If the same type of Logic applied to the possible Karnoffell variation, was applied to the Tarot, in 8 step increments (like dances)
you have a sequence ending with a soldier (chariot) as the vine producer.(0 is a trump)
Then you have another 8 steps (now 16) before the celestials come into play.
It would answer some questions (for me) as to the remarkable change of focus from card 9-16. to the cards before #9 and the cards after #16....Hmmmmm.........
It fits well for my Ur Tarot- Justice is Florence, Hermit is Patriarch of Constantinople etc...
~Rosanne
Well, in this time the social trend was already so, that the German nobility lost (became poor) and the rich citizens were the winners.
So the poor (and low) noble man in the game is just a social observation (by those, who profited from the situation; so it's "mockery" in contrast to other known hierarchies, for instance King-Queen-Knight-Servants).
The noble man loses his money to the Wucherer (the banker of the time), the banker has to pay to the Pfaff (the church), the Pfaff carries the money to the Prostitute, the Prostitute gives it to the Riffian (the pimp), the pimp drinks in the pub and pays to the innkeeper, the inn keeper has to pay the wine trader, and the wine trader carries his money to the wine producer.
So far it's understandable, and it might be just the "normal trumping hierarchy" from 1-8, where 8 wins against all others, the 7 against all other other, but not against the 8 etc.
But it might have been different.
If the noble man (the card) had trumped a trick (let's assume, with the second card of a trick), it possibly could have been taken only by the Wucherer (only by this, with the 3rd card in the trick), but this might be taken by the Pfaff (at the hand of the fourth player; if we assume, that the game had four players).
And so on.
There's the strange end of the sentence ".... umb der pauman der den wein pauwen sol, der nimpt das gelt wider von dem wirt."
This seems to indicate, that the wine producer would also win against the innkeeper, cause in reality the wine producer could also sell to the "Wirt (innkeeper)", not only to the wine trader.
Then we would have a rather different game than in the usual hierarchy (as known from the Tarot game).
8 wins against 7 + 6 (no chance to lose, the strongest card)
7 wins against 6, loses against 8
6 wins against 5, loses against 8
5 wins against 4, loses against 6
4 wins against 3, loses against 5
3 wins against 2, loses against 4
2 wins against 1, loses against 3
1 loses against 2
There's no guarantee, that this game had any rule, that "trumping" was limited. Possibly you could trump at every occasion.
There's also no guarantee, that each trick was limited to 4 cards (if 4 players played).
Perhaps a trick was finished, when ...
a. 4 players had opportunity to play trump, but didn't play trump
b. a player played trump, and the next player couldn't take the card
c. a player played trump, and the next player could take the card, with the risk, that the
next player could overcome his card (and so on).
It's just, that Ingold is rather short when explaining the game.
So this might be just a very unusual game. Possibly quite different from that, what is known as Karnöffel.
Significant might be, that Ingold describes the cards at the Ober and Unter positions as relevant for "trumping" (not the kings and no other cards)
**********
Relative contemporary to Ingold's text (1432) is the game description of the Michelino deck (1418-25).
Martiano da Tortona speaks of "4 kings" and no other court cards, but of 16 trumps in a hierarchical row 1-16.
So one has to assume, that the 16 trumps are ALSO just court cards, which - as in the game of Ingold - were used for the trump hierarchy. It seems logical to assume a 4x15-deck, especially as from the description of the John of Rheinfelden (1377) already a 4x15 deck was described, and that just this deck was described in a manner, that one has to expect a sort of expensive court deck (used by higher classes with enough money).
The trump hierarchy runs in this way ...
16 (highest): highest figure of suit 1
15 (2nd): highest figure of suit 2
14 (3rd): highest figure of suit 3
13: highest figure of suit 4
12: 2nd highest figure of suit 1
etc.
... which is similar to the trump row in the game "Schafkopf" (only 8 usual trumps)...
High: Kreuz Dame (clubs Queen)
Pik Dame (spades Queen)
Herz Dame (hearts Queen)
Karo Dame (diamonds Queen)
Kreuz Bube (clubs Jack)
Pik Bube (spades Jack)
Herz Bube (hearts Jack)
Low: Karo Bube (diamonds Jack)
I use here French signs, but the usual deck is Bavarian and they still have Ober and Unter and other (old German) suits:
As one can see, there is nothing with a Queen, but O = Ober and U = Unter are the relevant trumps in the usual military design.
The game name Schafkopf appeared first in c. 1700, but this doesn't mean, that the trump structure is similar young.
"Schafkopf" is distributed in 2 different versions, Bavarian Schafkopf and Deutscher Schafkopf, whereby the "Deutscher Schafkopf" is mainly played around the Riesengebirge (North of Bohemia) and the Bavarian Schafkopf, as the name says, in Bavaria (East of Bohemia).
In 14th century the German emperor (Charles IV, 1346-78) had his capital in Prague (in Bohemia), and the country was dominated by German nobility. His son Wenzel (Roman king) was abdicated as Roman king in 1400, and in 1409 German students were driven out of Prague, in 1415 Jan Hus was burnt in Constance and then followed for a long time a series of wars (Hussiten wars). In the 1460s the current pope still spoke of a crusade against the Bohemian population.
German culture in Bohemia disappeared and likely with it playing cards disappeared in Bohemia. "Earliest" card production notes appear later than elsewhere, beside the notes of the researcher Hübsch 1850 (which are in contradiction), who researched early trade in Bohemia and knew playing cards documents as early as "from 1340" (when the later Charles IV started to administrate Bohemia presenting his blind father John).
There are some reasons to assume, that a very early playing card production took place in Bohemia (which had the great luck, that the first big wave of the Great Plague 1348-50
didn't arrive in the country; Bohemia prospered by this condition considerably).
The "Big Wave" of playing cards in the 1370s, observed by John of Rheinfelden, followed
the crowning of young Wenzel (14 years) as Roman king 1376 in Aachen, for which the emperor Charles IV (still living) made a big Western journey with a lot of other Bohemian delegations. This was likely the key event for the "invasion of the playing cards".
John of Rheinfelden observes, that the most usual deck has king and two marshals as courts. The design of persons of military character likely caused, that these both cards were associated with military triumph, and so naturally fighting took place at the playing card table, when such cards appeared: so they became "trumps" as the most plausible suggestion, what one could do with the cards.
King and Queen were weak figures on the chess board (in old chess), the strong figures had been knights and towers or chariots. One was used to such game conditions, when playing cards arrived.
So one has to assume, that something like "Schafkopf" has the honor of origin of the first trumping rules, at least for Europe.
*********
Well, we have only few documents of relevance for this question: Master Ingold (1432), the Michelino deck (1418-25), the 8 Imperatori decks 1423, the Ferrarese note in 1422 (13 additional or replaced cards), a Spanish note, that speaks of 44 cards (1380s) and the big document of John of Rheinfelden (1377; which still is not neither full translated nor published in the web ... what a scandal), perhaps also the distributed Karnöffel notes with its contradictions (mainly Mysner c. 1450, rules 1537).
The Imperatori note might agree with the analysis of the documents of Ingold, Michelino deck and JoR, the 1422 Ferrarese note seems to have "another idea of trumping" (a fifth suit is designed as trump, possibly). The Karnöffel notes are unclear, Mysner's Karnöffel might be close to the Schafkopf rules, the later rules of 1537 might be another form of trumping. The Spanish note (1380s) is indifferent and doesn't add details.
So you again ...
If the same type of Logic applied to the possible Karnoffell variation, was applied to the Tarot, in 8 step increments (like dances)
you have a sequence ending with a soldier (chariot) as the vine producer.(0 is a trump)
Then you have another 8 steps (now 16) before the celestials come into play.
It would answer some questions (for me) as to the remarkable change of focus from card 9-16. to the cards before #9 and the cards after #16....Hmmmmm.........
It fits well for my Ur Tarot- Justice is Florence, Hermit is Patriarch of Constantinople etc...
~Rosanne
Mysner's not clear poem has possibly ...
Karnöffel ...
... possibly a victim of the Karnöffel
(possibly 4 ?) heilige Lehrer (holy teachers ... no number is given)
Pope
Devil
Emperor
... possibly some Ober and Unter as nobility, serving the emperor)
If the "heilige Lehrer" in representation of the 4 suits (as heilige Lehren: holy teachings)
were 4, we have Karnöffel, Pope, Devil and Emperor and this would be "8" (as in the Imperatori document.
Later the Pope is connected to the 6, the Devil to the 7, and the 4 Emperors to 2-5 and the Karnöffel possibly to 8.
In Mysner's poem the single Emperor seems to be higher than Devil and Pope, so possibly ...
(8) Emperor
(7) Devil
(6) Pope
(5) Karnöffel
1-4 = 4 heilige Lehrer
... which possibly fits with the condition, that the Karnöffel was occasionally addressed or interpreted as cardinal. The Cardinal below the Pope would make sense.
Or ...
(9) Karnöffel
(8) Emperor
(7) Devil
(6) Pope
2-5 = 4 heilige Lehrer
... cause German decks often had no Aces.
But Mysner's poem is a poem and not an old attempt to explain us the game. So these are only suspicions about an old text.
**********
Generally one has to see, that specific parts are older (the things mostly known by old German documents) and others are younger (the Italian Tarot row for instance). Tarot developed possibly by the help of German ideas (but possibly just ideas, which were also spread in Italy), but finished to be an independent game itself. Going from Tarot in the Marseille style to Karnöffel ...
7 Chariot ... this looks the triumphing Karnöffel
6 Love ... this might be the Devil in the Karnöffel game
5 Pope ... Pope
4 Emperor ... Emperor
3 Empress ... holy teacher 1 (?)
2 Popess ... holy teacher 2 (?)
1 Magician ... holy teacher 3 (?)
0 Fool .... holy teacher 4 (?)
Well, we have in Tarot (Italian) a higher pope and a lower emperor, contrasting we have in Mysners poem (German) a high emperor and a lower pope.
Well, these are just different opinions. Likely most Germans saw it like Mysner, and most Italians saw it as in the Tarocchi.