View Single Post
Huck  Huck is offline
Join Date: 02 Jul 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,682

Some reflections (maybe I repeat a few things, which I already said elsewhere)

Well, we have the ministre l'interieure. The handwritten notice (possibly made at a later time) is in this single case written on something, which is attached to the card (or, at least, it looks, as if it is):

It looks, as if something is behind this additional paper, perhaps another title (of Guignard). Perhaps this paper was added, when Guignard became ministre l'interieure at 7 August 1790.

Curiously the following card No. 4 is "ministre de la guerre". According the wiki list for this title the title didn't exist in 1790, but came up a year or so later ... maybe it was already used privately.
There's a man, who should be this ministre de la guerre, a man from Grenoble again, operating in this function ... since August 1789, likely with the earlier title for this function Secrétaires d'État de la Guerre

4 août 1789 - 16 novembre 1790 : Jean-Frédéric de La Tour du Pin Gouvernet

If we follow this lead, then we have a dating between 4 August 1789 and 7 August for the production of the deck (and the handwritten notes should have been added before 7 August 1790).

Necker is under clear suspicion to be No. 54 (ministre des finances), I would say. I've read, that he was a friend to Guignard, but this seems to have changed in the course of development (likely in 1790). For the time after the attack on the Bastille they probably were on the same side, I would assume. Well, Grenoble and its political clique had two important then and had likely reason to celebrate this.

A ministre likely had a lot to do in Paris and Versailles (22 km distance). Distance Paris-Lyon = 500 km, Paris-Grenoble = 600 km. It's not really plausible, that Guignard had time for such long travels, the situation wasn't without risks (there were accusations against him, French wiki knows). Maybe the biography knows more.
Nonetheless he had friends in the regions and will have received letters and possibly gifts. Possibly also the card deck, possibly as a christmas present (always a good time for playing cards).

Naturally there MUST have been a connection between Guignard and the circles of Sauveur and on the other side to the Etteilla pupils (logic demands this).

Hugand was suggested in private discussion as "living in Lyon close to the location Saint Priest (Guignard family had a chateaux there)" .... The social rank of Hugand, however, doesn't look so high in a rather big city Lyon, that everybody must have known him. It doesn't look, as if he was "very important" as a book-trader.


This is a nephew of Guignard ... with quite an interesting biography.
... also at ...
... something about his late years in England.

A spy and a political agent for different interests.

He visited his uncle Guignard in Constantinople (1778, 25 years old) ... "happily resigned his military post in 1778. Soon after, he accompanied his uncle, François-Emmanuel Guignard, comte de Saint-Priest, the French ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, to Constantinople. Later in the year, he made an excursion to see Egypt. In 1779, he began his trip home, visiting the cities of Warsaw, Cracow and Vienna." Guignard had only once visited France between 1768 - 1785, so I've read elsewhere. This must refer to this opportunity. So - likely - this was the relative, whom Guignard knew best.
I don't know, how he was related to Guignard (son of a sister ?). The wife of Guignard worked also as a spy in Sweden in 1790s. Vergennes (Gravier) didn't allow Guignard in the order de l'esprit, suspecting him to be more Russian than something else (1774, so I've understood).

Interesting: Louis-Alexandre de_Launay, comte d'Antraigues was born in Montpellier ... as the family of Sauveur had their origin in Montpellier.

Sauveur had qualified himself as a producer of high-quality objects with good graphic. The normal way would have been, that Etteilla pupils searched somebody like him and made a business request. Sauveur agreed ... This might have happened as late as around 1796, and it wouldn't demand something unusual. Sauveur had some link to the ministres circles (proven by his production 1784-88). He might have imported to the Etteilla decks knowledge about the Guignard deck or an earlier 42-card version similar to the Moscow deck (and made the Petit Oracle des Dames from this mixing). There are not much (if any ?) of the specialized (added) Guignard card motifs in the PODD or the Nouvel Etteilla. I compared the 42 cards with the 66 cards.
since post #6
I gave the comment: "From the first 42 cards No. 1-42 (66-cards-deck) 39 [of the Russian 42-cards deck) meet a roughly identical motif in the extant 41 cards. The 2 ministres (No. 3 + 4) are missing (somehow logical) and the Lady with the number 38. Two cards are additional (not included)."

It's somehow clear, that the 42 deck went from France to Russia (the costume and the motifs).
Guignard had the best possible relations to Russia. It looks plausible, that Guignard or somebody from his relatives or friends brought knowledge about this (42-cards) deck to Russia and caused finally the production in Moscow. The French version (42-cards) naturally must have been older than 1825. We don't see the deck in France, and the revolution deck of 1790 is (plausibly) a single deck, which is extant from this production. So both don't show signs of a big distribution at their time. Likely not produced at Paris, but somewhere on the country in France. Lyon is a plausible place.

I've also attempted to correlate motifs of the 66-cards deck to cards, which relate to PODD or Nouvel Eteila (both likely productions of Grasset Saint-Sauveur). From the numbers 43-66 only 2 motifs (44 + 46) were really repeated:
(from )




For 46 one can see, that it was already an Etteilla-motif ... but only "somehow".


For the Etteilla circle we have de la Salette, related to the Guignard family. So it's not really necessary to take the point with "Hugand was living in Lyon", close to a chateaux, which belonged to the St.Priest family. Hugand possibly was dead or "in silence" since 1794. Odoucet went to the "anti-government strategy" as a printer, often in prison.

1794 in political and economical matters in France was generally a year with catastrophes, possibly Odoucet sold some of his rights and Sauveur got them. Sauveur kept himself on the side, which reigned, avoiding conflicts.

Naturally some alternative developments are possible.
Top   #4