Gertrude Moakley & The Triumphs of Petrarch

A look at the first art historical approach to the iconography of Tarot

Mar 12, 2025

The question of an intended metaphor behind the sequence of the trump cards is perhaps the most enduring mystery in all of tarot. However, prior to the work of Gertrude Moakley in the 1950s, there had never been a serious art historical study into the iconography of tarot cards as little attention had been given to the subject outside of occultist’s speculations. Moakley’s pioneering theories about a connection between the tarot pack, the poetry of Petrarch and the medieval triumphal procession would finally place the cards in their proper Renaissance context. While not entirely correct, her theories got more right than they did wrong and many of her observations remain valid today.

Moakley was a librarian for the New York Public Library System for 40 years.1 Her
interest in tarot begun with a research project she did to help improve the library’s cataloging. Any subject would have done, but she had been given a stack of books on tarot to catalog so she started there. After some cursory research she was surprised when she couldn’t find a study on tarot from a serious academic. Disappointed with the way subject had been handled, she sought out to find answers. 2

The New York Public Library in 1966, from a postcard

*The Triumph of Fame over Death* and *The Triumph of Time over Fame*, both tapestries from the Metropolitan Museum of New York

Living in New York City gave Moakley access to a high concentration of tarot artifacts. She was able to study the Visconti-Sforza cards at the Morgan Museum firsthand. She remarked on the so-called Mantegna Tarocchi at the Metropolitan Museum, stating that they were too large and too thin to have been playing cards. 3 In one of her footnotes, she mentioned the two uncut sheets with numbers but no names, also at the Metropolitan Museum. 4 She even had the opportunity to meet with Piero Tozzi, then based in New York, and to see his collection of noble tarocchi in the Visconti-Sforza style, these cards may never again be publicly known.5 However, she wrote that the real breakthrough came when she found these two renaissance tapestries at the Met, The Triumph of Fame and Triumph of Time both depicting scenes from Petrarch’s I Trionfi.6

Moakley’s first work on tarot came in 1954 when she wrote a commentary on T. S. Eliot’s 1922 poem, The Waste Land, for the library bulletin. In The Wasteland, Eliot made a brief allusion to figures from the tarot pack, which many critics had attempted to decode. Of this, Moakley wrote, “The critics have quite naturally assumed that Eliot knew what he was talking about. Yet I think it can be shown that he did not.”7

She noted that what Eliot had referred to in his commentary as “the traditional pack” of tarot cards was actually the Rider-Waite deck, which was barely a decade older than The Waste Land itself. The Rider deck was virtually unique among tarot decks in having fully illustrated suit cards, and to Moakley, it was obvious that “the man with three staves” was a reference to Pamela Colman Smith’s Three of Wands. She then speculated on what the rest of Eliot’s tarot allusions may have been referencing. Her article has since been cited in numerous critiques of the poem.8

While she was formulating her theories on tarot Moakely had correspondence with art historian Erwin Panofsky who was so impressed with her research that he offered to buy her notes. In 1956 she would publish the first version of her theory linking the iconography of the tarot pack to Petrarch’s I Trionfi in the library bulletin.9 This apparently opened doors for her as she would be invited to write an introduction to the 1958 edition of Papus’s Tarot of the Bohemians—part of the publisher’s effort to make the book appeal to a broader, more grounded audience. The following year, she would write an introduction to the 1959 edition of A. E. Waite’s Pictorial Key to the Tarot. During this time, she enjoyed a bit of fame in the world of tarot. She was an acquaintance of actress and tarot author Eden Gray and appeared as a guest on shows such as “Long John” Nebel’s overnight program on WOR in New York, which focused on unusual, fringe, and paranormal topics—a precursor to shows like Coast to Coast AM.10

In 1966, she released her book, The Tarot Cards Painted by Bonifacio Bembo for the Visconti-Sforza Family. This work presented a refined and more in-depth version of her Petrarch theory, along with interpretations of the cards from the Visconti-Sforza pack (Pierpont-Morgan Bergamo Colleoni), which at the time were believed to be the oldest tarot cards. While it is now known that they are not the earliest, many of her interpretations remain insightful, even if they may only apply specifically to that deck.

Francesco Pesellino, *Triumphs of Love, Chasitity & Death; Fame, Time & Eternity* (Florence ~1450), Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum

The Triumphs of Petrarch

Francesco Petrarca (1304 – 1374), better known as ‘Petrarch’, was a poet from Florence whose popularity eclipsed even Dante’s during the Renaissance. Petrarch was so influential that he is credited with coining the term ‘The Dark Ages’ to describe the quality of literature before his time. He would write his epic I Trionfi (‘The Triumphs’) over the course of 23 years (1351-1374). 8 of those years, between 1353-1361, would be spent in Milan in service to the Visconti as a court poet. In 1360, at Gian Gallaezzo Visconti’s wedding in Pavia he is credited with coining the Visconti motto “A Bon Droyt” which appears on some of the pips in the Visconti-Sforza decks.

Petrarch based his metaphor on the Triumph, an ancient Roman custom that Renaissance rulers had revived. In antiquity, a triumph would be held to honor a military victory. The returning army would march with their prisoners and spoils in a procession concluding with the victorious general. These processions were quite popular and would often be accompanied by popular games and other festivities for the consumption of the general public.11

The Holy Roman emperor Frederick II (1194-1250) is remembered for holding the first triumph since ancient times. In 1237, after his victory over Milan, the emperor called for a triumphal procession through the streets of Rome. By the XIV century, triumphal processions had become a common occurrence all across Italy.12 Triumphs would be held for a variety of occasions such as holidays, weddings or a solemn entrance.

I Trionfi tells the story of one man’s journey from sin to redemption. The poem is organized in three parts constituted by pairings of six triumphs. Each triumph is presented as an allegorical figures who ‘triumphs’ over the previous until the ultimate victory of God in eternity. 13 The Triumphs of Petrarch became a cultural phenomenon in the centuries following the poet’s death. Moakley wrote that ‘next to the bible stories [it was] the theme use most often in illumination, tapestry, painted marriage-chests and birth-trays, pottery, enamel work, relief sculptures and engravings.’14

The first figure presented is Cupido, or Love, who rides in on a triumphal car drawn by white horses and attended by various celebrities. In Petrarch poem, this is the only figure to get a Chariot. Moakley noted a suggestion from Massena that the artists who painted The Triumphs of Petrarch were following some lost commentary rather than the poem itself.15 Love is paired with Chastity, who in the poem is played by Laura, Petrarch’s long lost love taken before her time by the plague. Laura is attended by the virtues as well as famous women from myth and history. Artists who painted The Triumph of Chastity depicted the figure in a chariot being pulled by unicorns.

Next comes Death who plucks a golden hair from Laura’s head and she dies. She soon returns to give a comforting message to poet protagonist. Given the lingering memory of the plague, artists painted The Triumph of Death everywhere and in various ways. The most common depictions of this triumph are the horseman of death indiscriminately slaying everyone it sees and other times it’s a large meat wagon being driven by a skeletal figure and pulled along by mighty black oxen. Death is vanquished by Fame who artists give a car with a white horses. Fame is attended by famous heroes from history and myth as well as the Greek philosophers.

Fame fades in Time. Petrarch uses the symbolism of the sun chasing the dawn to represent this triumph in his poem. Artists instead paint this triumph as Saturn being pulled around by stags. Time is ousted when Eternity finally comes and Petrarch is reunited with Laura in Heaven. Paintings depicting the final triumph tend to show Jesus and the saints overlooking the world and often incorporate some, or all, of the evangelist animals.

*Il Matto* & *Il Bagatino* from the Pierpont Morgan collection, The Morgan Library & Museum

The Tarot and The Triumphs

One of Moakley’s most significant insights was her observation that Tarot was primarily a card game and that it’s original name was Trionfi, a theory that had first been advanced by Robert Steele.16 She also took account of Petrarch’s relationship with the Visconti, who were patrons of some of the earliest known tarot cards. With these details in mind it was a logical conclusion that the game Trionfi was connected to the massively popular poem I Trionfi.

The core of Moakley’s theory is that the trump sequence of the tarot cards are portraying a triumphal procession, in the style of Petrarch, being held for the holiday of carnival. Carnival being the celebration held in Catholic countries prior to the start of Lent, a 40 day period of austerity that ends on Easter Sunday. In America, this festival is known on Mardi Gras and it ends on Fat Tuesday , known traditionally as Shrove. This is followed by Ash Wednesday where the faithful are expected to make a Lenten sacrifice and forgo a luxury for the duration of Lent. It is thought that the Carnival has roots that go back to the ancient Roman Saturnalia.17

To connect the procession to carnival she notes the crown of feathers worn by Bembo’s Il Matto which she takes to imply that he is an allegory of Lent. For this she notes an old Lenten custom where seven feathers were attached to an effigy known as ‘the Lent’. At the end of each week in Lent a feather would be pulled out and just before Easter the ‘Lent’ itself would be destroyed.

Opposite of Lent was the Juggler/Magician, known in some of the oldest decks as Il Bagatino, a word she theorized to have been a proper name as it has no other meaning besides ‘the first of the tarocchi trumps.’ 18 She interpreted Bembo’s depiction to be that of a man seated for his last meal and saw the rod he holds as a kingly rod. From these clues she deduced that he must be the Carnival King and as such he was to be sacrificed at the end of the procession, as was tradition. For her theory of Bagatino as the Carnival King she admits no direct authority but for the custom of the carnival sacrifice she cites a passage from James Frazier’s The Golden Bough.19

She made a few other lasting observations by seeking a personal meaning for the Visconti in the cards. Most notably, she identified La Papessa (The Popess or High Priestess) with Sister Manfreda, a Visconti ancestor who had been part of a schismatic sect that elected her as their pope. Ultimately, she met her end burned at the stake by the Inquisition.20 She made a similar finding with the Hanged Man whom she identified with the Pittura Infamante, or shame paintings. In Renaissance Italy, as well as other places in Europe, shame paintings would be commissioned for subjects of ‘public ignominy’ such as traitors, thieves or con artists. In the case of the Visconti this was personal as the Pope had once made Francesco Sforza’s father, a mercenary commander, the subject of one of these paintings after he had offered his services to one of the Pope’s enemies.21 The Tarot Cards depicting The Hanged Man remain the oldest known examples of this type of painting. 22

Perhaps her most salient observation was that the tarot pack likely descended from dice games, which could explain why the deck consists of 56 suit cards and 21 trumps. She noted that 21 is the number of possible outcomes when rolling two dice, while three dice produce 56 possible outcomes. She took this even further, noting that 21 is a triangular number with a base of 6, and 56 is a pyramidal number with a base of 21. When added together with The Fool, they total 78—another triangular number, this time with a base of 12. Removing The Fool from the equation leaves 77 cards, which could be broke down into 7 and 11, both considered lucky numbers by dice players.23

Along with this, she cited a theory from a Renaissance book suggesting that the suits were related to the virtues. According to this theory, Swords represented Justice, Batons represented Fortitude, Cups corresponded to Temperance, and the Coins were mirrors of Prudence.24

As for her central theory, the main differences between the theory she presented in her 1956 article and her 1966 book are the basis and order that the procession follows. In 1956, she followed the order from the Tarot de Marseille and envisioned the tarot cards as being a carnival procession based on the works of Petrarch. In this version, the Triumph of Cupid included trumps I–VI, representing the temporal rulers ending in Love. This was followed by Chastity, consisting of The Chariot, the three Virtues, and The Wheel. Death came next, and along with it The Hanged Man, Death, The Devil, and The Tower. She noted that the Triumph of Fame was absent from the tarot deck but present in the Minchiate pack. Il Gobbo (the Hermit), whom she moved from position IX, was the sole participant in the Triumph of Time. She also observed that while the Sun, Moon, and Stars were symbols of time, they often appeared as captives of Eternity in paintings of The Triumphs. With this in mind, she chose to include them in the final Triumph, alongside Judgment and The World.25

In her 1966 book, she would mix up the procession by adding in the suit cards and following the order from the Steele Sermon (Dummett’s Type-B Eastern). In this version, which she based on the Visconti-Sforza pack, she envisioned the cards as being commemorating an actual procession. Il Bagatino marches in first in his role as the Carnival King, he is followed by the Cups, which she envisioned as a knightly company. Next comes the temporal rulers, followed by Love, who is attended by the virtues Strength and Temperance—whose presence in this triumph she took to be part of a vulgar joke. The Triumph of Chastity is absent, replaced instead by the Triumph of Fortune. The Batons march in next, followed by the Wheel, and the sequence is capped off by the Coins suit. Rather than having his own Triumph, the Time Hermit is now part of the Triumph of Death. With the Triumph of Fame once again absent, the Swords enter next, heralding the Triumph of Eternity.

In her view the trumps sequence was “a ribald take-off” of Petrarch’s prose perhaps because “in the merry mood of Carnival, everything possible was done to make fun of the solemn story.”26 However by excusing any differences between the cards and their purported source as being part of a joke this view has been criticized as “allowing too much freedom” and “being too simplistic.”27 Dummett noted that ‘while plausible in principle’ her theory was ‘difficult to make convincing in detail’ but was still the best explanation for why the cards had been called Trionfi.28

While discussing Moakley in his book, Robert Place acknowledged that her theories represented a tremendous breakthrough for scholarly research into tarot, but he ultimately found them incorrect. While there was a relationship between some of the trump cards and illustrations of Petrarch’s Triumphs, there was not a consistent correlation across all the cards or in the correct order. Furthermore, noting that Petrarch did not create these images, Place concluded that the art direction of both the tarot cards and The Triumphs was likely informed by the same broader cultural vocabulary rather than directly derived from one another.29

Regarding her book’s reception, Sheryl Smith wrote in her blog on Moakley that “the book had no impact on the tarot community, which remained wedded to esoteric fantasies about tarot’s ancient origins until the internet made it impossible to ignore evidence to the contrary.”30

I personally found Moakley’s book to be a well-written and insightful journey into tarot history. It was an engaging read that presented a compelling story on its own merits and I would recommend it to someone, even if they had no interest in tarot.

Gertrude Moakley & The Triumphs of Petrarch

A look at the first art historical approach to the iconography of Tarot

Discussion about this post