Ross G Caldwell
It depends how you define what tarot is, before you can date it.
I approach tarot in at least two different ways, and use different definitions for each.
For historical research, I define "tarot" as a deck of 78 cards, four suits and 21 trumps, and a fool. And there are some variants. By this definition, it was invented, I think, in late 15th century Italy. So I start with the earliest trace of something looking like that, and work backward... then I quickly bump into "trionfi".
So I define "trionfi" cards a little differently, and these were first painted or drawn in the early 15th century, or even late 14th. They look a lot like "tarot" cards, but I don't like to mix my terms, it might prove misleading. Trionfi cards are (in my opinion again) depictions of trionfi, "triumphs", which are either victory parades or allegorical images, best known as being parts of processions or parades in Italy, where an ancient tradition kept them alive from Roman times; Petrarch made "rime" of them. You can read about them and see lots of images here:
http://www.geocities.com/autorbis/Trionfi.html
But he was not the only one. Trionfi were a relatively popular subject.
When they were first depicted in a "card-like" way, I don't know. Many experiments might have been lost, but the earliest trace seems to be in the 1420's, with the deck painted by Michelino da Besozzo.
http://www.geocities.com/autorbis/Marcello11.html
In my opinion, tarot/tarocchi is a branch of this large family of cards.
Another way to look at the tarot is to understand the imagery - interpretation. For this the historical method can only go so far.
If you imagine the cards as stained glass rather than cardboard, then the light shining through them comes from much more distant times.
It is difficult, when defining the cards solely as conveying imagery, to date them. If the image of Justice on a particular card is thought of as carrying all recognizable images of Justice, throughout time, then she goes back almost as far as we can see, to Egypt and Babylonia - it seems there was always Libra.
Nevertheless, I personally try to limit myself, in my interpretations of historical cards, to ones that are historically viable. With a particular deck, what could a person at time have known, or imagined about the image? Because of this approach, I am constantly studying the 15th century and earlier periods, in order to expand my palette of interpretations, to discipline myself against anachronism.
Some of the results of my approach, essentially an art-historical one, can be seen at my website,
http://www.angelfire.com/space/tarot
There are a few essays there.
Ross
I approach tarot in at least two different ways, and use different definitions for each.
For historical research, I define "tarot" as a deck of 78 cards, four suits and 21 trumps, and a fool. And there are some variants. By this definition, it was invented, I think, in late 15th century Italy. So I start with the earliest trace of something looking like that, and work backward... then I quickly bump into "trionfi".
So I define "trionfi" cards a little differently, and these were first painted or drawn in the early 15th century, or even late 14th. They look a lot like "tarot" cards, but I don't like to mix my terms, it might prove misleading. Trionfi cards are (in my opinion again) depictions of trionfi, "triumphs", which are either victory parades or allegorical images, best known as being parts of processions or parades in Italy, where an ancient tradition kept them alive from Roman times; Petrarch made "rime" of them. You can read about them and see lots of images here:
http://www.geocities.com/autorbis/Trionfi.html
But he was not the only one. Trionfi were a relatively popular subject.
When they were first depicted in a "card-like" way, I don't know. Many experiments might have been lost, but the earliest trace seems to be in the 1420's, with the deck painted by Michelino da Besozzo.
http://www.geocities.com/autorbis/Marcello11.html
In my opinion, tarot/tarocchi is a branch of this large family of cards.
Another way to look at the tarot is to understand the imagery - interpretation. For this the historical method can only go so far.
If you imagine the cards as stained glass rather than cardboard, then the light shining through them comes from much more distant times.
It is difficult, when defining the cards solely as conveying imagery, to date them. If the image of Justice on a particular card is thought of as carrying all recognizable images of Justice, throughout time, then she goes back almost as far as we can see, to Egypt and Babylonia - it seems there was always Libra.
Nevertheless, I personally try to limit myself, in my interpretations of historical cards, to ones that are historically viable. With a particular deck, what could a person at time have known, or imagined about the image? Because of this approach, I am constantly studying the 15th century and earlier periods, in order to expand my palette of interpretations, to discipline myself against anachronism.
Some of the results of my approach, essentially an art-historical one, can be seen at my website,
http://www.angelfire.com/space/tarot
There are a few essays there.
Ross
