Tarot Classic: Why does Kaplan say it's by Burdel?

Hi Michael, OnePotato,

It's not Lee's original question(s), but teomat's immediate question I was trying to answer -

teomat said:

I'd really like to know is what deck the Tarot Classic is actually based on (and the true dating of this deck).

Click to expand...

US Games' Tarot Classic isn't based on a Burdel or a Gassmann, but on an early 20th century Schaffhouse.

(I'll be posting two pages in German that explain the deck better, and mention Kaplan's use - hold on a bit)

Ross

From Walter Hass, Die traditionellen Tarocke der Spielkartenfabrik Müller, in
Daniel Grüter, Walter Hass, Max Ruh eds., "Schweizer Spielkarten 2" (Schaffhausen, 2004), pp. 55-73.

English summary (John McLeod) -
"Around 1830 the card maker J.G. Rauch of Diessenhofen brought out a Tarot pack, which he supplied primarily to the canton (Switzerland) of Grisons. This Tarot designs, in the historicizing style of the period, was acquired by Johannes Müller I, when he took over Rauch's factory in 1838; it has since been modified several times and is still produced today. Towards the end of the 19th century Müller added three more Tarot designs to his range: around 1875 a Tarot de Marseilles which until then had been manufactured by the Geneva card making family Gassmann using older techniques; around 1885 a French suited Tarot with views and around 1890 a Tarot with genre scenes of the tarot nouveau type. All these cards were intended for use by players, and as Tarot playing declined in Switzerland they were dropped from the range, with the exception of the oldest, which goes back to J. G. Rauch (Swiss 1JJ). The article traces the history of these four traditional Tarot packs of the firm of Müller and their variants, points out iconographic relationships, and tries to identify the regions in which they were marketed.
The esoteric Tarot packs, which after 1970 became the most important part of the business of the Schaffhausen playing-card factory, are outside of the scope of this article. Nevertheless it should be remembered that the firm owes its successful entry into the esoteric Tarot market to its oldest surviving design 1JJ, which continues today to serve the needs of the surviving players in the Surselva as well as the devotees fo the esoteric Tarot." (pp. 72-73)

(the important part is "B" on the second page here, that's the source for the Tarot Classic)




Sorry I can't give a full translation, but I think we can work out the essential parts in a little while.

Ross

OnePotato said:

Yes, and we can see that the Schaffhouse appears to be derived from the Gassmann, and Gassmann from Burdel.

Click to expand...

Hi OnePotato, I guess I'm not seeing that the Schaffhouse is derived from the Gassmann. You said you don't have the Tarot Classic to compare... I'm wondering what you're looking at when you say the Tarot Classic/Schaffhouse is derived from the Gassmann.

ETA: Looking back in the thread, I see Michael has also said the same thing, so I guess my question is to both of you.

Hi, Lee,

Lee said:

I'm wondering what you're looking at when you say the Tarot Classic/Schaffhouse is derived from the Gassmann.

Click to expand...

There are two elements to that question. First is the matter of what is meant by "derived from". A better way to put it is that a family resemblance is apparent. This genetic similarity is evidence that somewhere in the past two decks had a common ancestor, and perhaps one derived from the other, directly or via intervening developments and conflations with other decks. However, "derived from" rarely means directly copied from; when we see something like the Chosson/Conver copying, or the Schaffhausen/Tarot Classic copying, we usually note that one is a copy or reproduction of the other rather than using the vague term "derived from".

Like the genealogy of people, if you go back far enough, everyone is related. However, in the case at hand we have some rather unusual features which are not shared by most TdM decks, much less by most other decks. This is a relatively isolated branch of the Tarot family tree. As for examples of those unusual features, I pointed out two of them in my post, one connecting the Classic with the earlier Burdel tradition and one connecting the Classic with the earlier Gassmann tradition. The manner in which the suit of Swords is depicted is a distinct tradition which includes, among other decks, the Burdel, the Gassmann, and the Schaffhausen/Tarot Classic. OnePotato illustrated this beautifully.


The second unusual feature I pointed out is the design of the Hanged Man. This is from the tradition of Catelin Geoffroy's German-influenced 1557 Tarot deck. This style of Hanged Man comes, as I've argued and illustrated in the Jewish Execution thread, from a different source than the two main Italian Hanged Man styles, (i.e., one with hands tied and facing the viewer, one with money bags in hand). The probability of these features being independently created is zero; these decks are from the same part of Tarot's family tree, or put conversely, they have similarities which distinguish them from the majority of Tarot decks. Look at the lovely Sun, with its coif and garland of flowers. Is this standard in all Tarot decks? Is it the norm in most TdM Tarot decks? Or is it a rather distinctive feature of only a relatively few decks?


Ross is emphatically making a point which, AFAIK, no one is disputing, (and which I believe Jean-Michel made in an earlier thread), that the Tarot Classic is a direct copy, a reproduction of the Schaffhausen deck. OnePotato and I are addressing a different question, the original one you asked a couple years ago and which remains the title of this thread: There are connections which might have some bearing on the Burdel reference, and there are other decks in this family upon which the Schaffhausen/Tarot Classic were dependent.

Best regards,
Michael

Thanks Michael, that clears it up for me.

Hi all,

Lee said:

Does anyone know why this deck is misidentified by its publisher?

Click to expand...

Sorry I don't. Perhaps we should write US Games.

teomat said:

I have both the LS Burdel and Tarot Classic, and as Lee points out they are totally different. I'd really like to know is what deck the Tarot Classic is actually based on (and the true dating of this deck).

Click to expand...

I'd say the answer is an early 20th century Schaffhausen deck.

OnePotato said:

Sorry I don't have the Schaffhausen to compare, but I imagine it is in turn derived from the Gassmann.

I suppose one can claim that the "Tarot Classic" is sort of loosely and indirectly derived from the Burdel.

Click to expand...

Yes, I suppose that is the best answer. The Tarot Classic is better described as sort of loosely and indirectly derived from the Burdel, rather than an exact copy of the Kaplan Schaffhouse, never before illustrated here.


Ross

Ross, despite whatever my initial phrasing was (all these years ago), I think the topic in general certainly encompasses all four decks (Tarot Classic, Schaffhouse, Gassmann, and Burdel), and as far as I'm concerned your scans aren't off-topic (I'm not a moderator, however). I enjoyed all the discussions and scans in this thread and, speaking personally, I appreciate everyone's contribution.

I apologize for my misguided attempts to offer an explanation for why Mr Kaplan may have drawn a connection between the "Tarot Classic" and the "Claude Burdel."

Hi OnePotato,

OnePotato said:

I apologize for my misguided attempts to offer an explanation for why Mr Kaplan may have drawn a connection between the "Tarot Classic" and the "Claude Burdel."

Click to expand...

I'm still not sure either, but your explanations weren't misguided. The best explanation appears to be a mistake occurring in some part of the creation-production cycle. It's easy to be cynical about Kaplan, but this mistake seems too subtle to be attributed to bad faith.

Kaplan in fact sold a 1751 Burdel, with only 20 cards, in the auction in 2006 -



Christie's auction catalogue "Historic Cards and Games: The Stuart and Marilyn Kaplan Collection: Wednesday 21 June 2006" p. 24 (no. 26)

He owned it. On page 242 of volume I of the Encyclopedia of Tarot, he says that the Tarot Classic is illustrated from a Claude Burdel of circa 1751. Why pick this deck? Who knows. The Schwiezer Spielkarten illustrates a Claude Burdel from 1751 with 77 out of 78 cards - looks like the identical woodcuts (I'll scan it).

Ross

Hi all,

In the interest of saving Lee some trouble (for all but the most detailed of concerns), here's the Burdel 1751 from the Schweizer Spielkarten 2 catalogue -




Ross