Teheuti
Pre-Copernican views of the sun are discussed by historians. That view is part of history - or are you suggesting that once the 'truth' is known then history has been rewritten so that Pre-Copernican views are no longer historically relevant?A historical section of a forum, where the basic history is known makes no sense to me for foundation type stuff, like pyramids and gypsies.It is like discussing Pre Copernican views of the sun with modern astronomers and telling them your fable is true.
It is historically true that people have entertained and/or believed and based artifacts (decks and books) on an origin of Tarot in ancient Egypt. It is historically true that gypsies in Europe have long been connected with divination. How these ideas affected the historical development of Tarot is history!
It is historically true that writers in the field of Western Esotericism from around 1600 started seeing a correspondence among numbers, letters and astrological signs, as in Kabbalah, as key to understanding God's plan of creation. The historical development of this idea can be followed to a place/time when Tarot was incorporated into it by someone.
While Historical Research sticks more closely to the actual facts themselves, it seems appropriate to have an area where these things can be discussed more broadly. Where we can speculate - WHAT IF Jacob Boehme had known and viewed the Tarot Trumps as another expression of letter-number-sign? Individuals could argue based on reason rather than on absolute fact. Historical Research could pick up at the point where someone turns up (if they did) more solid evidence.
WHAT IF the Mamluk cards were based on designs in Persian carpets? You have to entertain the idea and play with it a bit before you can see if it takes you anywhere.