Huck
Well ....
to give an example, and you'll see, that it is a scandal, a scandal of bad information structure inside the system. And the victim is you, as you simply don't get up-to-date-informations.
Stuart Kaplan produced in 1978 his Encyclopedia of Tarot, a good-selling book, which later created the base for the internet culture, in which history of Tarot was discussed in finest details by some enthusiasts of the theme "History of Tarot".
Inside Kaplan's book he made 2 short entries, of DECEMBRIO (9 lines) and ISABELLA DA LORRRAINE (6 lines), page 26, in which he gives some informations, one about Decembrio noting a 1500 ducatos deck made for Filippo Visconti and the other about a letter, which was received by Isabella da Lorraine, which contained some information about a deck with 16 gods.
In 1989 the old-games-researcher Franco Pratesi published in the Playing Card Journal an article, in which he told, that he simply revisited the original document and discovered, that both entries do refer to the same object, a deck with the price of 1500 ducatos, made by Michelino da Besozzo, with an accompanying manuscript describing the deck made by Marziano da Tortona and the whole thing was thought out and commissioned by Filippo Maria Visconti.
Franco Pratesi published half Italian, half-English. That made it difficult for English readers to understand the message.
When Internet started (1995/96)', the information of Pratesi wasn't around, the discussions, which often were about "origin of Tarot" went on and on without mentioning his discovery. Later Tarothermit made at his internet-page a relatively short note about it - it stayed more or less hidden, wasn't discussed really and - of course - wasn't understood in his meaning.
Well - it definitely is about the oldest Tarot deck known. One should assume, that there is an enormous interest in Tarot circles at such an object. It isn't. People simply don't realise, what's before their nose.
1. The oldest deck, not really, but a fairly good description.
2. the oldest accompanying book, the first "Tarot book"
3. the oldest description, how the game was played
4. A letter with lots of interesting details and in it a passage, from which it becomes clear, that the term "ludus triumphorum" (= Trionfi) which was thought earlier to refer to common Tarot decks with 22 trumps or 21 trumps + Fool, in 1449 not necessarily was used to hint to decks with this structure.
Now we do write 2003, 25 years after Kaplan and 14 after Pratesi's discovery. The whole thing is still rather ignored and a lot of people are still fishing in the dark.
Especially the above mentioned point 4 clearly points out, that there is a deep error about that, what researchers do believe as the "original state of Tarot".
Compare:
http://geocities.com/autorbis/marcello1.html
http://geocities.com/autorbis/pbm14new.html
and if you wish to discuss about it (of course we also enjoy it, if you decide to discuss it here, it's a nice place and we're interested that people get facts in their heads instead of blind assertions, we're especially interested in a good information structure inside the world of Tarot):
http://geocities.com/autorbis/LTarot.html
to give an example, and you'll see, that it is a scandal, a scandal of bad information structure inside the system. And the victim is you, as you simply don't get up-to-date-informations.
Stuart Kaplan produced in 1978 his Encyclopedia of Tarot, a good-selling book, which later created the base for the internet culture, in which history of Tarot was discussed in finest details by some enthusiasts of the theme "History of Tarot".
Inside Kaplan's book he made 2 short entries, of DECEMBRIO (9 lines) and ISABELLA DA LORRRAINE (6 lines), page 26, in which he gives some informations, one about Decembrio noting a 1500 ducatos deck made for Filippo Visconti and the other about a letter, which was received by Isabella da Lorraine, which contained some information about a deck with 16 gods.
In 1989 the old-games-researcher Franco Pratesi published in the Playing Card Journal an article, in which he told, that he simply revisited the original document and discovered, that both entries do refer to the same object, a deck with the price of 1500 ducatos, made by Michelino da Besozzo, with an accompanying manuscript describing the deck made by Marziano da Tortona and the whole thing was thought out and commissioned by Filippo Maria Visconti.
Franco Pratesi published half Italian, half-English. That made it difficult for English readers to understand the message.
When Internet started (1995/96)', the information of Pratesi wasn't around, the discussions, which often were about "origin of Tarot" went on and on without mentioning his discovery. Later Tarothermit made at his internet-page a relatively short note about it - it stayed more or less hidden, wasn't discussed really and - of course - wasn't understood in his meaning.
Well - it definitely is about the oldest Tarot deck known. One should assume, that there is an enormous interest in Tarot circles at such an object. It isn't. People simply don't realise, what's before their nose.
1. The oldest deck, not really, but a fairly good description.
2. the oldest accompanying book, the first "Tarot book"
3. the oldest description, how the game was played
4. A letter with lots of interesting details and in it a passage, from which it becomes clear, that the term "ludus triumphorum" (= Trionfi) which was thought earlier to refer to common Tarot decks with 22 trumps or 21 trumps + Fool, in 1449 not necessarily was used to hint to decks with this structure.
Now we do write 2003, 25 years after Kaplan and 14 after Pratesi's discovery. The whole thing is still rather ignored and a lot of people are still fishing in the dark.
Especially the above mentioned point 4 clearly points out, that there is a deep error about that, what researchers do believe as the "original state of Tarot".
Compare:
http://geocities.com/autorbis/marcello1.html
http://geocities.com/autorbis/pbm14new.html
and if you wish to discuss about it (of course we also enjoy it, if you decide to discuss it here, it's a nice place and we're interested that people get facts in their heads instead of blind assertions, we're especially interested in a good information structure inside the world of Tarot):
http://geocities.com/autorbis/LTarot.html
