Tarot and Kabbala

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
I guess I didn't understand your last statement about changing motifs. I am exploring a possibility about a relationship between the Hermit card and Saint Jerome.

Click to expand...

There is no indication, that "Saints" were a topic inside the early Trionfi world, St. Jerome would be the first (if we take aside the strange motifs of Guildhall and Goldschmidt cards) - if you've another opinion, you could make a suggestion. From the few examples, that we have as "hermits" in Renaissance Italy, all fall in the category of "Father Time", mostly indicated by more than one sign.

The "time" figure was popular with Petrarca's "Trionfi" ... other figures of Petrarca's Trionfi (Fama, Love, Death ... Chastity possibly with the presence of virtues, Eternity possibly in the iconography of the world card in the later phase) also appear in the Trionfi series.

And generally, the assumption, that early Trionfi decks had 22 special cards, has still some supporters in the researcher communty, but no documentary evidence till Boiardo poem and Sola Busca Tarocchi, and these were probably relatively late.

Hi Huck,
First of all, I don't know as much as you do about the actual card history. I thought there was more uncertainty about the early cards. You can tell me where I am wrong. 1. "Authentic Tarot" was one of many allegorical games in the early 15th century. Some allegorical games featured warriors, others classical Gods, and some Biblical themes. However, these other games were not actually considered "AuthenticTarot", but "Tarot like." 2. The earliest actual date for a Tarot (or Triumphi pack) was in 1442 at the House of d'Este. 3. Other Triumph packs that were once thought to be much earlier were in fact found to be later, like Charles V deck (not sure about V there) 4. The number of cards in the "Tarot alikes" varied, but no one has proven that "authentic Tarot" changed its numbers. Here I am drawing on Robert O'Neill who has written this somewhere. Ronald Decker, who is a respected Tarot historian, also thinks that the Marseille deck is the original deck--stable number of cards. 5. Finally, I can understand that you are passionate about there not being originally 22 Trump cards. We can all hold strong opinions, otherwise we wouldn't be putting time and energy into this research. Still, I think there is room to speculate that "Authentic Tarot" is very precise in terms of number symbolism.

But do you have any samples of "Father Time" "Chronos" "Saturn" that are from the 15th Century. I went online and nothing popped up, then I went through my books and couldn't find it either. Frankly, I always thought the Hermit was Saturn or Father Time as well; but now I am changing my mind. A reference on this would help. Thanks..

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
First of all, I don't know as much as you do about the actual card history. I thought there was more uncertainty about the early cards. You can tell me where I am wrong. 1. "Authentic Tarot" was one of many allegorical games in the early 15th century. Some allegorical games featured warriors, others classical Gods, and some Biblical themes. However, these other games were not actually considered "AuthenticTarot", but "Tarot like." 2. The earliest actual date for a Tarot (or Triumphi pack) was in 1442 at the House of d'Este. 3. Other Triumph packs that were once thought to be much earlier were in fact found to be later, like Charles V deck (not sure about V there) 4. The number of cards in the "Tarot alikes" varied, but no one has proven that "authentic Tarot" changed its numbers. Here I am drawing on Robert O'Neill who has written this somewhere. Ronald Decker, who is a respected Tarot historian, also thinks that the Marseille deck is the original deck--stable number of cards.

....

But do you have any samples of "Father Time" "Chronos" "Saturn" that are from the 15th Century. I went online and nothing popped up, then I went through my books and couldn't find it either. Frankly, I always thought the Hermit was Saturn or Father Time as well; but now I am changing my mind. A reference on this would help. Thanks..

Click to expand...

The books of Stuart Kaplan, Tarot Encyclopedia I and II, offer generally a good overview ... only few Trionfi cards are not there.

A composite picture (not very illustrative) is given by Bob O'Neill.
http://www.tarot.com/about-tarot/library/boneill/hermit

As you see, there are 5 pictures:

Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo-Tarocchi, probably ca. 1452, handpainted
http://trionfi.com/m/d0yyyy.php?decknr=2046
Charles VI Tarocchi, 1463 (assumption), generally 1450 - 1470, handpainted
Castle Ursino fragment (hermit identical to Charles VI, not at Bob O'Neill's selection
http://trionfi.com/0/j/d/charlesvi/

3 other early woodcut decks exist, one is here
http://trionfi.com/0/j/d/sheets/

These are the extant Italian hermit cards. French Hermit cards start with Catelin Godefrey 1557, and since then the hour glass looks like a lantern. There had been many Petrarca Trionfi in 15th century, but not too many are in the web.

... ... I don't know, what you understand with "Authentic Tarot"

Early Tarot History in 15th consists of written documemts and real early playing cards ... the extant documents inform us, that some of the playing cards had the name "Trionfi" cards. And the terminus "Tarot" is missing in them ... first appearance 1505 in France and in Ferrara at nearly the same time.
So Tarot history reseachers came up with the opinion, that "Trionfi" should be translated in 15th century with "Tarot" and from their card findings they assumed, that the "authentical Tarot" was somehow in existence in ca. 1450. So, whenever "Trionfi" appeared in documents, they assumed, that they saw the note of an "authentical Tarot deck" and whenever they saw a remaining Tarot similar card, they saw the rest of a deck with 22 special cards and 56 small arcana around it.

The documents or reports of them are here:
http://trionfi.com/0/e/00/

The theory of a complete Tarot ca. 1450 has some holes ... The "authentic Tarot" was only a somehow possible fiction. There are other ways to interprete the documents. For instance there is no evidence, that the original structure of the deck was 22+4x14. The structure 5x14 is possible and also the structure 5x16. And the name "Trionfi" could be used for decks with various motifs.

For your proud statement:

5. Finally, I can understand that you are passionate about there not being originally 22 Trump cards. We can all hold strong opinions, otherwise we wouldn't be putting time and energy into this research. Still, I think there is room to speculate that "Authentic Tarot" is very precise in terms of number symbolism.

Click to expand...

... ... I'm not sure, if you know really what you're saying ... "Authentic" usually signifies "the oldest" in development and this would be in matters of Trionfi deck something like the Michelino deck. How will you with your numerology, which assumes to be "very precise in terms of number symbolism", operate with a Jupiter as the highest card and Amor as the lowest?

http://trionfi.com/0/b/

... undenyable a Trionfi deck ... well, maybe you find the "authentic" Tarot deck in the time, when the word "Tarot" really was used ... maybe after 1505.

And the many existent different numerologies in Tarot really need more than a few explaning words ...

the card dialogue

Hi Huck,
I know about Robert O'Neill's library, and I own the Kaplan books. And I know that Tarot was originally called Triumphs, which I do think is an important distinction--thank you. When I said I don't know the history I meant that I don't know it as well as say Neo-Platonism of that period, which has been more my focus. You I can see know it like that back of your hand. I disagree, though, on the importance of the number of cards. You admit that there could have been 14, or 16; but there also could have been 22. I immediately went through the illustrations you so kindly gave me, and I was wondering 'what Trump cards' are missing. How do you have a genuine Triumph game without a Fool, or without a Hermit, or without a World. Was it the four virtues that were missing, or the celestial element? What does a 14 card Trump suit look like? I know that the Devil, Tower, and Death were missing from some of the early aristocratic decks, but I thought that was because they didn't want those cards to ruin the social gathering. You see for me all the Trump cards are necessary to have the game, and I think the numbers are also part of the symbolism--a critical part. Can you put together for me a hypothetical 14 card deck or 16 card deck in terms of what cards are present and what cards absent. That would fill in some of the gaps for me? Thanks

Francesco Benaglio's Saint Jerome

Hi Fellow Tarot Researchers,
While Huck is putting together his hypothetical deck of 14 Trumps I want to pass on the Saint Jerome I have been talking about. And I finally figured out (dummy that I am) how to link you to the site. Here is it:
http://www.nga.gov/cgi-bin/pimage?41393+0+0 That's it. And after viewing over 50 or more portraits of Saint Jerome from the 15th and 16th Century, I think that Jerome was used to explore age, mortality, and so on. He is in some cases associated with lamps and candlesticks along with walking sticks, hourglass, hermit. I think that Jerome could definitely be called the "Old Man," which is one of the early names for the Hermit card. Here is another link that agrees with the idea that the Hermit represents old age, http://www.tarothermit.com/hermit.htm

kapoore said:

Can you put together for me a hypothetical 14 card deck or 16 card deck in terms of what cards are present and what cards absent. That would fill in some of the gaps for me? Thanks

Click to expand...

14 trumps
--------
http://trionfi.com/0/f/07/
... 14 Bembo cards ... the 6 other cards are painted by a second painter

16 trumps or special cards
--------
* as part of 60 cards deck
http://trionfi.com/0/b/
http://trionfi.com/0/b/71/
Michelino deck, 16 trumps

* as part of 80 cards deck, 5x16 (reconstructed trump series)
http://trionfi.com/0/c/30/
http://geocities.com/autorbis/VMnew.html
Cary-Yale-Tarocchi, 16 trumps, partly reconstructed

* Charles VI Tarocchi deck, 16 special cards are surviving
... it's assumed, that the trumps are complete
(no article for the moment)

Other Models
**********

* Minchiate ... 41 special cards
* Mantegna Tarocchi 5x10 (not playing cards)
* Lucca Tarocchi (reduced trump series) ... relative late deck form

Trump suits

Hi Huck,
I congratulate you on your research on this topic. Since your project is complex and involves a few separate concepts, I am going to respond to one concept at a time. First, I do understand that there were quite a few allegorical style games during the 15th Century. Previously I had the impression that not all of these are considered predecessors of Tarot, but as you say there was a creative impulse toward decks with different themes--such as the pantheon of gods, or warriors. There is evidence (I will post that later) of a Chinese Trump game that even has 21 Trumps. Certainly Chinese Trumps wouldn't be considered the same as Tarot style Triumphs, which have a unique set of symbols related to the 15th Century Renaissance. It's like a masked ball of allegorical games. A philosophical game of profound depth joins the throng. The ball ends and the masks come off, only the Tarot Triumphal game has a mask of multiple layers, only the Tarot Triumphs is unique, only one of all the games still facinates us. Why do you put Tarot Triumphal game on the same level as all the others? Maybe you could elaborate on this point.
Here is the link with the article on ancient chinese games.
http://gamesmuseum.uwaterloo.ca/Archives/Wilkinson/Wilkinson.htm
It's a bit of a read, but there is a relevant quote, "Yet it is exceedingly probably that in them (Tarocchi) we have the set of twenty-one natural dominoes which their marks from dice placed side by side."
I think it is worth considering that the Hanseatic League (German traders) were trading with the Mongolian Army that occupied Russian from the early 13th Century before the Fall of Bagdad to the Mongolians and the takeover of the Caliphate by the Mamluks. Perhaps thousands of Europeans visited the Chinese and Mongolian courts and I find it hard to believe that NOT ONE traveler brought back a souvenir of cards. I have read the Mamluk military files--what there are of them. But that's another story, and not the point of this inquiry into the number of the Trump suits. I think it likely the Triumphs were based on 21 and the Fool as unnumbered made 22 for the purpose of symbolism in reference to the humanist fraternity of Saint Jerome

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
I congratulate you on your research on this topic. Since your project is complex and involves a few separate concepts, I am going to respond to one concept at a time. First, I do understand that there were quite a few allegorical style games during the 15th Century. Previously I had the impression that not all of these are considered predecessors of Tarot, but as you say there was a creative impulse toward decks with different themes--such as the pantheon of gods, or warriors. There is evidence (I will post that later) of a Chinese Trump game that even has 21 Trumps. Certainly Chinese Trumps wouldn't be considered the same as Tarot style Triumphs, which have a unique set of symbols related to the 15th Century Renaissance. It's like a masked ball of allegorical games. A philosophical game of profound depth joins the throng. The ball ends and the masks come off, only the Tarot Triumphal game has a mask of multiple layers, only the Tarot Triumphs is unique, only one of all the games still facinates us. Why do you put Tarot Triumphal game on the same level as all the others? Maybe you could elaborate on this point.
Here is the link with the article on ancient chinese games.
http://gamesmuseum.uwaterloo.ca/Archives/Wilkinson/Wilkinson.htm
It's a bit of a read, but there is a relevant quote, "Yet it is exceedingly probably that in them (Tarocchi) we have the set of twenty-one natural dominoes which their marks from dice placed side by side."
I think it is worth considering that the Hanseatic League (German traders) were trading with the Mongolian Army that occupied Russian from the early 13th Century before the Fall of Bagdad to the Mongolians and the takeover of the Caliphate by the Mamluks. Perhaps thousands of Europeans visited the Chinese and Mongolian courts and I find it hard to believe that NOT ONE traveler brought back a souvenir of cards. I have read the Mamluk military files--what there are of them. But that's another story, and not the point of this inquiry into the number of the Trump suits. I think it likely the Triumphs were based on 21 and the Fool as unnumbered made 22 for the purpose of symbolism in reference to the humanist fraternity of Saint Jerome

Click to expand...

The Wilkinson article is well known.
Although its argumentation about iconographic relations between Latin suit and Chinese suits was regularely considered, the idea, that Chinese domino cards caused the Tarot series, was not adopted too much.

The Tarocchi motifs are contemporary Italian motifs.
I personally think, that the Italian Trionfi development took some influences from France and Germany and Spain (the Latin suit), but developed the major aspects itself, including the structure of the game with 21+1 special cards.

Nice, that you mention the Northern East-Western trading connections, usually they are overlooked by playing card researchers in preference of a single way via the Mamelucks.

evolution from 5-14

Hi Huck,
I did some background reading on the Mongolian Empire and what is available on the Mamluks for a theory on the playing cards coming into 13th century Spain via the Franciscans who traveled to the Mongolian Court. I can't imagine, though, presenting that on the history blog since I have had so little success with much less philosophical topics. Anyway, returning to the 5-14 theory, maybe you could elaborate on either the uniqueness of Tarot, Triumphal pattern or perhaps how the 5-14 became the 78 in the period betweem 1442 to 1452. It appears that the deck was complete by 1452 by your estimation. What cards were in the original deck of 14 trumps? Do you have any theories on what happened to change the deck. I'm missing those pieces and I was not able to glean that info from your essays. Much appreciated....

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
I did some background reading on the Mongolian Empire and what is available on the Mamluks for a theory on the playing cards coming into 13th century Spain via the Franciscans who traveled to the Mongolian Court. I can't imagine, though, presenting that on the history blog since I have had so little success with much less philosophical topics. Anyway, returning to the 5-14 theory, maybe you could elaborate on either the uniqueness of Tarot, Triumphal pattern or perhaps how the 5-14 became the 78 in the period betweem 1442 to 1452. It appears that the deck was complete by 1452 by your estimation. What cards were in the original deck of 14 trumps? Do you have any theories on what happened to change the deck. I'm missing those pieces and I was not able to glean that info from your essays. Much appreciated....

Click to expand...

I surely didn't say, that the deck was ready in 1452 ... that's something, what the traditional playing card research said and assumed. And I gave you a link to this question ..

http://trionfi.com/0/f/07/

.. which contradicts this issue and it gives the list with the original 14 trumps. The deck type with 5x14-structure didn't develop, as many other playing card deck forms didn't develop ... as for instance the Michelino deck with its 60 cards.
There's a document in Ferrara, which talks in 1457 about the production of 2 Trionfi decks with 70 cards ... it's plausible to say, that at this time the 5x14-form still existed, as 5x14 = 70.
http://trionfi.com/0/e/16/

The Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo deck includes beside the cards painted by Bembo 6 other Trionfi cards, which are painted by a second painter and for this reason it might be assumed, that by a second operation the 5x14-deck was later expanded to a 4x14 + 20 deck by the work of a second painter (just adding six cards). We see, that there are arguments to assume, that this happened possibly in 1465.

The development to the final form with 4x14+22 happened ... according current research from Trionfi.com's side ... at a latest possible date in January 1487, which we take as the production date of the Boiardo Tarocchi poem ... the poem is the first written sure evidence, that the standard Tarot deck form really existed (in its iconographical filling the Boiardo deck differs in suits and trumps, it is totally different).
http://trionfi.com/0/h/

However, it might be suggested, that Boiardo was not the first with 22 special cards ... there are reasons to assume, that the Milanese Trionfi decks reached the state of 4x14+22 cards in 1468 (still without devil and tower) and appeared in the later standard form (with devil and tower) in 1477. However, this are still only estimations and confirmations are still missing.