The Prince, Inventor of the Ludus

Triumphorum
In Bologna of the first years of the 15th century
 
Copyright   by Andrea Vitali  - ©  All rights reserved 2003 and 2017
 
Translation revised by Michael S. Howard, Feb. 2012, who also translated the additions, Dec.
2017
 
This essay written by Andrea Vitali is an expanded version of the chapter “Triumphs, Tarot and Tarocchini in
Bologna from the fifteenth to the twentieth century” included in The Tarocchino of Bologna. History,
Iconography, Divination from the fifteenth to the twentieth century  by Andrea Vitali and Terry Zanetti.
(Martina Editions, Bologna, 2005)

THE PRINCE

A famous painting, until a few years ago in Palazzo Felicini in Bologna and now mysteriously disappeared,
portrays in 17th century clothes Prince Francesco Antelminelli Castracani Fibbia, descendant of
the famous  condottiero [leader of mercenary troops] Castruccio Castracani. The work was painted by an
unknown  artist during the 17th century. The painting shows the Prince standing near a table holding some
whole-length Bolognese Tarocchino cards (the first, visible, is the Emperor). Other cards are on the ground (the
Queen of Staves and the Queen of Coins, while a third card is unrecognizable); another is shown falling from
the table (the Eight of Coins).
 
Under this painting there are the following words:

FRANCESCO ANTELMINELLI CASTRACANI FIBBIA, PRINCIPE DI PISA, MONTEGIORI, E PIETRA

SANTA, E SIGNORE DI FUSECCHIO, FILIO DI GIOVANNI, NATO DA CASTRUCCIO DUCA DI LUCCA,
PISTOIA, PISA &  FUGITO IN BOLOGNA DATOSI A' BENTIVOGLJ,  FU FATTO GENERALISSIMO DELLE
ARME BOLOGNESE, ET IL PRIMO DI QUESTA FAMIGLIA CHE FU DETTO  IN BOLOGNA DALLE FIBBIE, 
EBBE PER MOGLIE FRANCESCA, FILIA DI GIOVANNI BENTIVOGLJ.
INVENTORE DEL GIOCO DEL TAROCCHINO DI BOLOGNA: DALLI XVI RIFORMATORI DELLA CITTÀ
EBBE PER PRIVILEGIO DI PORRE L'ARMA FIBBIA NELLA REGINA DI BASTONI  E QUELLA DELLA DI
LUI MOGLIE NELLA REGINA DI DENARI. NATO L'ANNO 1360 MORTO L'ANNO 1419.

(Francesco Antelminelli Castracani Fibbia, Prince of Pisa, Montegiori, and Pietra Santa, Lord of Fusecchio, son
of Giovanni, born of Castruccio Duke of  Lucca, Pistoia, Pisa & fled to Bologna in service to Bentivoglio, was
made commander in chief of the Bolognese army and the first of this family, which was called Fibbia in
Bologna; married Francesca, daughter of Giovanni Bentivoglio.
He was the inventor of the game Tarocchino of Bologna. By the XVI City Reforms he had the privilege of
putting the Fibbia coat of arms on the Queen of Staves [card] and that of his wife’s on the Queen of Coins. Born
in the year 1360, he died in the year 1419) (figure 1).
 That the affirmation that this Prince invented
the game of Tarocchini appeared about 130
years after his death (1), united with the fact
that he never married Francesca Bentivoglio,
has led tarot historians to summarily affirm,
without however carrying out a thorough
historical investigation at the archives, that this
Prince never existed and that attributing the
invention to such a person was nothing more
than a device to inflate the prestige of the family
of Antelminelli Fibbia, since the cards of the
Tarocchini at the time of the painting were
rather loved by the Bolognese.
 
But if we investigate thoroughly what was
written, once the existence of that Prince is
verified through documents and some apparent
historical inconsistencies are carefully
evaluated, we must read the affirmation about
the invention of Tarocchini as about the
invention of Tarot (in Italian, Tarocchi), or
better, of the Ludus Triumphorum or game of
Triumphs, as that game was called from its
origin and throughout the fifteenth century.
 
First of all, the history, attested by documents that are found still today, tells us that Francesco Antelminelli
Castracani did exist and was not born of the imagination of the one who commissioned the painting. As we
have said, the wording on the painting has some errors. Giovanni wasn’t Francesco’s father, son of Castruccio
Castracani. Giovanni Castracani Antelminelli was in fact the son of the condottiero, as we are informed by
various chronicles that treated of that noble Tuscan family. Direct information comes from a will of Castracani
made a year before his death, which was fully reported by Aldo Manucci in Le attioni di Castruccio Castracane
degli Antelminelli Signori di Lucca con la genealogia della famiglia (The action of Castruccio Castracane of 
Antelminelli Lord of Lucca with his family tree) (2), where otherwise we can find interesting news about the
condottiero's last living moments and about his children.

Here are some revelations: “…avendo fatto il suo testamento l’anno adietro del MCCCXXVII alli 20. di
Dicembre, in Lucca…ma sentendosi mancare, & essere sopra fatto della gravezza del male; & avendo
discorso con li suoi Segretarij, & dati molti ordini; fece chiamare à se la Duchessa sua moglie, M. Nicolo
Castracani Antelminelli, Principal Vegli, Duccio Sandei, & F. Lazaro, Priore di Altopascio; & lasciolli nel
testamento tutori, con Enrico, Valevano, Giovanni & Verde, suoi figliuoli; a’ quali con volto intrepido diede la
benedizione paterna e l’ultimo bacio” ( …having made his testament the year before, MCCCXXVII on
December 20th in Lucca,…but feeling lacking & being above the fact of the gravity of his illness, he spoke with
his secretaries, giving them lots of orders; he desired to see his wife, the Duchess,  M. Nicolo Castracani
Antelminelli, Principal Vegli, Duke Sandei, & F. Lazaro, Prior of Altopascio & executor of the will, and Enrico,
Valevano, Giovanni & Verde, his sons, to whom he gave with intrepid face the paternal benediction and a last
kiss) (3). Castruccio expired on 23th September 1328 at the age of XLVII, five months, & five days” (4).
Giovanni died still young in 1343 and he was buried in Pisa, near his mother in St. Francis Church (figure 2 - 
Giovanni Castracani's tombstone / figure 3 - Coat of Arms of the Castracani Family on the tombstone): “In
the same temple Giovanni, son of Castruccio, is buried, a knight and important man in many battles. His upper
body is sculpted, armed, and dressed in Chivalric clothes, with the emblem of his family: & the inscription said:
“Virtutis exemplum. momentaneo iuventutis flore clarescens, praematurae mortis in cursu praeventus, tegor
hac in petra Ioannes, natus olim Illustris Domini Castruccij, Lucani Ducis, altissimae mentis, indelendae
memoriae, libertatis patriae defensoris, hostibus semper invicti. Anno MCCCXLIII. Die XIJ.Maj”. (Exemplar
of virtue. While I got fame in the flower of youth, anticipating the path of premature death, I lie covered by this
stone, me, Giovanni, son of the famous lord Castruccio, Duke of Lucca, of the highest intelligence, of
indestructible memory, defender of the homeland, never defeated by the enemy. 14th May 1343) (5). It is clear,
based on the inscription under the painting, that Francesco wasn’t Giovanni’s son, because he was born 17
years after his death.
 

Like his brothers, Giovanni was a Prince of many Tuscan cities, and
in particular Prince of Pietra Santa and Monteggiori, thanks to a charter given by Emperor Ludwig the
Bavarian, who “Volendo poi finger alcuna dimostratione di benevolenza e, meschiarla alla grande
ingratitudine, confermò alli 10. di Aprile alla Duchessa, moglie di Castruccio, le entrate, che gli aveva
lasciate il marito; e diedegli libera podestà, & dominio sopra il castello di Monteggiori, & suo distretto come
Patrimonio, con tutte le ville nel Contado, & terre sopra Pietrasanta; assegnando quattromila Fiorini d’oro
l’anno sopra esse Vicaria, a lei & à figliuoli, & e loro discendenti.  & alli 17. di dicembre fece due Privilegi à
quella Signora, à Valerano, e Giovanni predetti, confermandoli Signori di Monteggiori, & loro successori, con
la istessa entrata” (Wanting to demonstrate benevolence, mingled with great ingratitude, on 10th April
granted to the Duchess, wife of Castruccio, all the real estate left by her husband; gave her free power
& dominion over Monteggiori Castle and all the towns in Contado and the lands above Pietrasanta; assigning
four thousand gold florins per year on this Vicarage, to her, her sons and their descendants; making on 17th
December, two charters to the Duchess, and to the aforesaid Valerano and Giovanni, confirming them and their
successors as Lords of Monteggiori, with the same income) (6). Manucci has the whole text of this charter in
his work, as well as the Castruccio will.

So who was this Francesco in the painting?  Manucci, and also other documents and family trees referring to
this family  (figure 4), said that he was born of Orlando, son of Enrico, first-born of Castruccio Castracani.
 From Manucci we discover that
Enrico, Giovanni’s brother, had a
son named Orlando, who had four
other sons, Castruccio, Enrico,
Francesco and Rolando.

A Fibbia descendant, Padre

Flaminio Fibbia, who was a
member of the Order of the
Benedictines, sent a letter on 12th
March 1594 to his cousin,
informing him about a family tree
in the house of “Signor Bernardino
l’Antelminelli Gentiluomo dè
Principali della Città” ("Lord
Bernardino l’Antelminelli
Gentleman of the City of Lucca”), which he himself had seen, of which a copy in copper had been bequeathed. 
He writes that this Lord of Lucca thought that the family in question descended from a man named
Francesco, son of Rolando, who was born of Enrico, son of  Prince Castruccio; and about the emblem he
says: “Ora io non dubito punto, che la Famiglia nostra Cada da questa degli Antelminelli per mezzo di
Castruccio Castracane, et me ne da grande Argomento l’Arma, la quale è l’istessa che la nostra non alterata,
già la nostra sa vostra Eccellenza è il cane da mezzo in su col colare in Campo azzurro, et le Fibbie in Campo
bianco, et l'Arma antica vera delli Antelminelti usata da Castruccio Castracane e il mezzo Cane bianco col
Colare in Campo Azzuro, Coperto dal mezzo in giù da un Campo bianco schietto, nel quale noi v’avemo poste
le Fibbie Causa della variazione del Cognome; già l’Aquila vi è aggiunta da poco in qua. Egli hà biasimato,
che vi si ponghi l’Aquila, et sebbene io v’hò detto, che questo fu un dono che Carlo Quinto fece alla nostra
famiglia, mi rispose, che egli ancora l’hanno da imperatori in Dono … ma che la vera [Arma], è il Cane
Bianco col Colar posto in Campo azzurro, et di sotto tutto il resto dello Scudo bianco, in che noi, come o detto,
abbiamo posto le Fibbie”. (“Now, I have no doubt that our family came from Antelminelli, through Castruccio
Castracane, and this is Proved by the (coat of) arms, which is completely identical to ours, which, as your
Excellency already knows, represents half a white dog with a Collar on a blue Field andBuckles (Fibbie) on a
white Field, and the true ancient emblem ofAntelminelli used by Castruccio Castracane is the white half Dog
with Collar in a Blue Field, covered from the middle down by a white Field  in which we have put the Buckles
(le Fibbie), because of the Surname change; the Eagle was added recently. He disapproved of the Eagle put
there, although, as I told you before, this was a gift of Charles V to our family, he told me that it was had in Gift
from the Emperors, but the real [Arms] is composed of a White Dog with Collar in a blue Field, set in a
white Shield in which, as I told you before, we put the Buckles(Fibbie)”. The Benedictine lists all the names in
the family tree, beginning with Castruccio Castracane, Prince of Lucca, who “ebbe Enrico, et di lui Orlando, dal
quale nacque Francesco, che abitò in Bologna, et da questa derivò la Famiglia ora detta – de Fibbia – o –
dalle Fibbie – siccome volgarmente parla la Città di Bologna, et gli Anali di detto, aggiungendovisi però nelle
Scritture, alias de Castracani, questo Francesco ebbe due figliuoli, Perazzino ed Antonello” (“had a son Enrico,
and from him born Orlando who begat Francesco, who lived in Bologna, and from him followed the Family
now called Fibbia - or Fibbie, in the manner of the people of Bologna and its Annals - adding that texts about
the Castracani say that Francesco had two sons, Perazzino and Antonello.”) (7).
 
As for the presence of the Eagle in the coat of arms, it came from Emperor Charles V, who decreed it, in a
letter-patent, on 27th February 1533, to the "Doctor and cavalryman of the Pope’s army", Alessando Fibbia, our
descendant. And later, in another letter- patent dated 1st October 1533, he granted the honour of placing a
black eagle with a buckle (fibbia) in its mouth on his family’s coat of arms (8). There is evidence in many of the
works by historians in Bologna, such as Dolfi (9) or Montefani (10), both inspired by Alidosi (11), that
Francesco was the son of Orlando, born of Enrico, son of Castruccio. This progeny is in another family tree,
found in the Bologna State Archive (12).
 
There is no doubt about the fact that the branch descending from Enrico moved to Bologna, as we can see from
the will dated 5th November 1561, drawn up by Joannis Baptista Frassetti, where Francesco Fibbia, son of
Vincenzo, states that his noble family came from Francesco “descendentis a stirpe Henrici primogeniti
Castruccii de Castracanis, olim Lucae Principis, qui Henricus expulsus fuit Anno 1328, & in hac civitate
Bononiae Domicilium elexit, et habitavit in Domo Magna, sub Capella Sancti Prosperi, quam Vincentius
praedictus postea vendidit illis de Desideriis Anno 1475" (descendant of the family of Enrico, first-born of
Castruccio Castracani, formerly Prince of Lucca. This Enrico was ousted in the year 1328 and came to Bologna,
where he lived in a big house in the parish of San Prospero which the aforesaid Vincenzo then sold it to some of
Desideri in the year 1475) (13).

So we have been able to discover that the Francesco Fibbia in the picture was real and that he was Prince of
Pietrasanta and Monteggiori, thanks to the charter of Ludwig the Bavarian, transmitted to the descendants of
the children of Castruccio; we also understand that he lived in Bologna following the transfer to this city of his
family. Clearly he never married Francesca, daughter of Giovanni II Bentivoglio, because she married Galeotto
Manfredi, Lord of Faenza in 1482 in Bologna. The marriage didn’t last, because in 1488 her husband died,
killed by assassins under her orders, and she was free to marry Count Guido Torelli, a Vatican Chancellor.
 
The fame of this sequence of events that negates a possible marriage between the Prince and Francesca
Bentivoglio has led tarot historians to negate completely what was written in the painting. But you need to
know the medieval attitudes about family alliances and read them in the right way. That marriage contracts
never actually occurred with persons of noble origin was a continual practice throughout the Middle Ages, up to
the seventeenth century, as Professor Rolando Dondarini, a professor of medieval history at the University of
Bologna, reminds us: "Attempts to give character and prestigious ancestry through false unions and fanciful
ancestors were particularly frequent in the fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, when many
biographers took advantage of powerful families with their invented and servile reconstructions. There is the
controversy that Cherubino Ghiradacci had to face when he claimed that the Bentivoglio in origin were of low
birth, while their descendants boasted of being descended from King Enzo and his purely legendary
relationship with Lucia of Viadagola, to whom King Enzo would have said: ‘Indeed I am fond of you’ [Ben ti
voglio]".
 
There aren’t any sources to testify to the presence of another Francesca, whether daughter of Giovanni I or a
descendant from a secondary branch of the Bentivoglio family, of which the matrimonial stories aren't known
with certainty. But the Fibbias were closely tied to many Lords of Bologna, because many held office in the
Bentivolgios' Army, as I have found in all the documents above quoted. It is recorded, on this point, that a
Biagio, called the Bolognino, joined up in 1420 with Bentivoglio to conquer Castel Bolognese. The family
tree Discendenza di Guarniero I. Progenitore della Nobilissima Famiglia Antelminelli (Descendants of
Guarniero I, Father of the aristocratic Antelminelli family) bears the same inscription as the painting: “Biagio
detto Bolognino Principe di Monteggiori e Pietrasanta Fugito in Bologna datosi a Bentivogli fu Generale
Capitano. dell’Armi in Bologna. E creato Cavagliere fu de’ Signori” (Biagio called Bolognino Prince of
Monteggiori and Pietrasanta, fled to Bologna, in service to Bentivoglo, was General Captain in the Army of the
Bentivoglios. Was made a Knight and Lord of the Signori). The same words are also in the inscription under
our picture: “Francesco Antelminelli Castracani Signore di Fusechio Conte Palatino, fugito in Bologna, e fatto
Nobile Cittadino fu detto dalle Fibbie” (Francesco Antelminelli Castracani, Lord of Fusechio, Count of Palatino,
fled to Bologna, and made a noble citizen was called Fibbia) (14).
 
We know that the Fibbia and the Bentivoglio (coat of) arms, as the writing on the painting affirm, were printed
on the 17th Century Queen of Staves and Queen of Coins, for example, in the “Alla Torre” tarocchini, dated to
the XVIIth century, where the Fibbia (coat of) arms appeared on the Queen of Staves (the Queen of Coins is 
missing from the pack). These (coats of) arms also appear in the same cards in many decks from the XVIII
century, such as “Al Mondo”  (figure 5 - figure 6) (15) and “Alla Colomba” (figure 7) (16). The ability to
insert coats of arms of any nature, noble or not, in the oldest decks of cards was not subject to particular
authorizations, so that any printer could do it. On this point one must wonder why these emblems inserted
were those of the Fibbia and Bentivoglio, if not based on a tradition that saw in the Fibbia and their allied
family the origin of these cards.

Continuing our discussion, it should first be said

that whoever commissioned the painting did not
know the exact time when the tarot was invented,
as those who dealt with them in the sixteenth and
following centuries did not know, to the extent
that at the end of the eighteenth century
the tarot was even given an Egyptian origin. If
we investigate the documents that historians of
the fifteenth and sixteenth senturies
coonveyed about the inventor of that game and
the period of its existence, no one admitted to
having the information, so that various people
hypothesized that the tarot was invented at the
time of ancient Greece or in an epoch even
older, when we know that playing cards
themselves did not exist. One of these was Flavio
Alberto Lollio (1508-1569) who, in his Invective
against the Game of Tarot (17), writes in this regard, drawn to the game he loved but never given the right
cards to win: “He who invented such nonsense / showed himself to have little to do, / and truly to have
diarrhoea of the mind; / we must suppose that he was a worthless painter, / out of work and penniless, / who,
in order to earn his bread, /started making such childish gibberish. / What else do the Bagatella (Magician) and
the Fool mean, save that / he (the inventor) was a trickster and a cheat. /What else can they signify, the Popess,
the Chariot, / the Traitor, the Wheel, the Hunchback, / Fortitude, the Star, the Sun, the Moon, / Death, Hell
and all the rest / of this revolving bizarrerie / Save that he had an empty head, / full of smoke, caprices and idle
tales? / She who empties the wine-bottles (Temperance) shows / that it is also true that he was a drunkard. /
And that whimsical and bizarre name /of Tarocco, lacking an etymology, / makes it manifest to everyone that
his fantasies / had damaged and ruined his brain" (18).
 
From this passage we understand that the meaning of the word “Tarocco”, a term that replaced in its ludic use
that of “Triumph” at the beginning of the sixteenth century, was unknown, as well as its etymology. Today,
thanks to documents of the time, the meaning of that word and its etymological derivation have been clarified
by the writer (19).
 
On the picture it is written that Francesco Fibbia was the inventor of Tarocchini, but we know that this term
represents a XVIth century variation of the game of tarocchi (tarot), previously existent in Bologna since the
XVth century, when it had the name of Triumphs. All this means is that the author of the inscription, pointing
to someone living between the XIVth and the XVth century as the inventor of Tarocchini, did not know the
correct form of the game at the time of its creation, considering Tarocchini as the original form and not a later
variant. The fact that the Bolognese had forgotten the word “Tarocchi” and its game of 78 cards is not
surprising. On this point, Michael Dummett writes: "Although still in existence in 1588, the old form and
complete pack had been completely forgotten by the mid-seventeenth century, although the name Tarocchini
persisted" (20).  [... ]. If Prince Fibbia had something to do with the game of tarot, it is far more likely that he
was the inventor, not of the Bologna variant of the game, but the game itself,...  It may well be that in the mind
of whoever composed the legend of the portrait there was not a clear distinction between the invention of tarot
[tarocchi] and the invention of tarocchino; he might have thought that there were no other forms of the game
and even that it was unknown outside of Bologna and its surroundings. If so, Prince Fibbia could really be the
first inventor of the tarot pack and the game practiced with it" (21).
 
Dummett, who we may recall taught Formal Logic at Oxford University as well as writing monumental
historical works on Tarot, does not give examples of this claim that the Bolognese had forgotten the name of
Tarot [Tarocchi], probably taken by him for granted. I will therefore offer one of many. There was a work in six
cantos published in 1736, L’Dsgrazi d’Bertuldin dalla Zena (The Misfortunes of Bertuldin of Zena), in which
Giuseppe Maria Buini (born 1680) put into verse of the Bolognese dialect, with “remarks” on his text in
standard Italian, an earlier work from the 16th century, Le Disgrazie di Bartolino dalla Zena. (22) In his
"Remarks on Canto One”, regarding the line in stanza XXXII, “Dù zugavn’ di stanza a taruchin”, Buini defines
“di stanza” as a “Specie di gioco pres[s]o noi usitata, che si fa con le carte dei Tarrocchini, gioco inventato
dalla studiosa mente dei Bolognesi, del quale Gregor. Tolos. Syntag. Jur. Lib.30. cap.4. num.11 disse
trovarvisi dentro semi di buon fine, e di scelta erudizione” (“type of game used by us, done with the cards of
Tarrochini, a game invented by the studious mind of the Bolognese, of which  Gregor Tolos. Syntag. Jur. Lib.
30 cap. 4 num. 11 said he found himself among suits of good purpose and refined erudition") (23).
 
In essence Buini is citing how the well-known French lawyer Pierre Gregoire, known as Tolosano (1540-1597),
wrote in his Syntagma Juris Universi, that the cards possessed educational qualities that were full of erudition.
The invention of that card game, which to Buini meant the game of Tarocchino, went to Bologna.
 
In fact, if we investigate what the famous French jurist Pierre Gregoire wrote in his Syntax Juris Universi of
1582 (24), we read that the jurist speaks of Tarot and not Tarocchini: "Inventi tamen ludi sunt foliorum, in
quibus dum luditur, vestigia quoque quaedam eruditionis apparent, ut in Tarotiis, & ijs cum quibus excusae
sunt unà sententiae sacrae paginae & philosophorum, apud Vuechellum Lutetix typographum"
(However, games of sheets of cards have been invented in which, while they are played, there are also traces of
a certain erudition, such as in Tarot, and in those in company with the highest sacred and philosophical
writers, at the Vuechello typographer in Paris) (25). Which means that for the Bolognese
Buini, Tarotiis was Tarocchini, and not Tarocchi, the term and the game by now unknown to him.
 
But there is more, since Buini, continuing to write on Tarocchino, attests that “il Ginerlberti ne scrisse la
Storia, ed origine facendo vedere, che i Tarrocchini non sono altro, se non se la tragica faccenda de’ Geremei
Guelfi, e Lambertazzi Ghibellini, così il Valdemusi da Prusilio ne distese la varia fortuna” ("Ginerlberti wrote
the History, making the origin visible, that the Tarrocchini is nothing but the tragic events of the Geremei
Guelfs and Lambertazzi Ghibellines, so  Valdemusi da Prusilio laid out their different fortunes") (26). In
essence, he argues that the Bolognese Ginerlbelti, writing the history of Tarocchino, claimed that this game
was, through images, the tragic history of the struggle between the Guelf family of the Geremei and the
Ghibelline family of the Lambertazzi, and that another Bolognese, Valdemusi da Prusilio, described the events.
As the struggle between the two factions took place in Bologna in the 13th century, seeing the war between
these two families imprinted on those cards inevitably leads us to think that the historian Ginerbelti believed
that Tarocchino was conceived immediately after the contention or at most after a few decades, in memory of a
war between Bolognese that had arisen in that very clamorous time.. Which means that even the Bolognese
historians did not know the real date of the creation of their game, which for Tarocchino was around 300 years
after those events, and for Tarocchi 150.
 
As additional testimony to the fact that the Bolognese thought that the invention of Tarocchini was very old,
Ross Caldwell, our partner, has brought to our attention that Carlo Pisarri writes in his 1754 Istruzioni
necessarie per chi volesse imparare il giuoco dilettevole delli Tarocchini di Bologna (Instructions necessary
for those wishing to learn the amusing game of Tarocchini of Bologna), a technical manual on the game of
Tarocchini: “Questo Giuoco è antichissimo talmente, che non si ha cognizione nè dell’Inventore, nè del tempo,
in cui fu ritrovato; ben è vero però, ch’egli è particolare della Città di Bologna, e fu inventato per passare
l’ore nojose con qualche divertimento” (This Game is so ancient that we have no knowledge of its Inventor, nor
of the time in which it was created; it is certainly true, however, that it is specific to the City of Bologna, and
was invented to pass tedious hours with some entertainment)  (27)
 
From what we have been able to substantiate, no erroneous information is attributable to the inscriptions in
the painting, except for the irrelevant attribution of the Prince's paternity. The alleged error of the Prince's
marriage with Francesca Bentivoglio must also be interpreted in light of what has been expressed above.
 
Finally, we come to the reasoning that assigns for certain that Prince as inventor of the Ludus Triumphorum.
The dates indicated on the picture are very near to those hypothesized for the time of the birth of the game of
Triumphs, and this could not surprise us more. As the oldest known documents about the game of triumphs
date back to 1440 (Florence) and 1442 (Estense Court) (28), by historical assumption regarding the practice of
use [practica d’uso], the game must date back to at least twenty/twenty-five years earlier, a period which
matches with the Prince’s presence in Bologna.
 
This conjecture in reference to the practice of use is commonly supported by historians of the Middle Ages. A
single example will suffice: from Chiara Frugoni we are informed that eyeglasses were invented around the year
1285, based on the fact that the Dominican Giordano da Pisa, in his sermon of 1305 delivered at Santa Maria
Novella in Florence, cites them as dating back to about twenty years before:: "Not yet twenty years have passed
since the art of making eyeglasses was invented, for seeing well; one of the best and most necessary arts that
the world has, and it is from such a short time that it has been invented: a new art, which previously did not
exist.” And the reader [Giordano da Pisa] said: “I saw the one who first invented it and practiced it, and talked
to him”. (Non è ancora venti anni che si trovò l’arte di fare gli occhiali, che fanno vedere bene; ch’è una de le
migliori arti e de le più necessarie che ‘l mondo abbia, e è così poco che ssi trovò: arte novella, che mmai non
fu. E disse il lettore: io vidi colui che prima la trovò e fece, e favellaigli). (29).
 
So not only did the good Dominican communicate during the sermon that eyeglasses, still unknown in
Florence, had been invented about twenty years earlier, but also asserted that their invention had occurred very
recently. A statement which suggests that for people then, twenty years must have been considered a short
period of time, since he called it a recent invention. The Dominican did not say that he was the first to comment
on this invention. So, in order to better substantiate Prof. Frugoni’s statement, we have to establish that there
is no credible record of their presence anywhere else in the 15-20 years before his report. In fact investigators
have found two such reports, in 1300 and 1301 Venice. The 1301 regulation is the first to specify lenses made of
glass. The 1300 regulation speaks of lenses made of crystal put next to the eyes and prohibits the production of
counterfeits using clear glass; it also says that this regulation is a copy of a guild regulation of 1284. Since the
1284 date agrees closely with our Dominican's dating, the two references together constitute double evidence
for this example of the 15-20 year lag (30).
 
It is therefore obvious, given that the first documents on Triumphs belong to the early fifteenth century, we
must look for their creation 20/25 years or more earlier.
 
This type of assumption, with reference to practice of use concerning a situation like this, is commonly
supported by historians of the Middle Ages. Specifically, Professor Rolando Dondarini, professor of medieval
history at the University of Bologna, Professor Paolo Aldo Rossi, historian of tarot and professor of scientific
thought at the University of Genoa, and Professor Franco Cardini, one of most prominent medievalists, are in
agreement with the writer. Also, their content must be related to the cultural contexts of the time, a subject that
in specifics has been dated back to the end of the XIVth century or the beginning of the XVth by Professor
Franco Cardini.
 
We should actually consider the time needed for this game to become so popular that it is the object of artistic
illuminated production in the courts (that is, current practise). In the same period when the first illuminated
triumphs appeared, cards of popular manufacture were used in Bologna by the common people (1442),
testifying to a long-existing practice (31). The fact that popular cards failed to survive is due to the conditions
of their manufacture, as the paper and cardstock they were made of would easily deteriorate. 
 
Agreeing with the writer on the date of invention of the game are three leading experts: R. Decker, T. Depaulis
and M. Dummett. In the book A wicked pack of cards: The origin of the Occult Tarot they write: "A lower
bound for the date of the invention is harder to determine. It probably occurred around 1425; the earliest date
with any claim to be plausible would be 1410" (32). The era that saw our Prince at Bologna.
 
If the inscription’s author had mentioned a date later or earlier by one or several decades in comparison to the
one we nowadays know as the realistic time of origin of the Triumphs - the period between 1410 and 1420 - we
would have immediately understood that this was a type of operation conceived to strongly highlight the role of
this Family, since the tarot  was really loved and used in Bologna at every social level. 
 
Is it by pure chance that the author of the inscription indicated dates so close to reality, an unconscious ”hit”,
wanting to promote the image of his own family, or is it perhaps more plausible that he has come into
possession of an old document that has reported this, knowing that this also would bring prestige to his family.
To speak of a coincidence would be really unpropoundable!
 
What is more, Francesco Fibbia lived in an historical period that saw the beginning of the construction of the
Basilica of St Petronio (1390), and the construction of the Bolognini Chapel (1400-1420), in which there is the
image of the Hanged Man, adopted in the Triumphs of those years to represent the figure of the Traitor. In
addition the Chapel in question was also entitled The Magi, who have always been represented in the Star card
of the Bolognese tarot, together with the gastrocephalic devil [devil with a head on its belly] towering at the
center of Hell, again found in the iconography of the old Bolognese tarot (33).
 
Notes

1 - Tarocchino (also called “Tarocchini”) was created in the middle of the sixteenth century, when the
Bolognese, to streamline the game, took several cards out of the deck of 78 cards, narrowing their number to
62.
2 - The work was printed in Rome in 1590. 
3 - Ibid, p. 95
4 - Ibid, p. 97
5 - Ibid, p. 107
6 - Ibid, p. 105
7 - Adolfo Cavazza, Notizie intorno alle Famiglie Fibbia, Fabri, D’Arco, Fava e Pallavicini (Information about
the Fibbia, Fabri, D’Arco, Fava and Pallavicini Families), Bologna, 1901, pp. 7-8. 
8 - Ibid, p. 11. 
9 -Scipione Pompeo Dolfi, Cronologia delle Famiglie Nobili di Bologna (History of  Bologna Noble Families),
1670, p. 320.
10 - Lodovico Montefani, Famiglie Bolognesi (Bolognese Families), Bologna, University Library, ms. n. 34,
c. Pallavicini, Bologna, 1901, pp. 7-8.  
11 - Cfr: Gio. Nicolò Pasquali Alidosi, Delli Antiani Consoli di Bologna, e Confalonieri di Giustitia della Città
di Bologna, Libro Quinto (Ancient Consuls of Bologna, and of the Captains of Justice of the City of Bologna,
Book 5), Bologna, Per Sebastiano Bonomi, 1621.
12 - Bologna, State Archives, Archive Section (Fondo) Fibbia- Fabbri, Family Trees, Envelope 1. 
13 - This will was printed from the original manuscript by the typographers Longhi in Bologna in 1764.
Bologna, Archiginnasio Library, 17 Historical Biographies - Wills, Cap. I, n. 12.
14 - Bologna, Archiginnasio Library, coll.32.E.10. In this document the year of the Prince’s death is recorded as
1399.
15 - Collection Giuliano Crippa, Milan. 
16 -Bologna, Archiginnasio Library, Playing-cards, 16.Q.V.23.
17 - Flavio Alberto Lollio, Invettiva di M. Alberto Lollio Academico Philareto contra il Giuoco del
Tarocco (Invective of Mr. Alberto Lollio Academic of Philareto, against the Game of Tarocco), Ariosto
Municipal Library, Ferrara, ms. CL I, 257.
18 - Ibid, lines 205-226: “Ei mostrò ben d’haver poca facenda, / Et esser certo un bel Cacapensieri / Colui, che
fù inventor di simil baia: / Creder si dè, ch'ei fosse un dipintore / Ignobil, scioperato, et senza soldi, / Che per
buscarsi il pan, si mise à fare / Cotali filostroccole da putti. / Che vuol dir altro il Bagatella, e 'l Matto, / Se non
ch'ei fusse un ciurmatore, e un barro? / Che significan altro la Papessa, / Il Carro, il Traditor, la Ruota, il
Gobbo: / Là Fortezza, la Stella, il Sol, la Luna, / E la Morte, e l'Inferno: e tutto ’l resto / Di questa bizarria
girandolesca, / Senon che questi havea il capo sventato, / Pien di fumo, pancucchi, et fanfaluche? / Et che sia
ver, colei che versa i fiaschi / Ci mostra chiar, ch'ei fusse un ebbriaco: / E quel nome fantastico e bizarro / Di
Tarocco, senz’ethimologia, / Fa palese a ciascun, che i ghiribizzi / Gli havesser guasto e storppiato il cervello.”
The entire Invectiva is reported by Girolamo Zorli on his site www.tretre.it at the
link http://www.tretre.it/uploads/media/LOLLIO__IMPERIALI_-_INVETTIVA_e_RISPOSTA_-
_FE1554.pdf.
The English translation is taken from Michael Dummett, The Game of Tarot, from Ferrara to Salt Lake
City (London: Duckworth, 1980), p. 434, where the relevant part of the original also appears; it is online at
http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=1175&p=19806#p19806.
19 - See our essays  The meaning of the word ‘Tarocco’, Tarocco sta per Matto (Tarot stands for Fool,
currently in Italian only), and  About the Etymology of Tarocco.
20 - Michael Dummett, Il Mondo e l’Angelo.  I Tarocchi e la loro storia (The World and the Angel. Tarot cards
and their history), Naples, Bibliopolis, 1993, p. 224.
21 - Ibidem, p. 219.
22 - L’Dsgrazi d’Bertuldin dalla Zena, Miss in rima da G. M. B. [Giuseppe Maria Buini] Accademic dal Tridell
d' Bulogna. Accademic Con le Osservazioni, e Spiegazioni dei Vocabili, ò termini Bolognesi del Conservatore
della Società de’ Signori Filopatrij di Bologna, Bologna, Per Costantino Pisarri sotto le Scuole all'insegna di S.
Michele, 1736. (The Misfortunes of Bertuldin of Zena. Put into verse by G.M.B.  [Giuseppe Maria Buini],
Academic of the Tridell  [a word for low-quality bran] of Bologna. With Observations and Explanations of the
Expressions, or Bolognese terms, from the Conservatory of the Society of the Patrimony-Loving [Filopatrii]
Gentlemen of Bologna, Bologna, By Constantine Pisarri under the Schools of St. Michael, 1736). The earlier
work, Le Disgrazie di Bartolino dalla Zena,  by Count Pompeo Vizzani (or Visani) (c.1540-1607), was first
published in 1597 Bologna   “presso gli heredi di Gio. Rossi” (by the heirs of Gio. Rossi).
23 - Ibid, p. 98. For completeness of information, we report the stanza and as much as Buini clarifies in
his Observations referring to this stanza XXXII. (A very rough English translation follows immediately after
the Italian/Bolognese original.)
 
Canto Primo - XXXII
 
In quell mentr, ch’j asptavn’, ch’s’amanvass,
      Dù zugavn’ di stanza a taruchin,
      E dù altr’ a caplett’ in s’un tavlin,
      E dù a batt’ mur, e un d’lor stava a spass,
      Ch’ s’ i truvavn del lit, al sentenziava,
      E tutt’ l differenzi l’accumdava. (p. 9)
 
(In quel mentre che tutti aspettavano che si apparecchiasse / Due persone giocavano ‘di stanza’ a tarocchini / e
altri due ‘a caplet’ [a cappello] su un tavolo / e due a ‘batt’mur’ [battere muro], e uno di loro stava ozioso, / il
quale, se qualcuno litigava, con le sue sentenze / tutte le differenze di opinioni conciliava [cioè metteva
d’accordo tutti]
 
 Osservazioni al Canto Primo - XXXII
 
v.1. Ammanvass - Che restasse ammanito, ed approntato, manibus  aptatum prandium, direbbersi
latinamente.
v. 2 Di stanza - Specie di gioco pres[s]o noi usitata, che si fa con le carte dei Tarrocchini, gioco inventato dalla
studiosa mente dei Bolognesi, del quale Gregor. Tolos. Syntag. Jur. Lib.30. cap.4. num.11 disse trovarvisi
dentro semi di buon fine, e di scelta erudizione, e il Ginerlberti ne scrisse la Storia, ed origine facendo vedere,
che i Tarrocchini non sono altro, se non se la tragica faccenda de’ Geremei Guelfi, e Lambertazzi Ghibellini,
così il Valdemusi da Prusilio ne distese la varia fortuna” (p. 98).
v. 3. A Caplett - Gioco vigliacco affatto, e di mera fortuna detto cosi dal chiudersi in un capello diversi quattrini
di rame di nostro conio; uno de' giocatori chiama lettera, e l’altro lione, che sono le cose in quelli improntate,
rovesciato poi il capello, vince chi ha indovinato l’una, o l'altra delle apparenze chiamate. Se non fosse, che i soli
Birrichini [nullatenenti e questuanti], e Filatoglieri vi giocano, ragazzi di niun conto, e per i soli stessi quattrini,
certo che il gioco sarebbe affatto proibito, essendo una specie di Bassetta. (p. 98)
v. 4. A batt mur - Questo è pure gioco vile, mentre per le strade usasi con battere una delle monete suddette nel
muro, quale dee battersi con tale artifìcio, che caduta a terra si accosti alla moneta, che l’altro prima nella
stessa maniera gittò a terra, quanto è la lunghezza d' una misura fra le parti convenuta (p.99).
 v. 4. A spass - Senza impiego, ozioso, e che stava a vedere gli accidenti, che ai compagni occorrevano. (p. 99).
 
In quell mentr, ch’j asptavn’, ch’s’amanvass,
      Dù zugavn’ di stanza a taruchin,
      E dù altr’ a caplett’ in s’un tavlin,
      E dù a batt’ mur, e un d’lor stava a spass,
      Ch’ s’ i truvavn del lit, al sentenziava,
      E tutt’ l differenzi l’accumdava. (p. 9)
 
(In which while they all waited for things to be set up / Two people were playing “di stanza” (in the room) at
tarocchini and two others “at caplett” (at hat) at a table and two at “batt'mur” (bat-wall), and one of them was
lazy, who, if anybody litigated, with his judgments / all differences of opinion conciliated [i.e., all were put in
agreement]).
 
Observations on Canto One - XXXII
 
l. (line) 1. What would remain ammanite, and prepared, manibus aptatum prandium, to speak in Latin.
l. 2. di stanza (in the room) -  Type of game played by us with Tarrocchini cards, a game invented by the
scholarly-minded Bolognese, of which Gregor. Tolos. Syntag. Jur. Lib.30. chapter 4. Num.11 said he found
himself in suits of good purpose, and refined erudition, and Ginerlberti wrote the History, making it known
that Tarrocchini is nothing but the tragic events of the Geremei Guelfs, and Lambertazzi Ghibellines,
as Valdemusi da Prusilio laid out their different fortunes" (p. 98).
l. 3. A Caplett (At Hat) -  a cowardly game, of mere luck, so called by putting a few coins of copper into one
person’s hat; one of the players calls a letter, and the other Leone, which is the things in the ones marked, then
the hat is spilled, the winner is the one who guesses one or the other of the appearances called. If it were not
that onlyBiricchini [pauper and beggar] and Filatoglieri are playing, bad guys, and for the same quarter-
pennies, it is sure that the game would be forbidden to all, being a kind of Bassetta. (p. 98)
l. 4. A batt mur (at bat-wall) -  This is also a vile game; in the streets one throws one of the above coins against
the wall, which must fall close to one thrown by the other player in the same  way. In general the winner was
the one who threw his coin closer to a previously established land measure. (p.99; this is a translation of a
summary provided by Andrea Vitali, as a literal translation would not explain the game).
l. 4. A Spass - Useless, lazy, seeing what was happening with his companions. (p. 99).)
24 - Pierre Grégoire (c. 1540-1597), Tertia ac postrema Syntagmatis Juris Universi Pars, Pars III, Liber
XXXIX (contrary to the citation of XXX in Buini), Cap. 4, n.11 (Ludi foliorum qui innoxj, & ludi & lusoris
mala), (card games here innocent & games & the evil of the player). Lugduni (Lyon), Apud (At) Antonium
Gryphium, M.D.LXXXII. [1582].
25 - Ibid, p. 818.
26 - See note 20, Observations on Canto One, III, line 2.
27 - [Carlo Pisarri], Istruzioni necessarie.., op. cit. in the text, Chapter I: “Dell’Antichità di questo Giuoco, e
come gli Antichi lo giocavano” (Of the Antiquity of this Game, and how the Ancients played it), In Bologna, by
Ferdinando Pisarri, under the sign of S. Antonio, MDCCLIV [1754], p. 5.  That the game of tarot was invented
in Bologna is also attested in the volume Museo Cospiano: attached to that of the famous Ulisse Aldrovandi
and given to his homeland by the illustrious Lord Ferdinando Cospi, Patrician of Bologna and Senator, Book III
- Ch. XXVIII, in Bologna by Giacomo Monti, 1677, where we find the following:
12 - All these Games of Cards were derived from that of the Tarot, invented, as is known, in Bologna, and, more
than anywhere else, practiced there, when the Bentivoglio exerted the Princely authority. The cards presented
here give testimony.
13 - TAROT [TAROCCHI] CARDS, used in Bologna CLXX and more years ago, as evidenced by the backs of the
cards, on which the Arms of the Bentivoglio are printed, as used at that time when they exercised princely
authority, i.e. with the red Saw and nothing else in the shield, and a Panther above the Crest, with the motto
FIDES, ET AMOR. They are much larger than ordinary ones, and likewise painted in a variety of colors. The
Game with them is more ingenious than of luck, but the Holy Figures do not make for good harmony, such as
that of the Pope, such as that of the Pope, which does not seem to me proper to put among things of play, so
much so that even the Heterodox are scandalized by such abuse (p.307).
28 - See our essay Bologna and the Invention of Triumphs.
29 - Chiara Frugoni, Medioevo sul naso. Occhiali, bottoni e altre invenzioni medievali [Middle Ages on the
Nose. Eyeglasses, Buttons and other medieval inventions], Rome, Laterza, 2001, Chap. I p. 3. See: Giordano of
Pisa, Florence Lenten Sermons 1305-1306, critical edition edited by C. Delcorno, Sansoni, Florence, 1974;
Sermon XV (23 February 1305), p. 75.
30 - Vincent Ilardi, Renaissance Vision from Spectacles to Telescopes, Philadelphia 2007, pp. 8-9, accessible
at http://books.google.com/books?
id=peIL7hVQUmwC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false. I am
grateful to Prof. Michael S. Howard, associate of our Association, for this information. 
31 - In this regard see the essay Bologna and the invention of Triumphs. 
32 - London, Duckworth, 1996, p. 27.
33 - For further discussion on Prince Fibbia and our hypothesis on the early triumphs conceived by him, read
the Addenda to the essay The Order of Triumphs.