Re: Franco Pratesi: translations of old but fundamental articles

11
Here is the next in the series of notes on the earliest Florentine convictions for gambling with cards, then called naibi more often than carte (with various spellings). It is a translation of "1388-1396: Firenze − Condanne per naibi da parte dell’Esecutore," dated August 28, 2015, at https://naibi.net/A/413-CAPINAIB-Z.pdf. As usual, comments in brackets are mine, in consultation with Franco, for clarification purposes.

1388-1396: Florence − Convictions by the Executor for naibi

Introduction

This note is part of a long investigation on the early days of playing cards in Florence. After the well-known provision of 1377, it is not clear how the new game of cards, or rather naibi, as playing cards were then called, spread throughout Florentine territory. In particular, the possibility that the prohibitions actually succeeded in hindering the popularity of the new game remains very doubtful. In the event, if naibi players were convicted, they could be convicted by the same foreign rectors who had the power, and also the task, to repress the vice of gambling. The first of these officials was certainly the Podestà [chief magistrate], the only one also present in the smaller towns. In Florence, however, there were at least two other “families” of policemen who also had police functions and who in particular watched over the city with the task of capturing those who carried weapons, those who went out at night, and those who gambled. The two foreign rectors in question were the Captain of the People, whom we have already met in a previous study, [note 1] and the Executor of the Ordinances of Justice, whom we examine here.


The Executor of the Orders of Justice


The figure of this foreign rector is typically Florentine; in other cities, it would not even have been conceivable. The magnates, eminent figures, usually belonging to families of the ancient nobility, those who in other cities would have had the reins of city government in their hands, in Florence constituted the target of the main actions of control and conviction by the Executor. We are only interested in the activity of combating gambling, but this, as for the Podestà and the Captain, was only a rather secondary part of all the activities of the Executor's “family,” so much so that for these three foreign rectors, the books with the related information are found inventoried under the title of Ufficium
______________
1. https://naibi.net/A/413-CAPINAIB-Z.pdf [translated in the present thread at viewtopic.php?p=26685#p26685].

2
Extraordinariorum
[Office of Extra-ordinary matters]; in short, a sort of supplement to institutional duties.

The executor was one of four foreign rectors, with the fourth, the judge of appeals, having a lesser importance, so much so that in 1412 that office was suppressed. There was, however, a characteristic that necessarily distinguished him from the others, who usually came from the noble families: precisely because of his institutional function, the executor could not be a noble.
For this job, a knight was not chosen, because he had to keep an eye on the magnates and apply the laws enacted against them. He had to be: “an honest, expert plebeian, a scholar of legality, someone who in the Florentine vernacular is called a popolano”. […] The official headquarters of the executor was located in the rear part of the Palazzo dei Priori, next to that of the Capitano del Popolo. […] He also had a “family” at his disposal, made up of his deputy and a judge, as well as notaries and policemen on foot and on horseback, only that these were not called “berrovieri,” like the others, but “masnadieri.” [note 2]

The books studied

In the ASFi [State Archives of Florence] there is a section with the documentation that was collected by the executors. It is a set of archival units that, although numerically smaller than the similar ones of the podestà and the captain, still presents a more than respectable consistency, with its 2283 pieces that cover the time interval 1343-1435. An old inventory [note 3] of this collection is also available in the ASFI that permits the selection of those books that may be of greatest interest for research on games, namely the Libri inventionum [books of discoveries], belonging to the sector of the Ufficium extraordinariorum. These books of our greatest interest are not recorded in the Inventory for all the executors. It is possible that there are others not examined in this study, capable of providing further information regarding its particular purpose: to identify the appearance of naibi among gambling games, already during the fourteenth century.

The books examined are listed in the following table, where the letter in the first column has been assigned in this order only to simplify the related description; instead, the number in the second column is that of the signature in the ASFi collection.
_____________________
2. R. Davidson, Storia di Firenze. IV, Parte I, Florence 1973, pp. 160-162.
3. ASFI, Inventario N/03.


3
Books of the Executors studied
Letter-----Number----Years
A-------------819-------1378
B-------------953-------1383
C------------1012-------1386
D------------1050-------1387-8
E------------1077-------1388
F------------1098-------1389
G------------1130-------1390
H------------1228-------1394
I-------------1242-------1394-5
L------------1276-------1395
M------------1309-------1396-7
N------------1404-------1400

A − Register of 261 written folios, not bound. It contains mostly trial records. The initial ban [bando=declaration of prohibitions and other matters] begins with blasphemy. The part of interest, with the “discoveries,” begins only at f. 251. Initially, there are mainly captures for prohibited weapons; then, together with the euntes de nocte [people going out at night], there are also players of zare [a deice game], in one case seu tasilorum ["or dice"]. Indeed, there are often several players present and captured together, as on f. 260v two Neapolitans, a Pistoian, and others Florentine.

B – Unbound register of 27 folios. The “discoveries” are on folios 19-21. The ludus azardi [game of zara] is spoken of, and several cases are found with 5-8 players. As usual, sometimes the cloak left by the fugitive player is recorded. Overall, those captured for gambling are more than usual, much more numerous than those convicted for other crimes.

C – Register of 80 folios with parchment cover and coat of arms of the executor. In the initial ban, the usual list of the main crimes begins with blasphemy. The “discoveries” are listed from f. 15r to f. 28r. The majority of cases are those captured at night, followed at a distance by those captured with weapons, and finally for gambling. At least one person “baptized” [dunked in the Arno or given a cold shower], on f. 15v. The game always seems to be zara, as on f. 20 with six captured people, including two Sienese players and one from Pozzolatico. As a rule, only the verb ludere [playing] is indicated, without any attribute.

D – There are 4 books loosely sewn together. Only the first has the front of a parchment cover with the coat of arms of the executor. They are mostly trial records. Only the third book has, from f. 102r to 109r, the

4
usual list of “discoveries.” The game is called ludus açardi [game of zara] or l. aççardi, and also çardi. In one case the location is indicated, ad pontem Refredi [at the Refredi bridge]. The captured are numerous, also for weapons and at night. Important for the present study is capture for naibi, which will be examined again later.

E – Register of 22 folios without cover. It begins with the list of delegations and the general ban in which the crime of gambling is found rather low in the list, after blasphemy, weapons, counterfeiting money, hosting rebels. The “discoveries” go from f. 17r to 22, the last one. It is normally written ludus zardi or azardi, but in tassillos, or cum taxillorum [with dice], and ad ludum vetitum tassillorum [at the forbidden game of dice] are also found. Captures at night are predominant compared to those for weapons, and those for gambling are even less frequent.

F – Register without cover of 33 written folios. It begins with the delegations and bans up to f. 13. Here, too, the order of the crimes listed in the general ban is blasphemy, weapons, money, rebels, and only fifth gambling, indicated as ludus çardi. After some blank folios, we find the “discoveries” from f. 22. Here, too, the most common form is l. çardi. Among the objects abandoned by the players we find on f. 22v a board and wooden dice. On f. 27v we find the note that Benignus Alberti de Lamania bactiçatus fuit per ludum [Benignus Alberti of Germany {Lamania=Allemagna} was baptized for gambling.] (It must have been more difficult for a foreigner to put together the money to pay and leave the Stinche free without being “baptized.”)

G – Register of 30 folios with parchment cover and coat of arms of the executor. It is normally written ludus zardi or çardi. In the recurring formula used to specify the game, the entire related clause is often added, which usually also appears in the statutes: in quo vincebatur et perdebatur contra formam statutorum communis Florentiae [in which one was defeated and lost against the form of the statutes of the Florentine commune, i.e. Republic]. On f. 11, for one case, the location of the game is also indicated: ex porta sancti nicholai. In this case, the gate of San Niccolò is involved, as on other occasions some of the other gates were reported.

H – Register of 32 folios bound in parchment with the unusual coat of arms of the executor, with five beautiful white butterflies. The “discoveries” are listed from f. 28r to 32v. It is usually written ludus açardi or aççardi. In this book, the majority of the captures are for those taken at night. An entry of a capture on f. 29v for ludum ad marellas is later deleted as having been recorded in error. Evidently, the police had been too diligent in carrying out their mission, so much so that they considered a permitted game to be prohibited. Some historians of the game of checkers would be very happy to recognize in this case an early documentation of that game (which was probably played for quite a long time before being called checkers), but here it was more likely a game of the filetto [morris] type.

5
I – Thin register covered in parchment with the coat of arms of the executor. The folios of interest for captures are those from 29r to 37r, the last written folio of the 46 total. For the games, the ludus is indicated above all taxillorum. In one case we find ludere ad lapides seu sassos, in short, stone-throwing. More important for us are two entries in which the game of naibi is explicitly indicated, which will be examined later.

L – Register bound in parchment, of 54 folios, with the coat of arms of the executor. The captures are listed from f. 43 to f. 53. The game is indicated in most cases as ludus azardi. Also found there are l. sassaioia [stone throwing] and ludus puxillorum, boxing. Also in this book, we find one citation for naibi, on f. 43v relating to 25 December 1395, examined later.

M – Register without cover of 45 written folios, including blanks. The general announcement at the beginning lists the crimes in order: blasphemy, weapons, counterfeit coins, gambling, assemblies. The captures are listed from f. 23r to 28v. Gambling is usually indicated as ludus açardi, rarely tassillorum. On November 18, 1396, several captures were made for gambling and for night outings. Next to the ludus açardi, we find cases of naibi, indicated here differently from the usual as ad carticulas. They will be examined again later.


Convictions for naibi

Considering the purpose of this study, it seems necessary to recap the gambling captures in which naibi are expressly mentioned.

19.12.1388. (N. 1050, f. 107r): Cherricus Michaelis de Salseburge de Alamania inventus fuit per militem et familiam praesentis domini Executoris ludere ad ludum naiborum contra formam statutorun communis Florentiae. [Cherricus Michael of Salzburg of Germany {Alamania, for Italians, included Austria} was found by the knight and family of the present lord Executor to be playing at the game of naibi, contrary to the form of the statutes of the Florentine commune.] This capture, expressly indicated for the game of naibi, presents several noteworthy points. The date appears very early and shows us that at that time the laws prohibiting naibi were already enforced. To what extent they were enforced we remain in doubt. The noteworthy point here is that a "German" from Salzburg is captured, and that this is the only player captured. It is certainly not possible to think that he was captured while playing solitaire with cards! Then perhaps, with the Florentine players, the “family” of the perpetrator was ready to turn a blind eye.

22.11.1394 (N. 1242, f. 29v): Nicholaus Ser Anthonij populi S.ti Johannis de Florentia repertus fuit per militem et familiam predicti(?) domini executoris ludere ad ludum nayborum seu cartarum contra formam

6
(…) statuterum… [Nicholas, Ser Anthony of the parish of St. John of Florence, was found by the knight and family of the aforementioned(?) lord executor to be playing at the game of naybi or cards, contrary to the form (…) of the statutes]. Here, and also in the next entry, we encounter an interesting fact: next to the original name of naibi, that of carte is added, which later becomes the only common name.

20.01.1395 (N. 1242, f. 31v): Grassus Grassi ferrator populi S.te Lucie de Magnolis de Florentia repertus fuit per me notarium( ?) et familiam predictam ludere ad ludum cartarum seu nayborum contra formam statutorum et ordinament(orum) dictis communis… [Grassus Grassi, blacksmith of the parish of St. Lucie de Magnoli in Florence, was found by me, the notary(?) and the aforementioned family, to be playing at the game of cards or naibi against the form of said statutes and ordinances of said commune …] None of the players we meet here are distinguished by family or professional celebrity, but this Grasso Grassi ferrator may constitute a good antidote for scholars accustomed to investigating the playing cards of princely courts.

25.12.1395 (N. 1276, f. 44v): Bertus(?) Zenobij de populi S.te Marie Maioris de Florentia - Andreas (+++) - repert(i?) per familiam domini executoris ludere ad ludum naiborum contra formam statutorum communis Florentiae… [Berto(?) Zenobij of the parish of St. Mary Major of Florence - Andreas (+++) – found by the family of the lord executor playing at the game of naibi against the form of the statutes of the Florentine commune …] Here the players captured together are two, Berto and Andrea, but the record is not entirely clear about this. In this case, the date is also important. Christmas Day, or Easter [Pasqua] of the Nativity, as it was called then, is not part of the end-of-year celebrations, which in Florence began with the Incarnation on March 25, but it remained one of the main religious holidays, a day to be celebrated with the family, in church... or playing cards.

11.18.1396 (N. 1309, f. 24r): Johannes a Ture(?) stipendiarius inventus fuit per familiam domini executoris ludere ad carticulas contra formam statutorum communis Florentiae et captus fuit familiam dicti domini Executoris. − Nannes Becholj(?) stipendiarius de civitate Castelli inventus fuit per familiam domini Executoris ludere as carticulas contra formam statutorum communis Florentiae et captus fuit per Anthonium de perusio(?). [John of Ture(?) stipendiary was found by the family of the lord executor to be playing at cards against the form of the statutes of the Florentine commune and was arrested by the family of the said lord executor. − Nannes Becholj(?) a stipendiary from Città di Castello was found by the family of the lord executor to be playing cards against the form of the statutes of Florentine commune and was arrested by Anthony of Perugia(?).] On the same day different captures are listed, but these two would seem to have been made together: there are then two players caught playing the forbidden game of cards. Both are indicated as stipendiari, simple wage earners. At least the second one is not Florentine, but comes from Città di Castello, a city between Arezzo and Perugia that in those years had freed itself from papal domination with the help of the Florentines. Another noteworthy thing is that the noun naibi is not used, but already that of cards, or rather of carticulae, those that in other cities we often find indicated as carticelle. Let's be clear: this does not mean that the name naibi had fallen into disuse: attestations of it will be found for a long time afterwards.

7
Comment on naibi players

We read in several publications that naibi were, at least initially, playing cards of considerable value, which were used especially in courts and among the privileged classes, but of this aspect, important or not, we can find no trace in the documentation studied in this case. What we find here corresponds to a completely different situation.

None of the players we find convicted for being caught playing naibi are presented as people of importance; indeed, a considerable number of those captured are foreigners who presumably would have found little assistance from their Florentine acquaintances. It is no coincidence that the first player we find convicted, and at a rather early date, is a “German” from Salzburg. It also appears significant that almost always only one player is captured, while for the game of zara we also find several multiple captures recorded. At most, one can admit that the game of naibi was predominantly a game played between two players, but even in this case, it is perplexing that one of the two almost always manages to get away with it, without even being reported as having escaped.
However, it is clear that the game of naibi was widespread. Any foreigner who wanted to play naibi during his stay in Florence would have easily found company; he just had to move to the most suitable places, in some public loggia or near the city gates.


Conclusion


The study was based on a dozen books of the executors of the justice systems. In particular, some captures of naibi players carried out in Florence by the executor's “family” were reported and discussed. These cases are few: two together in 1396, two in 1395, one in 1394, and one even in 1388, when naibi had been in use for little more than a decade.

It is possible (but impossible to determine with certainty) that other cases of games of naibi were included under the name of zara, possibly intended in a generic sense for prohibited games. Other cases may be recorded in books of that series not yet studied. In the period examined, however, one does not perceive the presence of a drastic change in the laws on gambling, but rather a more or less severe attitude in controls.


8
The presence of several foreigners among the convicted and the very fact that often only one of the players who were certainly present was convicted suggests that the executioner's “family” acted severely only in some cases, possibly excluding Florentines and certainly people of importance. From what we find here, it is clear that the game of naibi had entered into the favor of the people, even at the lowest levels. This cannot exclude that at the same time there existed practices of playing naibi in socially elevated environments, involving the richest Florentine ladies and even the children that we glimpse from some testimonies; obviously, in none of those cases can one expect an arrest by the police, an action that was able to bring other situations to light, thanks to the registers preserved.


Franco Pratesi – 28.08.2015

Re: Franco Pratesi: translations of old but fundamental articles

12
The last in the present series is one that I have already translated once, in 2016, and now forgot that I had done so. This translation is probably slightly better and more readable, so I include it with the others here. It is of "1377: Firenze – Condanne ai giocatori di naibi," dated Oct. 9, 2015, https://naibi.net/A/423-1377-Z.pdf. 1377 is the first year in which playing cards are documented in Florence, in a prohibition of the same year. The note was first published in The Playing-Card 44, no. 3 (Sept-Oct. 2015), pp. 166-173. Again, comments in square brackets are mine for clarification, in consultation with Franco.

1377: Florence – Convictions to players of naibi

Frank Pratesi

English abstract

Two books of the Podestà of Florence, with records from July to October 1377, have been examined for this study. In addition to the expected captures of gamblers playing the dice game of Zara − about one hundred − a dozen captures can be read there for players of Naibi, at such an early stage. All these players were Florence dwellers, living in six different parishes all around the town. The spread of the game in Florence is commented on, as well as the implicit confirmation that a remarkable production of playing cards was already established there.


Introduction

In the history of playing cards and card games, the Florentine provision of March 1377 has a peculiar role. In the older contributions, this law was not known; when it was known, there were many uncertainties and inaccuracies before the document was checked against the originals and recognized as valid; for a long time, it was considered the oldest testimony for all of Europe. More recently, the genuineness of other documents has been recognized, and the Florentine testimony seems to have lost its primacy, but it remains, in any case, one of the oldest documentations in this regard.

Here we are not concerned with other cities, and the Florentine provision of 1377 remains the natural starting point. A study on that document appeared years ago in this journal; [note 1] rereading it after a quarter of a century, I find it still valid overall. One of the points that should be retouched concerns the idea that the word naibi was practically unknown in Florence, for the reason that even in official documents it was written differently; this remains true, but only in part, because writing naibi or naibj cannot be attributed to ignorance of the term, but only to an alternative way of writing the final letter I, which is also observed for the most familiar names.

Reading the provision leaves us with strong doubts about the situation in previous months, if not also several years before. That we can go back much further in time, at least for Florence, is excluded both on the basis of documents from other sources, and for reasons internal to the text, considering that it speaks of noviter in(n)olevit [recently implanted] and that noviter is there to demonstrate that it could not have been a long Florentine tradition. However, it is also true that if the new game was spreading in the city to the point of worrying the city councils, it could
__________________
1. F. Pratesi, The Playing-Card, 17 No. 3 (1989), 107-11.


167
not have been something isolated, known only to a few, perhaps a merchant who had brought back to his family, or to his business partners, a deck of playing cards found in an exotic location.

Assuming that such an event actually occurred, before playing cards took on the character of a mass game, so much so as to be taken into consideration by city councils, a lot of time would have been needed. In fact, the presence of a souvenir object was not enough; for its reasonable use in the game, knowledge and acceptance of the relevant rules was indispensable, to be observed in agreement by the various players; furthermore, the number of decks of new cards had to be multiplied in some way.

In short, what happened in Florence before March 1377 remains a mystery to be investigated; now, however, we can leave aside any possible hypothesis in this regard and move on to reading other documents from that same year 1377, simply moving from spring to summer.


The books of the podestà studied

This study is part of a larger investigation conducted in the State Archives of Florence (ASFi) on documents relating to the history of card games in Tuscany. One branch of this research has concerned the books of foreign rectors and the Books of the Lily [where the Lily, Giglio, was a specially designed emblem of Florence] of the Chamber of the Commune; most of this documentation studied so far concerns the fifteenth century, but some data relating to the end of the fourteenth century has been extracted from the Books of the Lily [note 2] and from those of the executor; [note 3] however, the books of the captain and the podestà [chief magistrate] have not yet provided useful results for those years.

As regards the series of books of the podestà, considerable difficulties are encountered in selecting the units of possible interest, and also in being able to consult them once selected. In particular, the books that, from reading the old Inventory [note 4] available in the ASFi, appear to be dedicated to inventiones [discoveries], that is, to the capture of offenders caught red-handed, are very rare; when these archival units are not found indicated, it remains to be verified whether the related documents were inserted into any book of the Officium extraordinariorum.

An attempt in this direction led to the choice of two units for the year 1377, the same year as the first Florentine testimonies on naibi. The aim was not to find others so early, but only to check the situation of gambling convictions at the time when naibi were introduced. These are two books that are practically identical externally, with the same dimensions of 30x23 cm and with a parchment cover on which are painted a central coat of arms and four similarly sized ones at the vertices.
_____________________
2. www.naibi.net/A/416-GIGLIO300-Z.pdf [translated here at viewtopic.php?p=26690#p26690.
3. www.naibi.net/A/417ESECUTOREZ.pdf [translated here at viewtopic.php?p=26691#p26691].
4. ASFi, Inventario N/26.


168
The first book, [note 5] of 28 folios, contains the registration of various activities and, above all, the bans [declarations of the prohibitions and other matters] with the standard formulas that record both their promulgation and their notification to the citizens by the official herald. On the part of the podestà's “family,” there are no arrests of citizens caught with weapons or out at night or gambling, precisely what would interest us; these registrations are in the second part of the other book examined. This second book, [note 6] of 48 folios, begins with a couple of folios relating to the installation of the new podestà, Marquis Pietro of the marquises of Monte Santa Maria. The podestàs of Florence were chosen from among the foreign knights of more or less ancient nobility; in this case the marquis was undoubtedly from an ancient family and also of imperial nomination.

The notary who wrote this book is Matteo di Pizzica, and he comes from the same marquisate of Monte Santa Maria from which the podestà came; his handwriting is particularly beautiful and clear, apart from some of the abbreviations. As usually happens, we immediately find a summary list of the delegations conferred by the podestà to the various officials and employees. Of interest to us are the three knights (indicated by the corresponding medieval Latin term milex sotius) Aloisio, Antonio, and Bellaccio, and above all, the notary delegated to extraordinary matters, as we read on f. 3r: “Item elegit et deputavit in suum notarium extraordinariorum viz. Ser Guelfutium Francisci de Civitate Castelli” [Also, he chose and deputed as his extra-ordinary notary, viz. Ser Guelfuzio son of Francesco of Città di Castello].

On folios 4-10, all the sessions presided over by the podestà are recorded; these are stereotyped texts, usually inserted five or six per page, in which the only significant detail is the date. The second part of the book, starting from folio 12r, corresponding to July 10, contains the records of the outings of the podestà's “family” in search of potential violators of the laws on weapons, nighttime outings, and gambling. Finding these convictions in a podestà's book cannot cause great surprise, because similar convictions can be found recorded in previous decades. However, there was a huge surprise in finding that in this early period, already some convictions of naibi players are recorded.


Gambling convictions

The three knights of the podestà regularly take turns on their inspection tours of the city, leading the “family” of berrovieri [police], and a continuous record of all these outings is kept in the book under examination, specifying in the header when the inspection took place at night. Many times it is recorded, with a standard and also rather verbose formulation, that the “family” returns without having made any captures. The captures by the knights recorded are exclusively for carrying weapons and for going out at night. At the end of August, a fourth name of a knight of the podestà appears, Blaxius, probably to be read in Italian as Blasio. It seems that the new arrival has a
___________________
5. ASFi, Podestà, 2261.
6. ASFi, Podestà, 2262


169
more zealous behavior, so much so that among his captures are also included some zara [a dice game] players, those indicated in the following table in italics and with an asterisk.

All the data in the table with convictions for gambling, excluding the three mentioned above, result from the activity of a single officer of the podestà, the notary Ser Guelfuccio, delegate for extraordinary cases, coming from Città di Castello, a town not far from Monte Santa Maria. Clearly, this officer is particularly dedicated to captures for gambling. In particular, among those convicted by his action, none appear for night-time outings, while these are the most frequent convictions for the knights of the podestà; but this can immediately be explained by the fact that there are no nocturnal outings of the “family” under the command of the notary. Apart from two cases in which Ser Guelfuccio has men convicted for carrying prohibited weapons, all his convictions are for gambling and are of great interest to us.

---------------------------[Day-----Naibi-------Zara-------Weapons--------Folio
in the months of July-October 1377]
Image

170
Image

Unlike in previous years, here naibi appears next to zara. In the Latin text, zara is systematically indicated as ludus çardi, but ludus tassillorum [game of dice] also appears at times, which probably did not indicate a different game. The game of naibi, however, is always indicated as ludus nayborum. As was to be expected, the sentences for playing are largely associated with the game of zara. For this game, it was quite common at the time to find quite large groups of players captured together, something that would become less and less frequent as the years went by; here, the number of zara players captured simultaneously varies from one up to even thirteen.

In particular, a clear decline in captures can be noted towards the end of the period. This also occurs for the other officers of the podestà, so much so that the last recorded capture is for one surprised at night by Blasio on 30 September, while in October there are eighteen recorded outings of the podestà's “family,” all without captures, until the last one on 9 October on f. 46r, followed only by a couple of blank folios.

The captures for the game of naibi might seem to be a negligible contribution, but they are not. Even numerically, they represent a good ten percent of the total, eleven cases compared to the 105 total of zara, and this is certainly not a small thing for a new game compared with the most popular one during the entire Middle Ages; in short, the game of naibi had evidently already become familiar among Florentines.


171
The players of naibi


The Latin text of the book is not transcribed here, but it is necessary to at least report the names of these first Florentine card players of whom we have news. It should be noted in this regard that the passage from Latin to current Italian can lead, among other things, to the confusion of the patronymic with the surname: the families who at the time had a surname were relatively few, and therefore it may be that in the table one should read di Donato, di Cecco, etc. A reference number is inserted in the last column, which has the sole purpose of making the related parish seat more clearly visible in Fig. 1.

Name--------Name of the father-------Parish---------[Ref.] No.
------------------or the family

Francesco--------di Jacopo -------San Pier Maggiore---------1
Domenico----------Donati----------Sant’Ambrogio-------------2
Nanni-------------di Bartolo--------Sant’Ambrogio-------------2
Bettino--------------Ciardi----------Sant’Ambrogio-------------2
Antonio -------------Cenni----------San Pier Maggiore---------1
Lorenzo----------Benincasa--------Santa Reparata------------3
Ceccandrea--------Cecchi---------Santa Reparata-------------3
Lodovico--------di Giovanni-------San Giorgio-----------------4
Pierozzo--------di Francesco------San Giorgio-----------------4
Cione--------------di Lapo----------Santa Felicita--------------5
Giovanni---------di Sandro---------San Frediano---------------6

It may be significant that in all cases, the players were Florentine, because in the captures for the game of zara the presence of foreigners is frequent. Again, comparing the data on naibi with those on zara, one can note a smaller variation in the number of players captured for the infraction: in our case it goes only from two to four. These data are certainly not sufficient to conclude that the game of naibi was for two, three, or four players. If one thought it possible to deduce participation from the number of those captured on the basis of later testimonies, one would have to conclude that naibi could also be played alone, which is clearly absurd. However, it remains significant that for naibi one never encounters, not even later, captures of large groups of players, as sometimes happens for zara.


172
Unlike other cases of this kind, the profession of these Florentines is never indicated in the document under study; however, their popular character is confirmed by their names and the parishes they come from.

Eleven players from six parishes are encountered, which are distributed across a wide radius of the city. The first three are on the right bank of the Arno (S. Ambrogio, S. Pier Maggiore and S. Reparata), the last three on the left bank (S. Felicita, S. Giorgio, S. Frediano). Most of these churches still exist; only S. Reparata was demolished, for the construction of the new cathedral, and S. Pier Maggiore, because the structure had become unsafe. Fig. 1 shows the position of the churches within the last circle of the city walls, built half a century earlier; compared to the previous circle, they are almost all located outside. The wide dispersion in the city is evident, but of particular interest is the fact that both the peripheral areas richer in manufacturing are represented, with large employment of low-level workers, who also had their poor homes precisely in these two rather unhealthy areas, let's say to the E and SW of the ancient center.


The spread of playing cards


So far we have seen how the documents studied could provide us with useful information on Florentine card players and how the new game had already spread throughout the city. Alongside this aspect there was inevitably another, equally important: the production and trade of playing cards. There are significant elements, again in Florence, that indicate how it was precisely in this city that a rapid development of the new game would have been possible. Here, we must be clear: in any location, a new game could have quickly taken hold of the population and gained its favor; but this was not the game of morra, which is played with the fingers of one hand: also, new cards were needed to be able to play.

In this regard, it is often read that the first playing cards were not only new objects, but also expensive and valuable, made with sheets of parchment with chalk primer, perhaps covered in gold, as well as having paintings on the front face so beautiful that they were usually sought after in court environments. (It is very often forgotten that the testimonies from those high-level environments were recorded and then also preserved more and better than any testimonies from popular environments.) And so it is assumed that it took a more or less long time before playing cards could "descend" to the common people, if only because of their high cost, which prevented widespread distribution among the people.

On the court environments and the related testimonies, I have nothing to add to the too much that can be read, but on the popular character, yes. First of all, I would like to point out that in Florence there was a typical and highly appreciated production of orpelli and argenpelli [animal skins, pelli, beaten and then coated with metallic paint simulating gold, or, and silver, argento], which as objects, apart from their different use, were not very different from naibi. Florentine production was

173
highly appreciated, and even Francesco di Marco Datini and his associates and successors in Avignon imported hundreds of dozens of them from Florence over the course of several decades in the second half of the fourteenth century. On this point, I must refer to a previous study of mine, also published in this journal. [note 7] In fact, going from a bundle of orpelli to a pack of naibi would not have entailed great variations in workmanship.
Image

Figure 1 – Schematic layout of the churches mentioned in the text.


Conclusion

Two books of the podestà of Florence for the period July-October 1377 have been studied. Among those caught red-handed by the podestà's “family,” those convicted of gambling were selected: around one hundred captures were recorded for the game of zara and eleven captures for the game of naibi, surprisingly, considering that only in March of the same year had the provision prohibiting them been approved. The eleven players were domiciled in six different parishes in poor areas of the city. The spread of the game in Florence is commented on and the logical consequence is deduced that there was already a notable production of playing cards; this could have been based on the experience gained over several decades by Florentine artisans in the sector of working with paper and leather (including orpelli and argenpelli).

Florence, 9 October, 2015

Re: Franco Pratesi: translations of old but fundamental articles

13
Well, I do have another from this series, one that was my first translation effort for Franco, back in 2016. Even as corrected by Franco then, I see now that there is much room for improvement. So you get a newly corrected translation of "1499-1506: Firenze – Nuove informazioni sulle carte fiorentine," at https://naibi.net/A/IPCS44N1.pdf, dated July 10, 2015. It originally appeared in The Playing-Card Vol. 44, No. 1 (July-Sept. 2015). It features a card maker's inventory that documents the presence of cards called germini in 1506 as well as trionfi "in the French manner," something quite surprising. Comments in brackets are mine, in consultation with Franco, for explanatory purposes.

1499-1506: Florence - New information on Florentine cards

Franco Pratesi − 10.07.2015


English abstract:


New information is provided for the history of playing cards in Florence, deriving from the records of two repossessions of goods from a local cardmaker in 1499 and 1506, respectively. Packs of Trionfi, Germini, and common playing cards are included among the objects listed. They provide a new insight for particular aspects, to begin with the unheard-of mention of "trionfi alla franciosa" at such an early stage. Moreover, we obtain a quotation of the Germini name already in 1506, which in particular gets close enough to the first documents on Minchiate known from the second half of the 15th century. The new information is discussed in the framework of an updated view of the history of card playing in Florence.


Introduction

Historians interested in the early days of the distribution in Italy of playing cards, and tarot [tarocchi, in Italian] in particular, have paid great attention to the Tarot of Visconti and similar objects of great value, extending the study from the Milanese court to the Este of Ferrara, from which came the first known documentation for triumphs, of 1442. At the foundation of knowledge in this regard, there are still some fundamental works, such as, above all, the book by Dummett (and Sylvia Mann), [note 1] which, more than any other, has served as a valid point of departure for subsequent research. A useful update can be found in a book written recently by the historian now most competent in the matter: [note 2] in a hundred pages he says all the essentials. For Florence, there can also be reported a recent collection of various studies. [note 3] Again with particular regard to the Florentine environment, in this note, new data are communicated and placed in the context of what has been recently acquired. It should be noted immediately in this regard that in this case the playing cards are intended as an instrument for games widely distributed at the civic level - as indeed they were - and thus have little or nothing to do with the much-studied courts of the Este and Visconti-Sforza.


Triumphs [trionfi]

For the triumphs, the most important recent progress has occurred in the alert by Thierry Depaulis of the presence of a document in this regard already
________________
1. M. Dummett, The Game of Tarot. London 1980.
2. Th. Depaulis, Le Tarot révélé. La Tour-de-Peilz 2013.
3. F. Pratesi, Playing-Cards Trade in 15th-Century Florence. North Walsham 2012. (IPCS Papers 7).

62
in 1440 [note 4] (to be precise, the Journals of Giusto Giusti containing that reference had already been transcribed in 1991 in the thesis of Lucia Ricciardi [note 5]). The two years "gained" from the previous Ferrarese attestation are almost negligible, but very significant is the shift from the ducal court of Ferrara to an unknown Florentine card maker who in 1440 produced decks of triumphs, beautiful and expensive, yes, but which had as practically the only special thing about them the coat of arms of the recipient: this was the military leader Sigismondo Malatesta, already known to historians of playing cards for some subsequent requests, precisely for packs of triumphs of Lombard production. [note 6] We can then speak of triumphs in Florence of that time as a game known and practiced locally, so much so that in 1450 it was included in the small number of card games allowed by the laws of the commune [i.e. the Florentine Republic], which shows that it already possessed the traditional character required for any such authorization.

In the future, it is possible also to anticipate Florentine testimonies (and possibly from other cities), but it is not plausible that the introduction of triumphs occurred many years before; therefore, even more than reconstructing what happened just before 1440, it seems necessary to define better what happened later, with the appearance of several variants of those packs of cards and the related games, also with significant differences between the various Italian cities and regions. These same triumphs were soon distinguished into small and large, and there appeared alongside them other names of the same or similar decks, starting with that of tarocchi, which then became universally established. In Florence, moreover, germini and minchiate are also met, with further difficulties for a precise reconstruction; it may be worthwhile to recapitulate the essentials of what has been found or proposed in recent years in this regard.


Tarocchi
The tarocchi [tarot] has become the most important deck of cards of all in this context, above all because of the great use that has long been made of it for divinatory purposes. The so-called Marseille Tarot deck is usually considered to be the typical one, with 22 “higher” cards associated with 56 common cards (in reality not too common, due to the four picture cards in each suit instead of the usual three). No one knows for sure whether this "standard" tarocchi deck already corresponded to the first packs of triumphs named in documents. The issue is important, because in varying degrees, different Italian regions are involved, including those which adopted a tarocchi with a number of cards other than 78. In the present context, focused on the environment of Florence, the issue is rarely encountered, because the name “tarocchi” was used to indicate, at some point, only the major cards of the triumphs [trionfi]. Out of a considerable number of documents studied on playing
_________________
4. forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=773
5. L. Ricciardi, Feste e giochi cavallereschi nella Firenze laurenziana attraverso le memorie di Ser Giusto Giovanni Giusti d'Anghiari. Facolta di Magistero, Universita di Firenze, 1990/91.
6. http://trionfi.com/giusto-giusti.

63
cards in Florence, the decks of tarocchi called by that name have been encountered on only one occasion, at the beginning of the seventeenth century. [note 7] Later on, it is still possible to find in Florence the name tarocchi associated with a deck of cards, but then it is the cards of minchiate. Even for Florence, there exists some doubt, as for other cities, about the actual composition of the first triumphs [trionfi]; however, in the specific case of Florence, there are other decks and games to take into consideration and place within the historical development of the whole family of triumphs.


Germini

The testimonies from the Florentine environment of succeeding epochs explain that the now obsolete term germini was first used locally instead of the term minchiate, which became more common. It is not certain that the two names always referred to the same deck or game, and in this regard, several hypotheses have been put forward. However, what can be safely said is that if there was a difference between germini and minchiate, it could only have been a minimal one, so that it can be neglected, at least win/as a first approximation. (A stimulating idea would be to indicate in one case the deck of 96 cards, without the fool, and in another case that of 97, with the new card; but it is not confirmed.) The first attestations of the term germini were noted in the years slightly after the middle of the sixteenth century; but recently some before then have been reported, such as one in 1529 in which they are assimilated to the large triumphs [trionfi grandi] [note 8] and subsequently that of 1517, found by Lothar Teikemeier, the oldest known today, with the germini in the hands of Lorenzo de’ Medici, nephew of the Magnificent. [note 9] Subsequently, the use of the term germini decreased, replaced in Tuscany by that of minchiate, but it can still be found attested even in the mid-eighteenth century and in none other than the official documents of the Florentine card maker Antonio Giovanni Mollinelli. [note 10]


Minchiate


For minchiate the situation is much more complex. The first attestation known is 1466, in a letter from Luigi Pulci directed to Lorenzo the Magnificent. All searches to reread the quotation on the original sheet have been in vain, but it has been verified that the letters written by the same hand in nearby times are perfectly legible, which increases the plausibility of that quotation. [note 11] In the early studies about it, it seemed impossible that that word would be used in that year, more than half a century before any additional proof. However, in subsequent research, there were discovered citations of games referred to as minchiate in years shortly after, both among the laws of the commune [note 12] and in a
_______________
7. http://trionfi.com/evx-germini-tarocchi-minchiate
8. F. Pratesi, The Playing-Card, Vol. 40, No. 3 (2012) pp. 179-197. [Online at https://naibi.net/A/72-PRIFI-Z.pdf, translated here at viewtopic.php?p=26648#p26648.
9. http://trionfi.com/germini-1517-1519.]
10. http://trionfi.com/evx-minchiate-export-tuscany
11. F. Pratesi, The Playing-Card, Vol. 16, No. 3 (1988) pp. 12-15 [actually, pp. 78-83. Online at https://naibi.net/A/08-FLOLITE-Z.pdf, in English.]
12. F. Pratesi, The Playing-Card, Vol. 19, No. 1 (1990) pp. 7-17. [Online at https://naibi.net/A/30-PRISECO-Z.pdf, translated here at viewtopic.php?p=26635#p26635.]

64
conviction for blasphemy. [note 13] On the one hand, this additional information is sufficient to support the plausibility of the quotation from the letter by Luigi Pulci, today untraceable, but on the other hand, this additional information is insufficient to eliminate all doubts about the identification of this game of the second half of the fifteenth century with that documented only well into the next century. Several historians of card games, even among the most competent, suggest that it was two different games and decks; obviously, the identification with the same game will be all the more convincing the more intermediate documents are successfully discovered.


The Court of the Merchandise [Tribunale della Mercanzia]


The history of Florence is known to many people who have some interest in works of art; but an importance at least equal to the contribution must be attributed to the civic Arts: to manufacturing production of noteworthy value, to trade in goods, and also to banking and financial activities in general. To regulate the innumerable disputes that those activities involved, there were various city courts with their civil and criminal sections, and moreover, each Art had its own courts to resolve disputes involving members of the guild. Above the courts of the individual Arts was, in a dominant position, the Court of the Merchandise, which was set up especially to defend the interests of Florentine businessmen in relation to foreign markets. In practice, the Merchandise was institutionally called upon to resolve commercial crises on the interstate level, starting with [cases of] reprisals against Florentine businessmen who located abroad or [of Florentine businessmen] who were prosecuted from there.

At the head of the institution was the Officer of the Merchandise, initially a notary, then a jurist who always came from other cities; he was assisted in his deliberations by the Council, made up of representatives of the five major Florentine arts. Making up the workforce of the Merchandise was at least one other foreign notary as coadjutor, a treasurer, six foreign policemen paid directly by the Officer, and at a later time also appraisers, who decided the value of pledges [pawned items]. The details of the functions of this important magistracy changed repeatedly over time, and in particular bankruptcy cases also fell within its competence; to the Merchandise often fell the task of settling the most various commercial disputes arising between Florentine businessmen. [note 14]

The site of this important court was, from 1359, the Palace of the Merchandise (Fig. 1, next page), known to many tourists today as the Gucci Museum, founded in 2011. Even among Florentines, there are not many who know the activities that once took place in that building, located at the eastern side of the Piazza della Signoria, behind the bronze statue of Cosimo I on horseback. In Roman times the great civic theater was located there; in the era in question,
______________________
13. F. Pratesi, L'As de Trefle, No. 52 (1993) pp. 9-10 [online at https://naibi.net/p/51-JURON-ZOCR.pdf, English translation at viewtopic.php?f=11].
14. R. Davidsohn, Storia di Firenze. I primordi della civiltà fiorentina, Parte prima. Florence 1973. pp. 513-534.


64
Image


Figure 1 - Palace of the Merchandise [Mercanzia], the facade on the Piazza della Signoria.

the palace had on the piazza a richly decorated portico, on par with the internal rooms, which was later demolished during one of the repeated reconstructions that followed.

The books of the Merchandise [Mercanzia]

In the State Archives of Florence [ASFi] is preserved the archive collection of the Merchandise [Mercanzia], comprising 14,168 units with an extreme range of dates from 1306 to 1770; for its consultation, an old inventory in two volumes is still used, dedicated exclusively to this collection. [note 15] The numbering of the archival units obeys a criterion of division into successive sections where the volumes are grouped by similarity of material. The initial sections are: Statutes, Matriculations [enrolling of new members into the various Arts], Squittini ["election sessions," i.e. gatherings where representatives were chosen], Tratte ["extractions of candidates," meaning occasions on which names of eligible citizens were drawn by lot to be considered for particular offices], Resolutions of the Foreign Officer, Speeches of the Officer and the Six of the Merchandise, followed by larger sections of Acts in ordinary cases and Acts in extraordinary and executive cases, at which you arrive somewhere in the middle of the Inventory. Another thirty brief sections follow, divided by topic. The section that concerns this study is that of Pledges and Demands of Payment. It is a section which, like the others, contains within it units in chronological order, beginning, however, in relatively recent times: its first archival unit, where the inventories presented and discussed in this work are found, covers the years 1485-1506; [note 16] it can be said that, with a few exceptions at the beginning, the series as a whole begins only from the sixteenth century.


The inventories found by Lorenz Böninger


Studying the book mentioned above, Lorenz Böninger identified, among others, two inventories that are linked together, if only for the common activity
___________
15. ASFi, Inventario N 35.
16. ASFi, Mercanzia, 11585.

66
of the production of playing cards. The first inventory is located at f. 117v and, except for errors, can be read as follows.
Sinubaldo<Giovanbattista> di Francesco Monaldi chartaro fu gravato questo di 18 di novembre 1499 [...]
3 paia di forme da fare charte
1 lima
1 paio di cesoie
1 paiuolo p.
1 fastelo di fogli non dipinti et parechi dipinti


[Sinubaldo <Giovanbattista [deleted word]> di [son of] Francesco Monaldi card maker was encumbered this day November 18, 1499 [...]
3 pairs [paia] of templates [forme] for making cards
1 file
1 pair of shears
1 cauldron p.
1 bunch [fastelo] of unpainted sheets and many painted ones
[...].]
The second inventory of objects of this study is at f. 190r, the third to last of the whole book, and can be read as follows.
Giovanbattista di Francesco Monaldi fu gravato questo di vi dezembre 1506 [...]
36 paia di germini e tr(i)onfi
1 paio di tr(i)onfi alla franc(i)osa non finiti
117 paia di charte
2 mazi di fogli bianchi
40 chanoni dipinti
11 libri tra grandi e piccoli
1 paio di manicha nera
1 beretta nera
1 chonellino bianco di suantone da fanciullo
I faldi?
1 maza finita
1 paio di vanghonle? sanza<manicho>maza
10 pezi di pronte di pionbo
26 forme tra grandi e piccole da germini
più chartoni
5 chasette tra grandi e pichole, e 1 chiave


[Giovanbattista di [son of] Francesco Monaldi was encumbered this day of 6 December of 1506 [...]
36 packs [paia] of germini and tr(i)umphs [tr(i)onfi]
1 pack [paio] of Frenc(h) tr(i)umphs [tr(i)onfi alla franc(i)osa, meaning "in the French manner" but made locally] unfinished
117 decks [paia] of cards
2 bunches [mazzi] of white sheets [fogli]
40 painted altar cards [chanoni]
11 books both large and small
1 pair [paio] of black sleeves [manicha]
1 black cap
1 skirt [chonellino], child's white suantone [some type of textile]
1 Faldi? [perhaps falde,"brims," as in the brim of a hat]
1 finished bunch [maza]
1 pair [paio] of vanghonle [a tool: "kicker"?--] without <manicho> ["manicho" deleted but still readable] maza [mallet handles?]
10 pieces [pezi] of lead stamps [pronte=impronte]
26 templates [forme] both large and small of germini
some cartons [chartoni]
5 boxes [chasette] both large and small, and 1 key]
Both inventories are preceded and followed by short sentences that are difficult to read, first specifying those who make the demand for payment, and then indicating the results of the operation. These parts will be subject to further research, when it is decided to define better the life and work activity of this Florentine card maker.


The card maker Monaldi

A piece of information that could be useful concerns the same card maker involved. Of the Florentine card makers [cartai], or “naibai,” as they were usually called, at least a dozen are known, also of the previous generation. For some of them, biographical and also financial information has already been collected, obtainable especially from the Florentine Catasti [property registers for tax purposes], beginning with the first, of 1427. A group limited to Naibai is present also in a voluminous study on Florentine

67
painters; [note 17] among them, Sinibaldo or Giovanbattista Monaldi is not listed. The name of Giovanbattista is present the second time alone, but is deleted and replaced by Sinibaldo in the first document. It seems likely that they were two brothers, but it is also possible that it was the same person who had a precise baptismal name, but who was familiarly called by a different name, as often happened at that time and even up to today. As for the name of the father Francesco, it seems that in the Monaldi families, it was quite common, so much so that in the first Castasto of 1427, there were already two householders called Francesco, out of the four Monaldi families then present in Florence.

That we are in the presence of a card maker is explicitly indicated in the document and confirmed by the material confiscated. It might seem that this is just a few objects, certainly not comparable with those listed in the noted inventory of Francesco Rosselli of 1528. [note 18] However, the two cases are not comparable. Already to start with, that was a big shop; this one looks like a workshop that could be contained in a normal room of a house, as happened a few years earlier for the card makers Filippo di Marco and Benedetto Spigliati; [note 19] in that case, the seven templates [forme] of contention had to be kept in the home of Benedetto, and Filippo had to go precisely there every time he wanted to use those wooden blocks. However, if we meet our card maker in this book, and in the section on Pledges and encumbances, his economic situation must have been in a very bad state. Probably one can find more information about him and his debts, such as to lead to the confiscations recorded in this documentation. For the moment we can make do with what is present in his shop, objects that provide us important information beyond expectations.


Items of the inventory


It is worth examining the specific items before discussing them in the context of the history of the games. In the first case, the elements are few and of limited interest: tools and material of work, of which only the 3 pairs of “forms,” or blocks of wood used for the production of cards, have a certain importance. which will be discussed later.

Much more illuminating is the list of objects of 1506. The 36 decks of germini and trionfi appear immediately as an interesting item, to which a specific section will be dedicated. A deck of triumphs in the French manner, "trionfi alla franciosa," is perhaps the most surprising element in the entire list, because in Florence, playing cards “in the French manner” [“alla francese”] were a noteworthy part of local production ... in the eighteenth century! To find a fashion of French origin in this context was not at all predictable.
___________________
17. W. Jacobsen, Die Maler von Florenz zu Beginn der Renaissance. Munich-Berlin 2001. p. 54.
18. A.M. Hind, Early Italian Engraving. Part 1, Vol. 1, London 1938. pp. 10,11, 305-308.
19. Ref. 3, pp. 21-25.

68
The 117 “bunches of cards” [mazzi di carte] correspond to an important quantity. It was found that the Florentine card makers often sold the cards they produced to haberdashers [dry goods shops] or even to minor silk dealers, who resold them in their shops. [note 20] One might assume that this practice entailed that there remained only a few examples in the house of the card maker; the fact that here they exceed one hundred suggests significant direct sales, from producer to consumer.

The two “bunches of white sheets” [mazzi di fogli bianchi] are especially significant for the use of the term in the sense of fascio [bunch/bundle]: so when "un mazo di charte" is written in the inventories of the time, one should not commit the error of reading it, anachronistically, as "un paio di naibi" [a deck of cards].

The 40 painted cannoni [“chanoni” in the inventory] seem to belong to an accessory production of the card maker. These cannoni may have been of the types of spools on which thread was wrapped, silk in particular, and which then constituted the unit most commonly used for work payments; they were usually made of cane, in accordance with the name. [Thierry Depaulis has since pointed out in correspondence with the author that "chanoni" are altar cards.]

The “books both large and small” [libri fra grandi e piccoli] are not easy to identify; it seems likely that the books were only for personal use, kept for the mandatory registration of accounts, with the usual lists of debtors and creditors gradually updated; probably other books were objects of production, to be decorated with illustrations, if not with truly fine miniatures, not very compatible with the ordinary quality of the cards.

Then we find listed a few clothes: some sleeves, a cap, a skirt for a child, (faldi?) perhaps falde [brims]. There follow items of particular interest that seem tools of the trade: a mallet [mazza], a tool with the name vang... ["kicker ..."], impossible to read with certainty, but if it was completed by a handle [manico] and bat/mallet [mazza], then a kind of mallet [mazzuolo] or hammer [martello]. Moreover, there are pieces of lead, with “pronte” to be understood as stamps, used in the production in the manner of punches or stencils. Regarding these last, one can imagine a variety of applications; but the technique used was certainly not an innovation, considering that objects likely very similar had already been used at the time of Francesco Datini more than a century earlier, even before playing cards. [note 21] Then we find an item that is of great interest to us, the 26 templates [forme], which will be discussed later. Finally, various cartons and boxes.


Germini and triumphs

The 36 packs of germini and triumphs are already indicative of a sort of contrast: they are too different from the common cards to justify being listed separately, and at the same time they are so similar to each other that they do not yet justify a separate counting of different packs; in short, the germini are
____________________________
20. Ref. 3, passim.
21. F. Pratesi, The Playing-Card, Vol. 26, No. 2 (1997) pp. 38-45. [Online at https://naibi.net/A/64-ORPELLI-Z.pdf, translated here at viewtopic.php?p=26643#p26643.]

69
not the “normal” triumphs, but they are very similar to them, in quality and price. The fact that the germini packs are counted together with the triumph packs is very significant and can bring to mind the indication of [the term] “large triumphs” [trionfi grandi] used for germini. [note 22] Assuming that we have moved from the commonly assumed 78 cards of triumphs to the equally commonly assumed 97 of germini, we see that the need for an additional template did not have much of an impact, nor did the clear increase in the upper cards, which were more complex in outline and coloring. By now, production had long been standardized and only the distinction from the reduced pack of normal cards remained valid. An interesting detail that can be deduced from the data presented in this study is the ratio between the number of decks of triumphs and germini, considered without distinguishing them, and that of all the cards produced; in this case, the ratio on the overall production corresponds roughly to a quarter. This is a high value, comparable to that frequently encountered also among Florentine card makers and players in the eighteenth century.


Triumphs [trionfi] in the French manner [alla Francese in modern Italian]


It may be useful to point out that for France, the game of tarot is documented in Avignon in 1506; and the greatest expert on this history suggests that it was known in Lyon – an important production center for playing cards - at the beginning of the century.
La plus ancienne mention connue du tarot en français date de décembre 1505. Elle se lit dans un acte notarié d'Avignon, […]. Les cartiers d'Avignon étaient en relation étroite avec Lyon, d'où venaient leur savoir-faire et leurs modèles. Il est donc permis de penser que le mot s'entendait à Lyon aussi et que le jeu y était connu autour de 1500. [note 23]

[The oldest known French mention of tarot dates to December 1505. It is written in a notarial act of Avignon, [...]. The Avignon card makers were in close relationship with Lyon, from where their expertise and their models came. It is therefore permitted to think that the word was understood in Lyon also and that the game was known there around 1500.]
But no one could have imagined then that there was already a typically French manner of designing and producing triumphs, and still less that it was also adopted in Florence, together with the manner of the local tradition. With a little fantasy, one would rather have imagined the inverse, that Lyon was producing triumphs in the Florentine manner ...; but imagination can be wrong, while this document speaks clearly, albeit catching us, as usual, rather unprepared because of the many remaining gaps in the documentation so far brought to light.


Germini and minchiate


It seemed useful to add this section entitled "germini and minchiate," even in the absence of the second term in the documents studied. The reason why minchiate cannot be excluded from the discussion is precisely the date of the second document: 1506 is a year that anticipates by eleven years the first known evidence of the term germini applied to typical Florentine cards.
_______________
22. Ref. 8, p. 191.
23. Ref. 2, p. 36.

70
This is already new, original, useful information; at the same time, however, this evidence fits into that intermediate zone that is still devoid of information about the game of minchiate. If after a few statements from the third quarter of the fifteenth century, we skip to the second or third quarter of the sixteenth century, the experts who suggest that these are two different decks in the two cases may be justified; but if the two separate sets of information end up reunited thanks to the discovery of new documents, that interpretation will become less and less plausible. The gap in time is not yet fully covered, but you can see the result; with patience, other attestations will be found, and one will be convinced not only that germini and minchiate were the same thing (save minor differences, not very significant) but also that Florentine minchiate was introduced shortly after the "normal" triumphs.


Templates [Forme] for making cards


To find, at the end of the fifteenth century, that a card maker was using wooden templates [forme] to produce playing cards cannot be considered a discovery, because the first evidence of this kind already dates back to the 1420s in Palermo and shortly after in Florence itself. A reference closer in time is that involving Filippo di Marco and Benedetto Spigliati. [note 24] The wooden blocks in use in that case were seven, and it was not easy to imagine a deck of cards that required so high a number of blocks. The simplest hypothesis was that these blocks were used, in most sets, for different types of cards. The number of four wooden blocks that is at the end of that document, on the other hand, suggested that four templates corresponded to the minimum number that allowed a card maker to print the cards. The term stampare [printing] should not be understood here as in the typical printing processes realized when working with a specialized press: on these templates, inked, they laid the white sheet on these inked templates and, if needed, with a roller passed above the sheet.

Here are two new pieces of information, rather different. The first, of 1499, records three pairs [paia] of templates. In this case, the pair [paio] counts more than the 3, due to the fact that the templates are counted in pairs; and it is not possible to avoid the mental association with the related deck [mazzo, in modern Italian] of naibi, which also was always referred to as “a pair” [un paio]. [note 25] Again reasoning in terms of pairs of templates, the preserved Rosenwald deck shows (albeit not in an explicit or direct manner, but as a suggestion of the possibility in such cases) that a deck of 96 cards of minchiate could have been produced with two pairs of wooden templates. [note 26] Instead of having to produce 97 cards, the problem is immediately met that 97 is a prime number, and thus it becomes impossible to use a "reasonable" number of forms of the same type. Of course, nothing prevents one from using templates of different sizes, with the only limit being the size of the sheet of paper that
_____________
24. Ref. 17, p. 552.
25. http://trionfi.com/paro-paio-para
26.http://trionfi.com/rosenwald-tarocchi-sheet

71
was used with it. The same cards could be produced in different sizes, requiring more pairs of templates.

In the second document, however, we find an impressive and unexpected figure, which cannot be mentioned without discussion: the number of 26 templates of germini, in fact. The number of 97 cards has already been met, a very "uncomfortable" one, for using similar templates. But also 26, dismantled only in 2x13, is an "uncomfortable" number, too. In short, understanding why this card maker had a total of 26 wooden templates is not immediate, and one has to think of several types of cards produced. One case that comes immediately to mind is that different templates were needed for large and small triumphs; but what we are talking about is triumphs but not large and small; unless, as is likely, the germini were precisely those decks that alternatively were called large triumphs in the Florentine territory. Certainly, the same need to also produce triumphs in the French manner will have made its contribution to increasing the templates to be utilized. We can also think of different hypotheses, such as the simultaneous presence of duplicates of templates, possibly with varying degrees of wear, or even templates for the production of different objects, such as those santini [holy pictures] that several card makers also produced, together with naibi, in the past.


Conclusion

Some useful information has been obtained for the history of playing cards in Florence in the passage between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Among the most important pieces of information, we can point out the production of germini packs in 1506, earlier than previously known, with templates large and small, and again the most unexpected production, triumphs “alla francesa,” at a time when France is just beginning to get the first vague information about them. More research is needed to better define the craftsmanship activity of the card maker implicated in the confiscations described, for which we so far do not have sufficient information.