BUT the main thing is there is a possibility of a 13 card 5th suit. (which matches the Mamluk), which would then be grist for the mill of 14 cards as a fifth suit, once the queen was added. I hope that is clearer than mud.
Any other tid-bits you can offer Huck?
~Rosanne
Yes, there is a possibility (though connected to doubts), and this seems to be a logical deck inside a longer evolution.
If we assume the 4x13 deck as the imported form, as it is generally done ...
... then one natural development form would be to exchange the courts (as John of Rheinfelden has shown in 1377, for instance Queens instead of other cards or 2 kings and 2 queens), another is is to expand the courts (as JoR has shown in 1377 with his 60 card deck with an addition of Queen and a maid), a third to expand the number of suits (as JoR has given, though with some contradictions in the translations; for unknown reason the expert Arne Jönsen came to other structures than an older translation).
History has it, that JoR wrote 1377, a year, that followed a great emperor (Charles IV with the capital in Prague) journey from Prague to Aachen to crown his son Wenzel as king), and a year, in which a second emperor journey was projected (to Paris).
Prague/Bohemia is by not confirmed reports (Hübsch 1850) given as much earlier involved
with playing cards (1340) than otherwise attested in Europe (first c. 1370, but in a big storm of the the "playing card invasion" just since 1377).
JoR 1377 describes a new sensation and card decks in many variants, so that one has difficulties to assume, that this appeared all first in one year. Somewhere in the world a well running playing card industry must have developed, not observed by JoR, for whom this is a very hot new medium.
Bohemia is not too far from Freiburg (about 500 km), where John lived, but traffic and trade had been handicapped by the plague of 1350 and also by many following plagues. Further there might have been not observed prohibitions, which blocked expanded distributions (one prohibition is known from 1367 in Bern, and it's really astonishing how just playing cards should have arrived there in the heart of Western Europe - 2 years before Charles IV had been there on his travel to Arles).
Prague had a Golden Era in this time, the city had been full of artists, and prospered in spite of the plague, likely thanks to the condition, that the first big wave of the plague didn't arrive in Bohemia. It also didn't arrive in Milan as one of very few locations in Europe, and also for Milan we have, that Galeazzo and Bernarbo Visconti expanded their territory and laid the base for the condition, that Giangaleazzo Visconti in 1402 prepared to be crowned as an Italian king.
Back to the game structures: JoR describes a 60-cards-deck, which gained his enthusiasm and which should have been in the category "court deck", a deck for noble persons with much money. All number cards are filled with figures (professions), and it has 5 courts, king, two marshals, queen and a maid in each suit.
JoR detects in it an ideal representation of the state, similar as it is known for chess (in the interpretation of Cessolis, known since c. 1300).
Existed "trumping" in the rules or "trick-taking-games"? Arne Jönssen, the expert, somehow expressed himself as if it existed, without going to details.
If we follow the iconography, then we have (from the imported deck structure) 2 cards in each suit, that are designed in the manner of military, Ober and Unter, occasionally presented as fighter on horse (Ober) and as foot soldier (Unter). If any card would have been predefined by "optical appearance" as trump, than it should these both cards.
Now we have a game called "Schafkopf", known with this name since c. 1700 (so far in the future of 1377). It's local distribution is in Bavaria (at the Western border of Bohemia) and in the region of the Riesengebirge (at the Northern border of Bohemia).
History has it, that the Bohemian region had been full of Western (German) influences during the time of emperor Charles IV, but that since 1409 this German influence disappeared, replaced finally by the long enduring war of the Hussites.
Known Bohemian playing card development is confirmed rather late, it seems, that the Hussites didn't like cards, perhaps cause of religious reasons. But Nuremberg (Western border of Bohemia), however, became a great and much testified location with playing card production.
From this it seems logical, that German fugitives from Bohemia in 1409 gathered around the border of Bohemia (naturally not in Southern or Eastern regions, cause this were Slavic regions), waiting for better times. Games, which they played in Bohemia before moved with them from Bohemia to their new locations.
Schafkopf uses the rule, that Ober and Unter are predefined trumps, that, what one could expect, if one just looks at the optical representation of the cards. Ober and Unter were made for "fighting", and trumping means "fighting".
********
About nearly 50 years later we hear of a specific deck in Milan, which definitely knows the trumping rule: the Michelino deck.
It has (likely) 60 cards, mentioned are number cards with birds (likely 10 for each suit, so 40), 4 kings and 16 trump cards presented as a sequence (the trump sequence - though with other motifs and another number - is common in Tarot later). The trumps are Greek-Roman gods.
As courts are only mentioned "4 kings", no other is noted. If one assumes, that Martiano da Tortona, the writer of the text, if he had seen Queens or other figures, that he would have mentioned them, then one has to conclude, that the "16 trumps" were actually the earlier court cards, 4 for each suits (and the suits are named: Virtues, Riches, Virginity and Pleasures), and each god is given to one category, so actually to one suit.
So we have to see, that this is a 4x15-deck, as that, which already was known to JoR.
The iconographic content is exchanged, of course, the 4 kings have survived, but all else was modified.
From the trumping rule one might suspect, that it also survived as a not changed element. Possibly Queens and Maids in the JoR 60-cards-deck were also trumps, cause there were always two ways to capture foreign territory, either by war (by the two marshals Ober and Unter) or by love (by marriage of Queens and Maids).
So we have for a good part with the Michelino deck (in some parts already close to the later Tarot) just a variant of the JoR deck.
The communicative relation between Bohemian court and Milanese court is given. The king Wenzel gave for a lot of money the duke title to Giangaleazzo Visconti in 1395. A Milanese delegation in Prague negotiated the deal.
The deal became the major reason, why Wenzel became abdicated in the year 1400, cause German nobility felt a big reason to protest.
Filippo Maria Visconti, who - according Decembrio - had playing cards in his youth, had been 3 years old in 1395. We may well suspect, that he got a Bohemian court deck then, just the JoR deck or another variant of the deck type with the structure 4x15.
The Michelino deck can be dated to 1418-1425. The Ferrarese note (5x13) is from 1422.
The general suspicion is, that the council of Constance 1415-1418, where a lot of persons from all parts of Europe met, caused in a natural manner some knowledge, how playing cards in different countries were used, and that this condition stimulated playing card experiments at different locations. Something similar had been observed for the development of music in Europe.
An European event in the dimensions of the council had been missing for a long time, likely one has to go back to times "before the plague" to find something similar.
*********
The word "Trionfi" in context to playing cards appears for the current knowledge of the moment at September 17 in 1440.
Likely one has to suspect, that the period 1420-40 knew other experiments with cards as the few, that we know about, so there should have been more variants (and perhaps some similar to Trionfi decks, whatever these were in the beginning), but it seems not likely, that the use of the word "Trionfi" in this specific manner was already given long before. Meanwhile a good part of playing card material (perhaps "not enough" to be really sure) has shown up before 1440 (thanks to Franco Pratesi mostly), "Trionfi" didn't appear (7 documents till 1440-1449, about 200 documents between 1450-1465, have shown up meanwhile).
Information to "deck structures" is rare.
1. JoR 1377: 6 deck structures
2. 1380s: A Spanish deck is described with 44 cards.
3. 1418-1425: Michelino deck
4. 1422: the discussed Ferrarese note, possibly 5x13
5. 1423: 8 Imperatori cards in Ferrara, imported from Florence
6. 1426: appearance of the name Karnöffel
7. 1432: Meister Ingold with two descriptions, both 4x13, but variants for the lower court cards beside the king. One indicates the Ober and Unter positions as trumps, the other looks like 4x13 with a preferred suit (trumps ?)
8. 1440: first appearance of the deck name Trionfi
9. 1441: 14 figure in Ferrara
10. 1443: new appearance of Imperatori games (till 1452 or 1454)
11. 1445 + 1447: appearance of the deck or game name "Chorone"
12. 1449: Marcello interprets the Michelino as new ludus triumphorum
13. 1450: Curious deck names in letter of Francesco Sforza
14. 1457: Trionfi decks with 70 cards
15. 1466: first note of Minchiate
To this information come surviving cards (Cary-Yale, Charles VI, Hofämterspiel, other German decks), which add to our deck structure knowledge.
And the factor of the price of decks might be of importance. Expensive decks might indicate experimental decks. There's for instance a high priced deck recorded in 1387 for Mantova, which according the description somehow belongs to the category "court decks".
All these many variations in relative few documents only lead to the condition, that the theory of a mono-causal development of Tarot cards with 4x14+22-structure is not plausible.
Naturally the factor mass production technology simplified the market. Some experiments were successful and were imitated, others not. Deck forms, which didn't arrive the mass production technology, naturally died, or simply had their time and disappeared.
As we're interested in the origin of Tarot, we naturally cannot assume, that later very successful versions had been "with guarantee" also the first. The 4x13 deck might have been the first, but not Tarot.
As a deck form 4x14+22 is rather complex, it seems plausible, that it was preceded by simpler forms. 5x14 is simpler. If the original deck had been 4x13, then again 5x13 is "simpler" (closer to the assumed original) than 5x14.
... The Boiardo poem has the Tarot structure 4x14+22 and is called "Trionfi", but the related deck is very different. The Sola Busca dito. Some of the decks with less trumps might have been closer to "Tarot" than these both. It's not clear, that Tarocchi and Trionfi were totally identical. 