Bonjour Krystal,
This card is in Japan.
Part of a very uncomplete and damaged Conver deck (one tenth of cards and no Valet).
So, the answer is difficult but one can say that:
Conver decks were all engraved in 1760.
Printed exemplaries are either post 1803 or pre 1803
1870 and 1880 versions were printed with damaged woodblocks (worms "eat" one Temperance eye for exemple).
BnF versions are all post 1803 and were printed from damaged woodblocks.
All in one I can say that this Japan card and uncomplete deck can't be exactly dated.
But this card is very important for me because it allows me to propose in coming months a real restitution based on exact details.
Conver deck is really interesting one and it's a pity to have not yet a good restitution in spite many efforts made by various publishers.
I make a difference between historical decks/facsimilés/restitutions and artistic creations that may be "agreable" to some eyes and taste.
Conver decks are a business it's clear I have no major problems with this but my goal is different let's say...
I was long but it's necessary.
Cordialy,
Yves
Hello Yves!
This is interesting. No valets, but is there a Two of Coins in the Japanese deck? Is the Japanese deck DEFINITELY attributed to Conver based on his name being found somewhere on one of the cards, or is it assumed to be his because it looks to have been printed from woodblocks he was known to have used?
My two Conver deck facsimilies (Heron and Lo Scarabeo), both dated after 1805, show degradations in the images. So by the time Conver was using the woodblocks to print these two decks, he was using worn blocks.
Based on discussion earlier in this thread, it appears reasonable to believe that Conver may have aquired the set of woodblocks from another printer or engraver some time after they were first made and then put his name on them to print his own decks, thereby erasing the name of the person for whom the blocks were originally engraved.
So my questions:
Who owned the woodblocks before Conver, and did the previous owner print any decks with them? (An unanswerable question at this point, I assume.)
How worn were the blocks when Conver first used them? How degraded is the imagery in the earliest surviving deck that is known to be his because it has his name printed on one of the cards?
In other words, I'm trying to figure out if Conver bought/inherited a USED set of woodblocks that somebody else had previously published decks with. Even though you find an incomplete deck that appears to be Conver's, without a printer's name being found on one of the cards, you don't really know who published it. All you know for sure is that it was printed using the same set of woodblocks.
Krystal