Neo-pythagorism and Tarot : Alain Bougearel's theory

Namadev

Re: Re: Links to study

Namadev said:
I wrote :

"(snipped)
3)the Ptolemé of Raphael.

(Remember Timoteo Viti and Boiardo...)

http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r14310/Ptolemy/Raphael/30-40.html

Right link :

http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/r14310/Ptolemy/Raphael/19-22.html

Note n°20


Alain


This is a most interesting point.

We have now a clear relation between Boïardo, Pier Antonio Viti da Urbino, his brother Timoteo Viti and Raphael's Pythagoras.

Alain

Some data from Trionfi.com and Steiner :

Pier Antonio Viti Da Urbino wrote a Commentary to the Boiardo Poem painted a Boiardo Tarocchi

Pier Antonio Viti da Urbino These historical informations are summarized from R. Renier, Tarocchi di Matteo Maria Boiardo, in Studi su M.M.Boiardo, Bologna <http://members.pgv.at/homer/tarock/renier.htm>, Zanichelli 1894, pp.229-259 and from Tarocchi (a cura di Simona Foà) Roma 1993.
Pier Antonio Viti da Urbino, brother of the more famous painter Timoteo Viti, one of the masters of Raffaello, was born around 1470 from Bartolomeo and Calliope Alberti; he had another brother, Pompilio. His wife was Girolama di Andrea di Lodovico Staccoli, from a noble family of Urbino; after her husband’s premature dead she went to the monastery of S. Chiara. Timoteo Viti married in 1501 Girolama di Guido Spaccioli, sometimes confused with the widow of his brother. Pier Antonio was a doctor (medic) and substained with honour the office of gonfaloniere (literally means a Herald; in medieval italian Communi, the Gonfaloniere was one of the main dignitaries of State, the chief of civil or justice magistrate order) in 1492 and 1498. He died young in his native town the 26 of november 1500 [As in Pungileoni, Elogio storico di Timoteo Viti, Urbino, 1835, pp. 3-4.]. Otherwise, he was known as a fun loving person. Describing the fool of tarocchi he said: "et da ciò che bono principio sia per me dato, de quello che è a me, per quello che se ha dicto, simillimo, incomenzarò" (I will begin from the one figure more similar to me). And also, excusing himself for the large space dedicated to the fool, he said that it was because of that figure was his relative: "per essermi de sangue assai congiunta". Father Vernaccia, whose biographical notes were at Renier times in ms. Oliveriano 1145, said that one of his descendants, Gio. Maria Antonio Viti had a manuscript of Pierantonio Viti’s “capitolo in quarta rima (sic), in cui colla figura del giuoco delle carte rappresenta quattro passioni dell' anima: cioè l' amore, la speranza, la gelosia, il timore" (a poem in rhymes in which four soul’s passions are represented through the playing card’s tarocchi figures: Love, Hope, Jealousy and Fear. So in Pungileoni, Op. cit., p. 3). The information is wrong, for the author of the “codicetto antaldiano” [the old march. Antaldo degli Antaldi inheredited the goods, and also the manuscripts of Viti’s familiy, when it was extinguished) was Boiardo, not Viti. Even if in the poem is not mentioned the name of the author, Viti never said he was the writer of the work, and in two places of it (pp. 315 and 333 of Le poesie volgari e latine di Matteo Maria Boiardo riscontrate sui codici e su le prime stampe da Angelo Solerti, Bologna, Romagnoli-Dall’Acqua, 1894) he spoke of the author of the Capitolo in third person. Viti simply explained the Scandiano’s count poem in his Illustrazione dedicated to a lady of Urbino's’court, maybe Elisabetta d' Urbino, the Duchess, or Emilia Pia her intimate confident and friend or another anonimous Madonna. The meaning of his work was to use it for a verbal game with tarocchi. “E da questo dar di carte che tocar deve a chi per sorte ha la migliore, nascie il primo piacere: perciò che ognuno lege li versi che nelle carte sue sono e mostranli a li compagni. Et in ciò si vedono a le volte a donne et omini venire terzetti che sono grandemente al proposito loro, e di gran riso de chi gli ascoltano” (Tarocchi (a cura di Simona Foà) Roma 1993, p.60). The first pleasure came from the distribution of the cards, made by the one who has the better: every one read the verses in his cards and show’em to the companions. And sometimes the tercets are so appropriate that the friends laugh heartily. Composed and translated by Raimondo Luberti




Quote from Syeiner(s essay :

Pier Antonio Viti da Urbino, uomo sollazzevole com' egli stesso ci dice [Nel descrivere il matto dei tarocchi, chiosa: "et da ciò che bono principio sia per me dato, de quello che è a me, per quello che se ha dicto, simillimo, incomenzarò" (p. 327). E in fine si scusa per aver descritto molto lungamente quella figura "per essermi de sangue assai congiunta" (p. 328).], fu medico e nella patria sua sostenne onorevolmente due volte, nel 1492 e nel 1498, la carica di gonfalconiere. Nato verso il 1470 da Bartolomeo e da Calliope Alberti, fu, con Pompilio, fratello al celebre pittore Timoteo Viti. Morì giovane in patria il 26 novembre del 1500 [Vedi Pungileoni, Elogio storico di Timoteo Viti, Urbino, 1835, pp. 3-4.]. Il padre Vernaccia lo disse anche poeta, aggiungendo: "di lui abbiamo veduto presso Gio. Maria Antonio Viti, suo discendente, un capitolo in quarta rima (sic), in cui colla figura del giuoco delle carte rappresenta quattro passioni dell' anima: cioè l' amore, la speranza, la gelosia, il timore" [Parole riferite dal Pungileoni, Op. cit., p. 3, n. Una copia degli spogli biografici del Vernaccia è oggi nel ms. Oliveriano 1145.] Con le quali parole senza dubbio intese il Vernaccia d' alludere al codicetto antaldiano [Il vecchio march. Antaldo degli Antaldi ereditò i mss. e le cose d' arte della famiglia Viti.]; ma errò nell' attribuire i capitoli del Boiardo al Viti [Gli annotatori del Vasari (cfr. l' ediz. Sansoni, IV, 492 n) ripeterono l' errore, aggiungendone per conto loro un altro. Essi affermano che Pier Antonio prese in moglie Girolama di Andrea Spaccioli. Non è vero. La moglie di lui fu Girolama di Andrea di Lodovico Staccoli, nobile famiglia urbinate, che dopo la morte del marito prese il velo nel monastero di S. Chiara. Fu Timoteo Viti, che nel 1501 impalmò Girolama di Guido Spaccioli.], il quale non ne fu che l' esplicatore. È ben vero che nel codice non è detto di chi i capitoli siano, ma è pure vero che il Viti non se ne arroga mai la proprietà, ed in due luoghi [A pp. 315 e 333 dell' ediz. Solerti, alla quale sempre mi riferisco.] accenna in terza persona al compositore di essi [Le varianti, in confronto col testo a stampa, non sono molte ed il Solerti le ha indicate. L' ordine logico dei capitoli è quello dato dal Viti, conforme a quello accennato nel sonetto esplicativo. In omaggio all' uso letterario, i ternari nelle stampe si chiudono con un verso scempio, il quale dovette mancare nell' originale, come manca nella trascrizione del Viti. Ad ogni carta infatti erano assegnati tre versi e non più. La lezione del cod. Antaldi è in genere migliore di quella a stampa.].
 

Namadev

Namadev

Namadev

Re: Ptolemy and the 78

Namadev said:
Hi,

The neo-pythagorean disposition of the 78 as shown in the Almagest of Ptolemy :
http://www.dudleyobservatory.org/Logo/Ptolomey.jpg

Alain

Hi,

There should be more ancient examples but this alphabetical one directly linked to Ptolemy's Almagest translated is most interesting.

The initial suggestion given is :

the first line : 1 dot,
the second line : 2 dots

Anybodody aware of neo-pythagorean arithmology reads that the
following lines will be :

third line :3 dots
...

12th line : 12 dots

So:
1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12=78

BTW, there are only 12 lines in the Triangle under the intial name :
Almagest...


[It has no sense to count the intial name Almagest...]



For further inquiry, study :

Greek mathematics and astronomy :

http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/vatican.exhibit/exhibit/d-mathematics/Greek_math2.html

http://www.ibiblio.org/expo/vatican.exhibit/exhibit/d-mathematics/Greek_astro.html#math18
 

Namadev

Re: Ptolemy and the 78

Namadev said:
Hi,

The neo-pythagorean disposition of the 78 as shown in the Almagest of Ptolemy :
http://www.dudleyobservatory.org/Logo/Ptolomey.jpg

Alain

Data relatives the Almagest

The title page of Ptolemy's 'Almagest', from the first edition, is dated 1515 and is from Venice

Image credit: Royal Astronomical Society

I haven't seen older editions such as the two following for eaxmple :


In Latin, Translated by Gerard of Cremona
The most important medieval Latin translation of the "Almagest," which is found in many manuscripts, was made from the Arabic in Spain in 1175 by Gerard of Cremona, the most prolific of all medieval translators from Arabic into Latin.

In Latin, Translated by George Trebizond, ca.1481
George Trebizond, one of the notable Greek scholars who came to Italy in the early fifteenth century, made a new translation of the "Almagest" from the Greek for Pope Nicholas V between March and December of 1451. Due to a dispute about the quality of Trebizond's commentary on the text, the translation was never dedicated to Nicholas. This very elaborate manuscript of the translation, with the figures drawn in several colors, was dedicated to Pope Sixtus IV by George's son Andreas.

In Latin, ca. 1482
During the same nine months that George Trebizond made his translation of the "Almagest," he also wrote a commentary as long as the original text. The commentary was severely criticized, however, which resulted in a falling out with Pope Nicholas V. This opulent manuscript was dedicated to Pope Sixtus IV by George's son Andreas along with Vat. lat. 2055 of the translation.


Was the initial page present in these more ancient manuscripts?

Further inquiry is necessary.

Alain
 

Yatima

Could you specify your evidence?

-presence of the Basileus of Byzantium in Milano in the years 1424-25
-Congress of Ferare-Firenze of 1438-39
-arrival in Northen Italy of Byzantium scholars and foundation of the Florentine Academy.

What could they have done there to transfer this structure to the Tarot? What would be the train of transmission? How could there by an interest to transfer it? Who could be the poeple to have interest to do so? Filippo Visconti? Marziano? students of the university?

When do you think the structure was transfered to the Tarot? From the beginning with a 22 trump structure? Or later with a developement from, say, 14 to 22?

Yatima
 

Namadev

Yatima said:
Could you specify your evidence?

-presence of the Basileus of Byzantium in Milano in the years 1424-25
-Congress of Ferare-Firenze of 1438-39
-arrival in Northen Italy of Byzantium scholars and foundation of the Florentine Academy.

What could they have done there to transfer this structure to the Tarot? What would be the train of transmission? How could there by an interest to transfer it? Who could be the poeple to have interest to do so? Filippo Visconti? Marziano? students of the university?

When do you think the structure was transfered to the Tarot? From the beginning with a 22 trump structure? Or later with a developement from, say, 14 to 22?

Yatima

Hi,

I would like so much to have the specific answers to all these questions..
But, I haven't.
This doesn't mean that the questions cannot be answered but that, the research must go deeper.
For the moment, the elements I've published are the data I've found.
Any new data is welcomed.

Alain
 

jmd

That 78 is a triangular of base 12 comes to mind quite early to many who have interests in such numbers.

Likewise that 22 is a pentagonal number of base 4, that 10 is a triangular number of base 4, and that 16 is a square number of base 4 (as I have also mentioned in another thread).

These base four numbers by themselves also account for the structure of the deck - without the need to depict the (wonderful) triangular division Namadev (Alain) proposes.

I suppose my own reservation is not that the method works (that, to me, is a wonderful mathematical-geometrical discovery), but rather that it is implied as possibly being the underpinning structure somehow intended for the 78-card deck.

My own reflections on taking taking the sequence as arising from base four considerations seem as (un)likely:
  • base 4 triangle = 10
  • base 4 square = 16
  • base 4 pentagon = 22
These seem (to me at least) as important - if not more so - yet do not consider that these formed part of the conscious intent for Tarot's overall structure. Rather, they arise out of the completed deck as mathematical discoveries given the specific pattern the deck intrinsically captures.

The three shapes (triangle, square and pentagon) are also, it should be noted, the only shapes possible as faces on the five platonic (or 'regular' or 'perfect') solids.

That these first three of shapes of base four also add to make a (3 x 4 =) 12 base triangle (ie, 78) is of course also fascinating... and important in itself.

So why the division of the 12 as suggested by Namadev? Whence is a similar structure a reflection of earlier thought (as implied)?

As I said, this does not take away, for me at least, the important discovery made by Alain - but I do not, as seemingly also questioned by Yatima, see that it reflects, of itself, pythagorean thought - though I have to also admit that I have not visited John Opsopaus's site in a while, and may therein discover much delightful additions.
 

Namadev

JMD wrote :
These base four numbers by themselves also account for the structure of the deck - without the need to depict the (wonderful) triangular division Namadev (Alain) proposes.

Hi,
The fact that these separate elements in themselves are coherent and issued of pythagorean mathematics in arithmology is evident - similar as the 40 numeral cards and the 16 honours and the 22 allegorical subjects could strand by themselves.
But in Tarot these elements are linked together in a whole : a 78 deck.

In the same manner, the 4 decades, the 4 squares and the pyramidal 22 are linked together in the Triangle of base12.

Why?
Because it is so...

Alain