Teheuti said:
I discovered this material this morning on the Tarot History Forum - after posting my article (which had been in process for several months). Somehow I missed seeing Vitali's material when I was doing my original research a couple of months ago.
I've made some changes to the text of my post to reflect Vitali's information (and gave a link to him).
Andrea Vitali published this article "recently". I think, it didn't exist "months ago".
I'm confused. Do you mean that by 1534 Trumps should no longer be taken as referring to tarot?
It should get a ?????? at least at "since 1534". Andrea noted ... "On the Spanish Triumph the famous Spanish humanist Juan Maldonado (Erasmus’s friend) wrote in Latin in 1541 and revised in 1549, a dissertation entitled Ludus Chartarum Triumphus (6). In it, Moldonado describes the game and its rules through a dialogue between different players whose names are Maldonatus, Ferranus, Rosarius, Padronus, Asturianus." ... the used cards were not Tarot cards.
This was in detail reported by Franco Pratesi possibly 15 years ago in an IPCS article.
Since 1494 foreign military in great number frequented Italy. If the trumping word (as game function, not as name for special cards) was used outside of Italy different to the use in Italy (Trionfi as special cards), this natural should cause a name conflict. We see, that in Ferrara Alfonso started to use "Taroch" in 1505 and repeated this in 1515/16. From a document in 1559 it's clear, that Ferrara was a dominant Tarocchi card producer (then) ...
"Playing Card list with Tarocchi 1559", my article in the other Tarot Forum
... , but likely already earlier (possibly 1540), Ferrara's Tarocchi cards were better than those in Padova.
From my perspective (I don't expect a big Trionfi card distribution during 15th century), which is usually different to that of other researchers, it seems plausible, that an extended Tarocchi card production for the mass market (with this or a similar name) could easily overrun earlier publications of cards with a stronger view at the highest social class ... and so could cause the name change. Possibly from Ferrara, possibly around 1520.
I never said that the Fama preface does. I do make the point that those people familiar with the original or the translations of Boccalino's entire work might have made an association with tarot or playing cards - as I believe Paul Foster Case might have done. He talks about his legend for the origin of tarot (in Fez) in the same section that he talks about the origins of the Fama Fraternitatis.
I didn't say, that you did say so. I just reflected this so for my own curiosity. It's strange, that a writer, who wrote about a playing card topic, just participated in the production of a text, which took such a mysterious and strong influence on the Rosicrucian movement (which later participated in the glamorization of the Tarot cards). So I tried to check the background and attempted to verify, what could be said about this curious context.
It's curious, that the playing card chapter (the 2nd of a series of 100 and further 150 followed) appeared at such an early and with this a dominant place. It might be, that this indicated a "meta meaning of the playing card chapter" for the whole text.
That just chapter 77 was taken by the Rosenkreuzer might have had the background, that somebody thought of 77 Tarot cards + Fool.
Indeed playing cards reappear in the further text (google search found six places on search key "cards"). This passages don't indicate Tarot cards in a clear way. One interesting passage is related to a ship sunk by a lightning. A card is invented, which brings the sailors to land ... The "lightning" might indicate the card Tower, but if this is all, then a relationship between text and playing card system would stay rather spurious.
Well, I don't know ..
.. if I'm interested enough, I'll read the whole text to get a clearer opinion.