which is also very early and somehow much more concrete than the notes about Charles IV, and itseems, that it also had influenced the Hofämterspiel and possibly also the "six courts" in the Cary-Yale.

There are good reasons to assume, that the 60 card deck of JoR had been a court deck for Charles IV, possibly known to Bohemian insider circles already around 1330. Charles IV, then still not emperor, might have brought it to Lucca.
Prince Fibbia was "from Lucca" and (possibly) brought this game or a variant of it to Bologna, as the legend tells, with the result, that some experimental deck forms (without being named "Trionfi", but possibly called "Imperatori") were part of the playing card scene in 1420-1440.
In 1273 and again in 1277, Lucca was ruled by a Guelph capitano del popolo (captain of the people) named Luchetto Gattilusio. In 1314, internal discord allowed Uguccione della Faggiuola of Pisa to make himself lord of Lucca. The Lucchesi expelled him two years later, and handed over the city to another condottiere Castruccio Castracani, under whose rule it became a leading state in central Italy. Lucca rivalled Florence until Castracani's death in 1328. On 22 and 23 September 1325, in the battle of Altopascio, Castracani defeated Florence's Guelphs. For this he was nominated by Louis IV the Bavarian to become duke of Lucca.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucca

The event of 1325 had been connected to the terminus "Trionfi", when I read once a longer description of it.
When the Ghibelline Castruccio Castracani defeated the forces of the Guelph Florence in the 1325 Battle of Altopascio, the Holy Roman Emperor Louis IV made him Duke of Lucca, and the city gave him a Roman-style triumph. The procession was led by his Florentine captives, made to carry candles in honour of Lucca's patron saint. Castracani followed, standing in a decorative chariot. His booty included the Florentine's portable, wheeled altar, the carroccio.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_triumph

In the three-cities-fight Lucca-Pisa-Florence (14th century) the city Florence had taken Pisa(, lost it (1494) and got it again (1513). But perhaps the whole story is older ...
After Charlemagne had defeated the Lombards under the command of Desiderius in 774, Pisa went through a crisis but soon recovered. Politically it became part of the duchy of Lucca. In 930 Pisa became the county centre (status it maintained until the arrival of Otto I) within the mark of Tuscia. Lucca was the capital but Pisa was the most important city, as in the middle of 10th century Liutprand of Cremona, bishop of Cremona, called Pisa Tusciae provinciae caput ("capital of the province of Tuscia"), and one century later the marquis of Tuscia was commonly referred to as "marquis of Pisa". In 1003 Pisa was the protagonist of the first communal war in Italy, against Lucca. From the naval point of view, since the 9th century the emergence of the Saracen pirates urged the city to expand its fleet: in the following years this fleet gave the town an opportunity for more expansion. In 828 Pisan ships assaulted the coast of North Africa. In 871 they took part in the defence of Salerno from the Saracens. In 970 they gave also strong support to the Otto I's expedition, defeating a Byzantine fleet in front of Calabrese coasts.
11th century

The power of Pisa as a mighty maritime nation began to grow and reached its apex in the 11th century when it acquired traditional fame as one of the four main historical Maritime Republics of Italy (Repubbliche Marinare).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pisa

Lucca once had been the Nr. 1, actually Pisa (distance Lucca-Pisa is 15 km) had the role of the harbor of Lucca, located at the river Arno with a close distance to the open water. When Florence took Pisa, it also took the opportunity of Lucca to use this harbor. And Pisa was of vital importance for the Florentine oversea trade.

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

Montecarlo and Monaco

It's somehow strange to find Montecarlo and Monaco (nowadays mainly the name of a "gambling" location and state) in the above mentioned article.
The "gambling" mountain got his name late, and the gambling state has the Italian expression for the location, , which formerly had "Principatu de Múnegu" or similar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monaco
Huck
http://trionfi.com
cron