Huck
le pendu said:
We've the Ursino stag, the Mantegna Tarocchi, the Michelino deck, the Boiardo deck, the Cary-Yale, the 5x14 deck, the Minchiate, the Guildhall-Goldschmidt cards, the Sola Busca ... and I would bet, if I would know each curious deck of 15th century, this list would be much longer.
When I take a walk through our Museum with 3600 decks, I do perceive, what creativity means. Also I perceive, what standardization means. Both perspectives contrast each other, but both exist.
Standardization developed naturally by the mechanism of mass production. In the beginning of playing card development, massproduction naturally was not existent, but I suppose, that it developed early, already before the time, that we observe. However, there is the natural tendency, that at beginning the number of produced series of a specific deck type was small and later
got increased - just according to improvements of the production methodes
and trade ways, market strategies, guildbehaviour etc.
From this observation the idea seems natural, that the situation of the beginning of playing card development knew a lot of creativity, that means, the individuell structure and iconography of a deck could differ largely from others. When we read the text of Johannes of Rheinfelden, we see, although he's possibly only 10 years from the begining way, he knows a lot of decks and variants, he even already knows a deck, in which the number cards are personified, 60 persons and figures inside one deck, that are 22 more than in Tarot game (22+16) with 78 cards. In the year 1377.
Let's assume, they had a lot of varieties, but not the idea to add special cards, as we do have it in Tarot.
We do have a "first sign of Tarot", or better, "first sign of added special cards" in the year 1423, when the term Imperatori deck is mentioned in a document in Ferrara. The deck is imported from Florence, that means from a republic, not from a court. It doesn't necessarily mean "from the mass market" - the taste in Florence was already exquisite, perhaps of a high level. But: The idea came from "below", not from the courts.
We see at the same time something, which is only observable at this time, the early 20ies, and it happens only twice: 40 ducatos for a card play paid in Ferrara and 1500 ducatos paid in Milan by Filippo Maria Visconti.
Later prices are not cheap, but this two sums are exorbitant.
Such prices are only paid, when something is "really new", and the observation, that both prices are paid in nearly the same time gives reason to the correctness of this assumption. Something new has happened, a quality jump. A new interest ...
Politically we've after 1425 a disturbance of "happy card playing". San Bernardino is running around and preaches - that is a compley conservative countermeasurement against new developments in social culture, and part of the attacked "modern world" is card playing. We've then great wars, another bad condition, and then with Pope Eugen somebody, who engaged to help San Bernardino. Eugen took his home in Florence .... ergo: Florence chances to produce new playing card developments are bad.
More cultural freedom in Ferrara, which luckily more or less stayed outside of the wars of Venizia, Florence and Milan. Result: in 15th century a lot of cultural new-developments started in Ferrara, it became the "Hollywood" of its time. A relatively small city, but with a splendid court.
The idea of the Imperatori had wandered to Ferrara already in 1423. But ... political and familiary conditions (Parisina captivated by the accusation of her husband) stopped playing card development. Playing card interests reappear 1434, "when the many kids are old enough", and when "marriage of the daughters" give opportunity for social festivities.
Inside this "group of young people" the intellectual basis is given to produce a "new playing card level". And there is the right situation, when Bianca Maria Visconti is at a visit, possibly in near futiure marrying the heir of Ferrara
Leonello d'Este. It's clear, that for the amusement of the young ladies (there are 3 at this court from which we know) playing cards are necessary. And here the Trionfi developments seems to take a start. 1.1.1441. And also is clear, that this community has no reason to imitate something. What they do, is naturally "creative", it's Ferrara, the most creative point in space and time for this moment.
The object is a luxury deck "in project" for the marriage of Leonello and Bianca. A "Trionfi deck", cause the marriage would be accompanied by triumphal festivities.
The projected marriage never took place. But the card deck had "14 figure", whatever was pictured on them, this we don't know.
Another projected marriage took place, in October 1441. This was - probably - accompanied by the Cary-Yale. It had 24 court cards and - likely - 16 trumps. It was - probably - different from the deck of 1.1.1441. Why should it have been the same? It was another marriage and these decks had the idea to show the greatness of just this event and not another.
2 monthes later a next "Trionfi" occasion. Immediately after the death of his father Leonello orders 4 Trionfi decks and they're ready and paid in February 1442. And again - it's likely - that also this decks were different ... The interests in this type of deck seem to go down in the 40ies ... The real action was the "triumphal procession and the great festivities", the decks had only the function to accompany them. It seems, that the Trionfo of Alfonso in Naples hadn't an event-deck, this was, as it it seems, only a custom in North Italian courts, but - probably not of all, as any playing cards notes for instance from Mantua (had a lot German connections) are missing.
Well ... I shouldn't tell too much, this becomes too long, but you see, that a reason for "repeating decks" was not given at the begin of the Trionfi development, everybody, who had reason and money and interests enough to make a Trionfi with accompanying card deck, had an interest to produce something individual, not a series imitation, this would have been nonsense and against any logic. So .. there is the creativity.
One of these experiments became later - by the curious ways of life - very successful. It became a series, somehow modified and the production methodes were of course according to new developments in printing technique. In the given time, nobody knew of this development, things have their own dynamic.
That's the spirit, out of which the Tarot was born: Creativity at various occasions. A tree gives many seeds, some (and most) never become a tree, others stay small and perhaps one or two become very big. These new trees don't look completely like the mother-tree, but have similarities.
The Tarot was one of the big trees.
The 5x14-deck of Bembo already is nearly the Marseille, as far the choice of the motifs is concerned. The numbers are probably correct.
For the research for the first 22-decks, which leads to the Marseille, this means: Look at Milan.
There are various reasons to look at the time from 1460 - 1475 for the development to the 22 deck.
This means for research: Look at Milan in 1460 - 1475. And that means: Lokk at Galeazzo Maria Sforza.
Galeazzo Maria had many festivities, but the marriage to Bona should be a greater one. There is the "Trionfo" and there one should search the "Trionfi cards" with 22 elements.
Galeazzo had a curious accident in his life:
When he was 22 years, he followed his father on the throne of Milano.
When his father, Francesco Sforza, was 22 years old, he followed his father in the role of the Super-condottieri
When his mother was 22 years old, her father, Filippo Maria Visconti died.
Galeazzo Maria had a personal reason to be personally fixed on the number 22.
It might be, that already had chosen a playing card experiment with the number 22 involved: Boiardo perhaps, for instance. But perhaps there had been also decks with other numbers. Galeazzo's likely choice: He took the 22 as the number of the trumps.
Rather unlikely: That he put at position 15 a card like the devil.
Rather unlikely: That he didn't consider Prudentia.
This was an individual deck, made for a Trionfo, with the individual wish to display Visconti heraldic - and the Visconti heraldic had its snake.
It was not imaginable to Galeazzo Maria, that 540 years after his action in an Tarotforum in Australia this small detail of the much greater Triuonfo, that he made, would get such an importance. Also he didn't realize, how this decision would influence 500 and more years of playing card production.
Of course he had a sort of idle, philosophic reflection of his own family device - as it probably any of this heraldic owners had in all these centuries. And in the spirit of his time, he probably thought of Prudentia and analysed, "the Visconti family was always clever and mighty (could capture their foes)".
And he uses it and for his mind it was completely boring, what you are me would think of it.
The connection of snake to wisdom and knowledge is already given in rthe bible and also in Greek mythology. See legend Garden Eden, Teiresias and caduceus of Mercury. Galeazzo didn't invent anything with this.
Don't worry.This is not a pet theory. Galeazzo Maria doesn't really look like the nice guy, one would love to have invented Tarot. Many pet theories have been left to reach this one, many other ideas and possibilities are in the trash. This is serious and demanded the study of a lot of details, not mentioned here.
As far I know, JMD didn't reflect the offered scheme till now.
I don't know, what you mean with "discount the Visconti decks". We think it worthful, when researchers are open-minded and unconvinced.
One cannot show decks or images, which are not available. Research is done to see the hidden background, invisible to the normal eye. This helps to research in the right direction and not to waste energies in fields, where naturally nothing can be found.
The 5x14-theory was formulated by Lothar 1989 as "true with a probability of at least 99 %" on the base of just looking at Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo deck. The 70 cards note from Ferrara came much later, the document of Ferrara 1441 came later, the perspective of Marcello 1449, which destroyed the illusion, that Trionfi = 22 trumps destroyed, came later.
But these points were only recognized, cause the right places were focused in research.
That's the same with Galeazzo Maria: Focusing him will probably lead to further details, which makes the net closer. I say "probably", cause when we verify, that the bacic assumption is wrong, we change our course, we do not work with "pet theories", we also try to be open-minded.
1. In the figure you've the numbers running from 0-21 - you can't speak against this.
2. That 0/1 and 20/21 are logical pairs, is not only our observation, it's also given by the rules, which give high points to 0-1-21 - you can't speak against this.
3.That 2-3-4-5 and 16-17-18-19 are logical groups, was also said already elsewhere. Yatima made a lot about his 6 or 7 lights recently. But, simply looking shows, 4 lights are clearly deciperable: 19-18-17-16. - You can't argue against this.
Btw: The explanation to the card Jupiter, highest card in the Michelino deck,
includes a note to 4 lights, one in each of the four corners, the top lights seem to be sun and moon, but are metaphorically described, so unclear, but the bottom lights are a "star like Mars" and a "lightning". 4 lights, not 6 or 7 as Yatima suggested.
4. The middle-10 from 6-15 is a life-tree, that's the only statement you can argue about.
Well, we can discuss this part in detail, that's interesting.
Well, we've also to thank you for your critical reflection.
