The Avignon Papacy

[Ross G Caldwell]

While the Mamluks were centered in the eastern Mediterranean, there could have been interaction and exchange during the crusades -- seems much more likely than the cards coming to Europe by way of the Moors in Spain. During this period, "saracen" was often construed in Europe to mean anyone/thing of Arabic/Islamic origin.

Yes, you're right about Saracen.

But Crusades are unnecessarily early; there was plenty of communication and trade between north Africa and the Levant and western Europe in the late 14th century.

Besides the big players like Venice and Genoa, Sicily was always right there in the middle, and we have treaties and other documents between the Caliph (or was that a Sultan?) of Tunis and Gian Galeazzo Visconti and Filippo Maria Visconti. I'm sure I've read of similar things with Louis of Orléans as well; and Genoa, with international outposts, was a French possession during Louis' time. So he could have gotten cards directly from Egypt.

Some people have interpreted the cards as coming with Valentina Visconti in 1389, when she went to Paris to marry Louis (thus the "Lombard" cards), but Louis' connections were vast and his activities and concern for what he wanted to do in Italy make such an explanation superfluous.

Cards are not well-known in Arabic-Mamluk sources, and they are always called "kanjifeh" or "ganjifah" - this is a Persian word and betrays their origin. So the question, for the Mamluk origin hypothesis, is why Europeans called the cards "naïbis" (pronounced "na-EE-beece", or "na-HEE-bees").

Accepting the theory of a Mamluk origin for the regular pack, my tentative hypothesis would be that the "naïbi" figures - the lieutenant-king (or vice-king) and second lieutenant-king played an important role in the game first learned by Europeans. It could have been some kind of trumping game like Karnöffel, where the highest card is the naïb, who defeats the Kings (just as Mamluks rose from slaves to a royal dynasty).

So my hypothesis is that the Mamluks called cards "kanjifah", but the particular game "naïbi", and that around 1370, both Italians and Catalans became acquainted with this game.

 

[Huck]

Could "Saracen cards" be a Mamluk deck? It seems difficult to date the remaining Mamluk cards we have (but there is speculation that these cards existed as early as the twelfth century ....

You mean speculations about Mamluk cards in 12th century?

Some early Mongols already around in the region then?

Writing error perhaps?

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

You mean speculations about Mamluk cards in 12th century?

Some early Mongols already around in the region then?

Writing error perhaps?

I think some people judged fragments of Arabic cards as early as 1250, or even 1200. This is in Dummett somewhere. I think it is very insecure, as he also is not sure - the judgement was based on stylism, which we know could be very conservative in playing cards. And perhaps "crudeness" is considered "early", when we know it could be interpreted otherwise.

The Turfan card was dated by Le Coq to the 11th century, but recent research says that the Uighur texts with which the card was found are mostly from the 13th and 14th century. This would fit perfectly with the design, which seems to be a character from "The Water Margin", and would put it at the earliest in 1300.

My own understanding is that the eight-suited Persian "Ganjifeh" (which went into India) came from China first (not necessary via Mongols, it could have been much earlier - Culin mentions that some Chinese packs have eight suits). This pack did not influence the west. The western pack had to have been based on a four-suited pack, and I agree that it should be a "lat chi" or what we call a "money pack".

Arabs don't generally play cards - the Mamluks were not Arabs, although they were a Muslim dynasty. Mamluks must have gotten the game of cards from Persians, because they borrowed the word "Ganjifeh". But the eight-suited pack doesn't seem to be the origin. There must have been a quick transfer of the four-suited pack through Persia, where it has left no trace (nobody is really expert here, to tell the truth). Since Polo Sticks, Swords, and Coins (I can't remember if Cups are) are Mamluk heraldic symbols, I think they invented these suits.

The Catalans seem to have interpreted the Polo Sticks as Batons; and it is a fair guess that the Mamluks interpreted the Strings (of Coins) of the Mongol/Chinese pack as Polo Sticks (they look like sticks in the Chinese packs). The Sword suit, Andy Pollett has suggested (based on who?), might be from the shape of the Chinese symbol for "tens (of myriads)", which is a cross (+). The Cups suit, I believe Wilkinson suggested, is an inversion of the Chinese symbol for "Myriad", which looks like an upsidedown "y".

In my reading of the Water Margin, many historians say that it became popular under the Mongol dynasty in China because it is a story of outlaws as heros (like Robin Hood), and represented popular resentment of the Mongol overlords. Since the decoration of the "Myriads" suit (Wan in Chinese) was with "Water Margin" characters, it might be that the Mongols did not have these characters on their cards, but replaced them with simple characters for the suit - 2 Wan, 3 Wan, 4 Wan, etc. The Mamluks, not reading Chinese or Mongol characters, *turned the symbols over*, so they looked like cups.

It seems far-fetched, but according to Trevor Denning the Japanese in the 16th century did precisely the same thing with Portuguese cards. They did not understand what the Cups in the Portuguese cards were - they look like balls with stems - so they made cards with the stems on top and balls underneath - but they called them by a Japanese adaptation of the Portuguese name. Strange, but true! And it illustrates that Wilkinson's theory might have some probability.

 

[Huck]

China was split in 3 major parts, before the Mongols attacked (1220 or so?) the northern part. A splitted China had likely no far-reaching trade before. After success they took their route to Europe, and they were in 1241 then 150 km far from Praha.
It doesn't seem likely, that playing cads reached the Mamluks long before this date - when they, as indicated, developed in 12th century. 1250 is a much more acceptable date.
John Meador once presented some links to Mongolian pictures on papers in the web, which were dated very early ... also related back to the storm of the mongols.

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

China was split in 3 major parts, before the Mongols attacked (1220 or so?) the northern part. A splitted China had likely no far-reaching trade before. After success they took their route to Europe, and they were in 1241 then 150 km far from Praha.
It doesn't seem likely, that playing cads reached the Mamluks long before this date - when they, as indicated, developed in 12th century. 1250 is a much more acceptable date.

I agree, it was a quick transfer for the four-suited pack - and the later the better. The eight-suited Ganjifeh is more difficult to date.

Mamluks called cards "Kanjifah", and Mongols called cards by their Chinese name (pai), so Mamluks must have learned cards from the Persians.

No Persian pack we know of looks like the Mamluk pack, so we have to guess there was a pack that left no trace in Persia, and only barely among Mamluks. But this was the game that completely determined European cards.

And they call these the "minor arcana"! Really, they are the greater mysteries.

 

[Rosanne]

I am very interested in views on this subject. As it is for me,(the subject) very important, I will be getting a sort of essay together to explain why I think the Avignon Papacy alongside the Black Death, strongly influenced Tarot, possibly was the time of its birth. I am sure I will be corrected if I am way off beam; but still it will take me a little while. I will try to be as straight as an arrow in my reasoning. I know it was a game, then a philosophy but possibly it was more side by side.
As the Gothic period was drawing to a close the humanizing of religious themes and images had started to accelerate. Art and symbols were addressing the private person in a direct appeal to their emotions. The details of images were well on the way to outwardly relating to the population, as expressing recognizable human feelings. The bitter human experiences of the time, both religious and secular were the fuel for this change from remote to personal. I think the images of Tarot- were parodies of the real human experience of the times..... but more on this when I have done some solid organising. Thanks Robert for starting the thread. ~Rosanne

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

Hi Roseanne,

As the Gothic period was drawing to a close the humanizing of religious themes and images had started to accelerate. Art and symbols were addressing the private person in a direct appeal to their emotions. The details of images were well on the way to outwardly relating to the population, as expressing recognizable human feelings. The bitter human experiences of the time, both religious and secular were the fuel for this change from remote to personal. I think the images of Tarot- were parodies of the real human experience of the times..... but more on this when I have done some solid organising. Thanks Robert for starting the thread. ~Rosanne

I agree with this - I look forward to reading your essay.

I realize it will take you time to formulate and write out your ideas, and I don't want to critique what isn't there yet!

But let me throw out a few things to think about...

Yes, the experience of the social, economic, ecclesiastical, political catastrophies of the later 14th and early 15th centuries definitely influenced the ideology expressed in the series of tarot trumps. There can be no doubt.

But what I don't understand is, why do you think Avignon better reflected these conditions, before 1377, then northern Italy itself in those days?

And what positive evidence do you think there is that the tarot trumps even existed in Avignon before this date (the date Gregory XI returned to Rome, and tarot cards coming with him (not necessarily *on* him) if I understand your view)?

My point is that there is no sure evidence before even 1442 that such cards existed, and when we assess the evidence we have after that date, it seems unlikely that if they had existed beforehand for so long, certain specific people would have mentioned them, or they would indicate their existence in certain places. But the same kinds of documents and imagery that give us an indication of their existence after 1442, are silent beforehand. Whether they are inventories of the possessions of noble families, account books, lists of permitted and prohibited games, preacher's sermons, stories which mention card games, books of allegory and symbolism, histories, traveller's accounts, drawings and paintings - many of which attest to tarot's existence in the decades *after* 1442, are completely silent *before* 1442. 10 or 20 years is held to be a plausible period of documentary silence, but 70 years or more seems excessive and implausible.

This is my opinion, of course, and although it is the consensus of specialists as well, naturally it is not immune to better arguments or new evidence.

So - I look very much forward to reading you, and hope you are up for a healthy debate!

Ross

 

[Huck]

I agree, it was a quick transfer for the four-suited pack - and the later the better. The eight-suited Ganjifeh is more difficult to date.

Mamluks called cards "Kanjifah", and Mongols called cards by their Chinese name (pai), so Mamluks must have learned cards from the Persians.

No Persian pack we know of looks like the Mamluk pack, so we have to guess there was a pack that left no trace in Persia, and only barely among Mamluks. But this was the game that completely determined European cards.

And they call these the "minor arcana"! Really, they are the greater mysteries.

As far I remember from my earlier studies, the Mongols behaved rather unfriendly against the Persians, but had occasionally treaties and militarical arrangements with the Mamluks. Simple political friendship might be the reason, that Mamluks oriented towards Chinese-Mongols suit design and Persians didn't (of course such a development might now man other reason). Wilkinson saw an iconographical relation between Chinese and Italian suit design.

Actually ... German decks - far away from the common oriental trade routes - know many different suits. Italian and Spanish suits - both with contacts to the muslimic world - have the similarity and bewared it.

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

As far I remember from my earlier studies, the Mongols behaved rather unfriendly against the Persians, but had occasionally treaties and militarical arrangements with the Mamluks. Simple political friendship might be the reason, that Mamluks oriented towards Chinese-Mongols suit design and Persians didn't (of course such a development might now man other reason). Wilkinson saw an iconographical relation between Chinese and Italian suit design.

I don't know the relations between Mongols and Persians or Mamluks. This you will have to show me, or I will have to take time to research it. It is another field...

But Arabic sources call them "Kanjifeh", which shows that cards in general were called by a Persian name in Arabic during Mamluk times. It seems to have been the 52 card pack that came to southern Europe first. The Spanish dropped the 10s soon, and other cards later; but experiments seem to have been around for a long time - one early Catalan record (from 1390 or so) knows a card pack with "44 pieces". Maybe 10s were gone already - or something else?

Actually ... German decks - far away from the common oriental trade routes - know many different suits. Italian and Spanish suits - both with contacts to the muslimic world - have the similarity and bewared it.

Well, John of Rheinfelden is interesting. Maybe cards came to Germany from a different source, at around the same time. Or maybe they just experimented more at an earlier date. The Germans were the most inventive, that is for sure, and they made the most cards for a long time. Then the French took over that job for Europe, starting the second half of the 15th century.

 

[Huck]

I don't know the relations between Mongols and Persians or Mamluks. This you will have to show me, or I will have to take time to research it. It is another field...

I took my info partly from the web, other parts from common history, nothing special, that I do remember.
Just a humble research about the movement of the militaric Mongolic forces.

But Arabic sources call them "Kanjifeh", which shows that cards in general were called by a Persian name in Arabic during Mamluk times. It seems to have been the 52 card pack that came to southern Europe first. The Spanish dropped the 10s soon, and other cards later; but experiments seem to have been around for a long time - one early Catalan record (from 1390 or so) knows a card pack with "44 pieces". Maybe 10s were gone already - or something else?

I'm informed, that at least some Chinese card systems also dropped the 10's ... as we see it in Mah-Jongg, which is said to be of late origin. Likely according to the number-system 1-9, 10 - 90, 100 - 900

Well, John of Rheinfelden is interesting. Maybe cards came to Germany from a different source, at around the same time. Or maybe they just experimented more at an earlier date. The Germans were the most inventive, that is for sure, and they made the most cards for a long time. Then the French took over that job for Europe, starting the second half of the 15th century.

We work on a list-overview with all German decks from 15th centuy ... when the list is finished, then it is obvious, that suits had been really rather different, before they settled in "common" patterns.