Tarot of Giuseppe Ottone

[le pendu]

Thanks Kenji!

Here is a translation to English of the Jean-Claude Flornoy site:
http://www.tarot-history.com/Jean-Noblet/jean-noblet-page-2.html

So... basically... can I assume that the "big picture" here is that the "Piedmont" Tarot is based on the TdM I? Basically, the Dodal and the Payen are examples of the cards similar to that which were used as a model (but not the Dodal or Payen themselves).. but the images "evolved" into the Piedmont?

If so, how do we classify the Ottone and the Drago? Are they TdM (as I would classify them, they certainly have more in common with the TdM I than they do with the "Piedmont" tarot shown in the "Liguria Piedmont") or are the "Piedmont"?

So do we have here yet another example, like the Besancon and the Belgian tarots, of the influence of the TdM I on the development of other "styles"?

This frustrates me so. I've spent countless hours comparing these early decks, and find that all of them have "bits and pieces" that match up (and/or conflict). I would LOVE to see all of the Ottone images as I wonder what "pieces" it has that are lost in the Dodal/Noblet/Payen, and other TdM I decks.

How does the Ottone "know" to put two flowers on the shoulders of the King of Swords, if it was based on the Dodal or Payen this detail would be lost. And why does Ottone know this but Drago instead copies Dodal/Payen?

It seems to me that the TdM I continued in Italy after the TdM II gained popularity in France. We have the dating of the Ottone as 1736, and the dating of the Drago as c. 1790 (although.. I am really starting to question this. WHY is the Drago dated as such?)

When trying to "reconstruct" the TdM, these images are critical! I continue to believe that the only way to "glimpse" the "original" TdM is to look at all of these decks, give "priority" to the TdM I decks (like the images from the Vieville, Noblet, Dodal), but to also realize that the TdM II decks (Conver, Burdel, etc) are also based on the same prototype... and look for clues as to what the "original" TdM **might** have looked like.

 

[kenji]

I should have written Ottone is BASICALLY TdM I, to be more precisely. For a few cards are obviously in TdM II style -- the trumps 6, 9, and 17 for example (given Fournier Spanish tarot is true to original Ottone). I suspect some Swiss deck influenced this deck.

So, I feel Ottone deck is to be called one of "proto-Piemontese" tarots. Undoubtedly Ottone is not the sole ancestor of later Piemontese tarots. There are other 18th-century Piemontese decks which have different styles. For example, Cosmo Antonio Toso deck (Genoa, c1770 according to Kaplan II, p339) looks much more similar to Dodal.

By the way, Kaplan II dates Draghi[Drago] deck as "early 19th century". (I don't know if this is correct.)

 

[DoctorArcanus]

So, I feel Ottone deck is to be called one of "proto-Piemontese" tarots. Undoubtedly Ottone is not the sole ancestor of later Piemontese tarots. There are other 18th-century Piemontese decks which have different styles. For example, Cosmo Antonio Toso deck (Genoa, c1770 according to Kaplan II, p339) looks much more similar to Dodal.

http://maps.google.it/maps?f=q&hl=i...1,-15.556641&spn=25.152597,110.214844&iwloc=A

Genoa is in Liguria (south of Piedmont) and has always had relations with Marseille since they are the two most important ports of the Northern Tirrenic sea.
Serravalle is in Piedmont, but it is also close to Genoa.
Ottone actually means brass in Italian, but the name seams to be derived from the Longobard/Germanic "Otto". Ottone (with variants such as Ottoni, Oddoni, Oddone) is quite common in Piedmont and Liguria.
http://www.melegnano.net/cognomi/cognomi0013oo.htm

Once again, we face the fact that "TdM" can mean many different things: if we take it literally, to mean "Made in Marseille", of course Ottone is not TdM. If we take it as a family of graphic patterns, Ottone could be defined TdM. In this second case, it would be interesting to define at which stage cards produced in Piedmont/Liguria became original enough to exit the TdM pattern. Tricky

Marco

Marco

 

[kenji]

La Farfalla in IL MATTO

Thank you for the useful information, Marco!

I think the most remarkable feature of modern Piemontese tarot is THE BUTTERFLY which THE FOOL (IL MATTO) chases after. I believe this butterfly first appeared in Piemontese tarot in the 19th century, and have been wondering what it is derived from.

In some early-19th-century Swiss tarot decks, a tax stamp is put in front of the face of IL MATTO. (See Kaplan II, p343 & p345.) I suspect this is the origin...???

By the way, this butterfly can be seen in some more recent NON-PIEMONTESE decks, such as YEAGER TAROT OF MEDITATION, SHERIDAN-DOUGLAS TAROT and so on. And I, personally, like to see this creature in Tarot

 

[euripides]

it would be interesting to define at which stage cards produced in Piedmont/Liguria became original enough to exit the TdM pattern. Tricky

a key point well phrased, Marco. I think that's the concept we've been trying to get at in some other threads, though tending to the reverse, ie 'what makes it a Marseille' - but this idea - at what point does it depart sufficiently to NOT be a TdM.... that's useful.

thanks for the other info too.

 

[jmd]

I'm coming in late to this wonderful discussion, and am simply digesting the wonderful images brought and reflecting especially on how much the Ottone resembles the Drago.

One of the distinguishing features I had previously noted on the Drago (apart from the 'reversed' Two Coins band) is that the Bateleur appears to have a distinct 'brick' on his table.

One of the characteristics between early TdMI and later TdMs is that the object on the table appears to shift from possible book in the Noblet, to ambiguous item (possible bag or book) on the Dodal/Payen, to something more akin to a bag on the TdMII.

The 'brick' of this Ottone/Drago stands out as a characteristic. Also of note is that unlike the Payen/Dodal, the Ottone/Drago Bateleur does not have a 'coin' in his lower hand.

On the Bateleur (again), a difference between the Ottone and the Drago is that the former appears to be wearing 'tails' (ie, a long split coat going towards the ground).

I would also be interested to see how XXI features in terms of the TdMI vs TdMII both in terms of whether the person is 'caped' or standing on a single foot, but also whether s/he appears more feminine or masculine.

...time to have another look at Dummett and see what I may have missed there as well!

 

[Cerulean]

Here's a funny translation of Piedmontese Tarot as a local

occurance or some cardmaker/game notes:

http://translate.google.com/transla...&prev=/search?q=serravalle+tarocchi&hl=en&lr=

Giordano Berti is cited as a reference.

Best regards,

Cerulean

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

On the Bateleur, the Ottone seems to have lost/confused the front leg of the table with the leg of the Bateleur.

In Ottone, I can see the lines of the engraving for the leg of the table, and the leg of the Bateleur behind, with the front half of his shoe coming out (i.e. it is just like the Drago). It is the (hand or stencil?-)coloring that went wrong.

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

My best source on Piemontese cards is the recent monograph by Thierry Depaulis, "Cartes et cartiers dans les anciens états de Savoie (1400-1860)" (IPCS Papers, No. 4), 2005.

He notes Giuseppe Ottone in two places, p. 30 and p. 46.

P. 30:
"One is surprised also to encounter the name Serravalle (not yet noted in any document) on three tarots of the 'Marseille' type made between 1736 and 1744: Giuseppe Ottone, specifies 'AN SERRAVALE' e l'annee 1736', Pierre Cheminade - him again - signed 'IN SERAVALE 1742' [Fig. A] and Giacomo Chastelano (1744), whose tarot was engraved by 'TORELLI IN SERAVALE' [Fig. B]."

The two figures (small, b/w) show (D=Deniers, C=Cups, S=Swords, B=Batons; R=King, Rg.=Queen, C=Knight, V=Valet):
A (Cheminade 1742): A(ce) D, 2D, 3D, AC, 6S, 7S, Diable, RC.
B (Chastelano 1744): AC, 2C, 2D, RB, 7S, Diabele, RgC.

The Devil of Cheminade is smooth; Chastelano's is hairy. This is the first detail difference I note.

P. 46 gives the same information we have already heard here -
"Ottone, Giuseppe: Cardmaker known by a tarot of the Marseille I type (69 of 78 cards surviving), with titles in French, 1736 (Fournier 1982, Ita. 25 (refers to Fourier catalogue))."

The illustration shows AC, 2C, AD, 2D.

Depaulis' conclusion gives no detailed hypothesis about the evolution of tarot designs in Piedmont. He notes that while it is true that we have no surviving tarots from Piedmont from before the early 18th century, all of the documentation before that tends to suggest there was always a strong influence from France.

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

Tarots like those of Giuseppe Ottone are important witnesses for the early Piemontese tradition because they exist before Bologna and Milan started making TdM styles for export. Therefore the influence or models, as far as we can tell, are entirely from the west - especially Lyon.

I would guess that Ottone shows a model that had been in Piedmont for some time, while Dodal and Payen are developments of the Avignon-Lyon pattern. They must have a common ancestor, which might be reflected in the Noblet.

The earliest tarot from Piedmont (apparently) that survives is that of Pierre Cheminade, Chambéry, 1718 (Depaulis 2005, p. 37). Depaulis comments: "There (in Chambéry) he certainly made cards and tarots, as seen by the quite crude counterfeit of a Tarot de Marseille" signed by Cheminade on the 2D; "But it is difficult to believe that these cards, so badly engraved, so badly printed, and so badly colored, are the work of a Cheminade."

Does this indicate something about the state of the market in Piedmont at the beginning of the 18th century? Or is it just a red herring?

Comparisons might give the answer. I.e. if features of the Noblet explain differences between Dodal and Payen on the one side and Ottone et al. on the other, then we might have to look for a deeper common ancestor, at the beginning (at least) of the 17th century.