Tarot and Kabbala

Hi Huck,
I think we're working out of different material as well as historical periods. I am more interested in Neo-Platonism, and so I have somehow fallen into studying that. Outside of Seznec, which does treat the Greek gods and the Roman gods--I'll have to go back and read it again--I don't have evidence that this was a major theme. But the problem with Seznec is that it has been discounted as a source on this very forum. Maybe you should recommend your secondary sources for me--I mean an isolated diary is just that--an example but not proof. Choosing an isolated example to demonstrate a point, I think, is generalizing from a specific to a whole. It would be like saying, well so and so had a lap dog, and therefore every woman in the Renaissance had a lap dog. You have to show how what became the Tarot really is a game of pagan gods and goddesses. I don't see that. So and so had a game of Greek gods and therefore the Trump (Tarot) game is that... You have to show context and evolution, not isolated instances.

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
I think we're working out of different material as well as historical periods. I am more interested in Neo-Platonism, and so I have somehow fallen into studying that.

Click to expand...

"Neo-Platonism" is a large field and somehow undefined, when not related to specific periods or opinions.

Outside of Seznec, which does treat the Greek gods and the Roman gods--I'll have to go back and read it again--I don't have evidence that this was a major theme.

Click to expand...

... ... Greek/Roman Gods were in the time, when Tarot had its roots, well, it's just called renaissance, "rebirth of some older topics", modern and interesting topics ... rather obvious, if we take a look at the art production of 15th century.

But the problem with Seznec is that it has been discounted as a source on this very forum.

Click to expand...

I don't understand ... ???????

Maybe you should recommend your secondary sources for me--I mean an isolated diary is just that--an example but not proof.

Click to expand...

Well, there is a lot of art with Greek/Roman gods in 15th century. And a lot of evidence, that just the persons, from which we know, that they had Trionfi cards, also paid artists for the production of pictures, statues etc of just these gods.

Choosing an isolated example to demonstrate a point, I think, is generalizing from a specific to a whole. It would be like saying, well so and so had a lap dog, and therefore every woman in the Renaissance had a lap dog. You have to show how what became the Tarot really is a game of pagan gods and goddesses. I don't see that. So and so had a game of Greek gods and therefore the Trump (Tarot) game is that... You have to show context and evolution, not isolated instances.

Click to expand...

http://trionfi.com/0/b/01/

... ... Maybe you've specific ideas, how Tarot history should be to make an interesting reading ...

... however, Tarot history is as it is . In this case it are specific decuments, which you should know, if you've the wish to know about "early Tarot". They tell about the Michelino deck, and it has 16 Greek gods as trumps.

Hi Huck,
I have a proposal for you, but it would take preparation time on both our parts, so we would have to postpone it until we are ready. For my part, I would have to read and review about five books. This is my thought. You take the 14 original Trumps from your theory on diary entry 1442. You show how these relate to the Roman/Greek pantheon. I say Roman/Greek because the Romans had the same pantheon and just renamed them. But I think the Roman names are better because the Latins drew on their Roman heritage. So you show how the 14 Trumps relate to the Roman pantheon--using whatever books were available at that time. You have to show, though, that, for example Ovid or Cicero were available--obviously they were but that is the basic idea. Show, for example, how the symbols of say Jupiter are present in the emperor card, etc.

I'll do the same for the "neo-platonism" but I am going to focus almost exclusively on the works of Ramon Llull. We won't worry about cards that aren't present in the 14--so the celestial element, and a few of the virtues, plus the World card--won't count. Since the regular playing cards are present--Kings, Queens, Knights, and Pages are fair game.

You get to pick the order in which we describe each card. It might be interesting and help us move the project forward--that is, the project of Trump origins.

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
I have a proposal for you, but it would take preparation time on both our parts, so we would have to postpone it until we are ready. For my part, I would have to read and review about five books. This is my thought. You take the 14 original Trumps from your theory on diary entry 1442. You show how these relate to the Roman/Greek pantheon. I say Roman/Greek because the Romans had the same pantheon and just renamed them. But I think the Roman names are better because the Latins drew on their Roman heritage. So you show how the 14 Trumps relate to the Roman pantheon--using whatever books were available at that time. You have to show, though, that, for example Ovid or Cicero were available--obviously they were but that is the basic idea. Show, for example, how the symbols of say Jupiter are present in the emperor card, etc.

I'll do the same for the "neo-platonism" but I am going to focus almost exclusively on the works of Ramon Llull. We won't worry about cards that aren't present in the 14--so the celestial element, and a few of the virtues, plus the World card--won't count. Since the regular playing cards are present--Kings, Queens, Knights, and Pages are fair game.

You get to pick the order in which we describe each card. It might be interesting and help us move the project forward--that is, the project of Trump origins.

Click to expand...

Well, the matter is easy.

There was very early a chess iconography and chess was a major literary topic in 14th century. The pawns were developed to professions, 8 different professions. So there were 16 iconographical patterns, together with the 8 officers. There are enough examples of it, though not necessarily online.

The idea of the professions were taken into the card playing development, at least Johannes of Rheinfelden observed such a deck in 1377. He reported about it. Later about 1455 a deck called Hofämterspiel, the oldest woodcut deck, survived and showed at its design various professions.

http://trionfi.com/m/d0yyyy.php?decknr=0360

In the version of Johannes of Rheinfelden the deck had 60 cards, 5 court cards and 10 number cards per suit. The 40 number cards showed the professions. The 5 court cards were King plus 2 marshalls, a Queen and a Maid.
In the Hofämterspiel the game was changed: two unnumbered cards per suit (Kings and Queens), and 4x10 illustrated and numbered cards. However, between the numbered cards are 4 Hofmeister (all 10's), 4 Marshalls (all 9's), 4 Jungfrauen (Maids; all 6's), 4 Fools (all 1's) ... in other words, some court cards have been mixed with the professions. So this deck had 6 court cards and they are rather similar to the deck of Johannes of Rheinfelden. One of two earlier marshalls had been changed to a "Hofmeister" and a Fool was added to each suit. The remaining 24 cards became all different professions or "Hofämter" (with one exeption).

Meanwhile chess iconography and literature hadn't been lazy, and in France in late 14th century/begin 15th century a rather big book appeared, in which all 32 figures were changed to allegorical figures, and an imaginative man played the game with an imaginative girl. The girl wins in the book, her allegories are better. On some other pages all the world is explained with various contents, the whole is a complex encyclopedia. On some of these pages a series of 16 gods is explained, it's for the moment only an assumption, that the author meant these as related to the 16 figures of the already existing chess iconography.

Now we have in Milan the young Filippo Maria Visconti growing up and already in his youth he's very fond of playing cards. And his father Giangaleazzo is very interested to establish a family genealogy, in which the personal ancestors became Jupiter and Venus (by the Italian invader Aeneas). He ordered a nice painted book by the painter Michelino da Besozzo ... the book survived, produced about ca 1402.
But Giangaleazzo died and the whole Milanese dukedom got serious trouble about it. Michelino left Milan.

The younger son Filippo Maria Visconti is able to solve the Milanese trouble and finally Michelino da Besozzo returns back to Milan (about 1418). Around ths time the council of Constance has happened and the new pope Martin arrives in Italy, first visiting Filippo Maria Visconti in Milan. One person of his big company is the Florentine humanist Poggio, and later he becomes well known as a manuscript hunter. During the council he was already able to have some success in this occupation, for instance he had found the Manilius manuscript ... an ancient poem about an early astrology in Roman times, in which the 12 Olympian gods are used. This astrology is much later used in Palazzo Schifanoia in Ferrara (about 1469-1472) on large frescoes.

Generally we assume, that it happened ca. 1424/25 (but possible is 1418-1425) ... Filippo Maria Visconti knew (probably) about the French chess book idea with 16 Greek gods and he knew about the Manilius manuscript. He composed a new order of the Greek gods, just as it pleased him. He incorperated the system of the 12 Olympian gods (from the Manilius-manuscript), but added 4 figures (reaching so 16 chess figures as the French manuscript). The 4 added figures were Hercules, Aiolus, Daphne and Eros ... curiously he added also Daphne, probably inspired by Ovid's Metamorphoses (and Petrarca's interest in it; Filippo was fond of Petrarca). Ca. 1424 a specific literary concept of "a cold woman, who makes the man suffer without end" was developed in French literature by a poet, who just in this year had personal contact to Filippo Maria Visconti ... it seems, that Filippo Maria was inspired by this motif and for this reason he did take Daphne as motif. Generally Filippo Maria had various reasons to feel disappointed in sexual matters.
About the same time Filippo Maria established a personal chess club at his court.

The deck of Filippo had 16 trumps, 4 kings and we assume 10 number cards per suit (4 suits with birds) ... so altogether it had 60 cards, like the favored deck of Johannes. There is reason to assume, that (although 16 cards were determined to be trumps), that Filippo regarded it as a 4x15 deck ... as the deck of Johannes was.

Why can it be regarded as an early version of Tarot? Cause the given rules, although they are given only in rudimentary form. The deck has a longer series of "predefined trumps in hierarchical order" as the later Tarot has. Another minor point is the fact, that 2 suits are valued from 1-10 and the two other from 10-1 ... this feature also appears in later versions.

In the translation of Ross Caldwell
http://trionfi.com/0/b/11/

Indeed the first order, of virtues, is certain: Jupiter, Apollo, Mercury and Hercules. The second of riches, Juno, Neptune, Mars and Aeolus. The third of virginity or continence: from Pallas, Diana, Vesta and Daphne. The fourth however is of pleasure: Venus, Bacchus, Ceres and Cupid. And subordinated to these are four kinds of birds, being suited by similarity. Thus to the rank of virtues, the Eagle; of riches, the Phoenix; of continence, the Turtledove; of pleasure, the Dove. And each one obeys its own king. However, the order of these Birds is, although none of their type has right over another, yet this arrangement they have alternately – Eagles and Turtledoves lead from many to few: that is to say it goes better for us when many cultivate virtue and continence; but for Phoenices and Doves, the few rule over the many, which is to say that, the more the followers of riches and pleasure are visible, the more they lead to the deterioration of our station. Every one of the gods, however, is above all the orders of birds and the ranks of kings. But the gods are held to this law among themselves: that who will be first designated below, he should lead all the others following in sequence. And although it is well known that many gods were of the very same name, such as three Jupiters: two of Arcadia, the third of Crete; four Apollos; three Dianas, and similarly of the rest; by hating to delight in such questions, it will not be rendered excessively long, as it is held that only one of the very same name was assumed to deification, and one only the cause of perpetual fame. I will therefore make only a brief mention of these conditions, by which they are described; in which, according to their distinguishing quality, by difference of image and subject matter, it is permitted to vary a little in the writing style.

Click to expand...

Well, and another very important point, which links the Michelino deck to the later Trionfi versions: It simply appears in the same place and head, the court of Filippo Maria Visconti and the head of Filippo Maria Visconti.

What do we have now from the date 1442 ... a note in the Ferrarese account books? Only a new word "Trionfi" and a description, that we have now the use of the Latin suits, as they are later used in Tarot. Not more, no word about the number of trumps. From the further circumstances (other documents) we have, that early Ferrarese decks probably had 14 trumps.

* The number 14 is mentioned in a document of 1.1.1441 as the number of "14 figure", which serve as a present for the guest Bianca Maria Visconti, daughter of Filippo.
http://trionfi.com/0/d/

* The later Milanese version are the 14 Bembo cards, probably in 1452 ... there are signs, that this version followed Ferrarese influences and not Milanese versions
hrttp://trionfi.com/0/f

* The 70-cards-note in Ferrara in the year 1457 ... 5x14 has the result 70.
http://trionfi.com/0/e/08/

What do we else have? The Cary-Yale Tarocchi (and the Breara Brambilla Tarocchi) , which probably was made in the time of Filippo Maria Visconti. The Brera Brambilla is not of much use ... only 2 trumps are remaining, an emperor and a wheel of fortune.
The Cary Yale is curious: it has 6 court cards and 10 number cards per suit (so 16 cards per suit) and from the unknown number of trumps are only 11 remaining. From these 11 are 4 NOT part of the later standard Tarocchi. There's the figure "Fame" and there are 3 theological virtues, hope, faith and caritas.

From Filippo Maria Visconti we know, that he earlier used the number "16" in a card deck version and that he loved chess (based on the 16) and that he also had a favor for Geomantia (also based on 16) ... and in the Cary-Yale we find another 16 (number of cards per suits). Shall we now assume, that he suddenly jumped in the numbers of trumps to a 22 or a 24/25, as it was suggested, especially as we have from no contemporary source any evidence for an early 22?

The logical conclusion is, that Filippo Maria probably used a 16 as the number of the trumps and that he aimed to create a deck with 5x16-structure.

What were the contemporary feelings towards playing?

* Chess was a glorious game, not under attack in 15th century - connected to a 16

* Playing cards were mostly under prohibition in Italy, but occasionally given some educational worth, especially for women and kids - mostly the prohibition was reduced to a mixed prohibition, some games were allowed and the gambled money was kept reduced. Read the text above again from Martiano da Tortona, who described the Michelino deck ... how careful he operates not to fall in the open trap of anti-playing-cards-feelings and how much good words he gives to show the educational worth.

* Dice ... this was regarded as very bad. The fine for dice playing was usually much higher than a fine for card playing. And 21 ... as we know it ... is a dice-number, a devilish dice number (1+2+3+4+5+6), variously attacked as such, for instance by Meister Ingold.

Filippo reduced playing card prohibition and gave between 1421 - 1429 some tolerant laws about it.
http://trionfi.com/0/p/08/

The region of Florence (much more in the Southern part of Italy ... and near to Rome) was much more intolerant till ca. 1450 ... they became then less prohibitive till ca. 1494 and then dropped back to their Savonarola period, in which playing cards were burnt.
http://trionfi.com/0/p/05/

*******

The interesting question is, how the Trionfi cards later found to the later 4x14+22-structure ... ... especially if one meditates about connections between Kabbala and Tarot.

E pluribus unum

Huck said:

The interesting question is, how the Trionfi cards later found to the later 4x14+22-structure ... ... especially if one meditates about connections between Kabbala and Tarot.

Click to expand...

4x10 + 4x4

Hi Huck,
Help!! I'm lost. I think of Tarot origins as a type of game as well. One of the rules, as I understand the game, is that any origin theory has to show some evidence in the early cards. A few examples.
l. Stuart Kaplan in volume II of The Encyclopedia of Tarot says that the structure on the cup is the Grail castle. He makes this claim based on the card. (I'm not saying he is right but he does try to back up his claim with reference to the card)
2. Timothy Betts in his book Tarot and the Millennium traces the 21 Trump suit to the 21 chapters in the Book of Revelations. He states his case based on the similarity between art on the Trumps and art in the tradition of Revelations. Plus the number 21
3. Paul Huson in Mystical Origins of the Tarot makes the claim that the Medieval Mystery drama is the source of some of the Tarot imagery. He has to make his point plausible with reference to the imagery on the cards.
4. Robert O'Neill reviewed in his website the Triumph tradition, the dance of death tradition, the Revelations tradition. He shows how in each instance these are plausible based on the card imagery.

I can't find the website now, but it lists what makes a good origin theory and that ultimately comes down to cards, although context is second. I think your context is excellent. But have you demonstrated the relationship to the Trump(Tarot) suit of 14?

What I am proposing is that we take each card in the 1442 entry--that is, the 14 cards that existed in your theory of 14 Trumps. Let's say a similar name, a similar theme, art of the period that backs up your theory, etc.
You choose let's say Jupiter and Venus in the family tree. I choose the medieval works of Ramon Llull mixed with some later Neo-Platonism, but I will try to keep to Lull. I won't bring in whole passages from Cusa to muddy the waters and you don't bring in an over contextualized argument.

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
Help!! I'm lost. I think of Tarot origins as a type of game as well. One of the rules, as I understand the game, is that any origin theory has to show some evidence in the early cards.

Click to expand...

If cards are really existent in a documentary form (really as cards or as description, as it is the case in the text of Johannes of Rheinfelden and in that of Martiano da Tortona), you've something to interprete and analyze. If they're not there, you have other kind of data ... prohibition of card playing, other fragmentary notes, here and there a hint on the structure. Possibly no note about motifs at all.
Till the Cary Yale Tarocchi / Brera Brambilla there is nothing like Tarot motifs in relation to playing cards, but... naturally ... there are more or less all Tarot motifs somehow existent in other contexts. Am I allowed to conclude cause of this circumstance, that there existed 1000's of Tarot card decks in the medieval world before 1440, best in the kind of theory, that "Tarot was the mother of the playing cards", as it was en vogue only short time ago and still appears occasionally as "an opinion"?
Surely not ... a Tarot designer, who would "invent" Tarot, would probably take motifs, which were around somehow. So each of the motifs may have its longer history, no problem. This is very natural.

Well ... would the Tarot motif series be in existence as a complete composition inside another context (or even only a greater part of it), so that it was taken as a model for the new relation "playing cards - just these motifs", then world would be fine and the riddle more or less solved.

But this wasn't the case, quite in the contrary, 1000's of researchers looked and looked and couldn't find anything of greater value in these older sources. Actually this negative result should be taken as a result: if you're searching with the wrong idea or at the wrong place, you logically find nothing.

A few examples.
l. Stuart Kaplan in volume II of The Encyclopedia of Tarot says that the structure on the cup is the Grail castle. He makes this claim based on the card. (I'm not saying he is right but he does try to back up his claim with reference to the card)
2. Timothy Betts in his book Tarot and the Millennium traces the 21 Trump suit to the 21 chapters in the Book of Revelations. He states his case based on the similarity between art on the Trumps and art in the tradition of Revelations. Plus the number 21
3. Paul Huson in Mystical Origins of the Tarot makes the claim that the Medieval Mystery drama is the source of some of the Tarot imagery. He has to make his point plausible with reference to the imagery on the cards.
4. Robert O'Neill reviewed in his website the Triumph tradition, the dance of death tradition, the Revelations tradition. He shows how in each instance these are plausible based on the card imagery.

Click to expand...

Well, I can't judge the individual attempts and their value ... I do not know enough about them.

I can't find the website now, but it lists what makes a good origin theory and that ultimately comes down to cards, although context is second. I think your context is excellent.

Click to expand...

Bob O'Neill's website is at Tarot.com ... you've to click at button "Tarot" and then somehow "Library".
... myaybe this is quicker
http://www.tarot.com/about-tarot/library/index

But have you demonstrated the relationship to the Trump(Tarot) suit of 14?

What I am proposing is that we take each card in the 1442 entry--that is, the 14 cards that existed in your theory of 14 Trumps. Let's say a similar name, a similar theme, art of the period that backs up your theory, etc.
You choose let's say Jupiter and Venus in the family tree. I choose the medieval works of Ramon Llull mixed with some later Neo-Platonism, but I will try to keep to Lull. I won't bring in whole passages from Cusa to muddy the waters and you don't bring in an over contextualized argument.

Click to expand...

The 14 trumps, that existed in the Bembo cards (from ca 1452, not from 1442), are defined by art historians as the work of the first painter, the other six as the work of the second painter.

If you look at the motifs, there are 3 groups in the motifs ...

5 are persons
5 are allegorical motifs
3 are bad and the final 1 is finishing

All is explained at
http://trionfi.com/0/f/07/
http://trionfi.com/0/f/08/ ... here is a graphical demonstration,that you probably missed

Hi Huck,
I can see from your "graphical demonstration" that this is indeed an interpretive method. I don't know how you arrived at these conclusions. On one hand you have all context and then the other these labels attached and yet actually it should be context leading to demonstration. But I do "get it" in the sense that I realize you have finalized your theory. To be completely honest, I am probably no different. I have my unwavering opinions. I don't agree with your logic , though, that thousands of people have searched for meaning in the cards and found nothing, hence the missing info won't be found. Call off the search..

So, a debate on the fourteen Trumps was a bad idea. I do believe you have missed something, but then I don't know you or how you approach Tarot. It was an interesting conversation. Maybe some new topics will pop up in the future. Good-bye for now..

kapoore said:

Hi Huck,
I can see from your "graphical demonstration" that this is indeed an interpretive method. I don't know how you arrived at these conclusions. On one hand you have all context and then the other these labels attached and yet actually it should be context leading to demonstration. But I do "get it" in the sense that I realize you have finalized your theory. To be completely honest, I am probably no different. I have my unwavering opinions. I don't agree with your logic , though, that thousands of people have searched for meaning in the cards and found nothing, hence the missing info won't be found. Call off the search..

So, a debate on the fourteen Trumps was a bad idea. I do believe you have missed something, but then I don't know you or how you approach Tarot. It was an interesting conversation. Maybe some new topics will pop up in the future. Good-bye for now..

Click to expand...

Well, there is no doubt, that structures which contain a "22" or even an "21+1" existed very early in philosophical speculation, far before the development of paper and playing cards. Kabbala, I-Ching, Egyptian destricts etc. are examples.
But the researched object with "missing knowledge about its origin" is "Tarot", a card game.
There is not much doubt, that Tarot was not the origin of the common card deck, but that the common card deck was first and Tarot developed from it.

Why? Cause a lot of people have researched the existing old documents and had found no confirmation, that Tarot existed very early. So this "kind of opinion" is determined by documents, which really exist.
Natural the process of research is one of "finding documents" and this depends on lucky accidents (well, some research technique helps to find something, so its not only "lucky accident", but also a presentation of the used technique and energy ... so we have for instance a lot of data about card history in Florence, cause there was a researcher, Franco Pratesi, who spend a lot energy in a Florentine archive; we're not allowed to conclude, that there were more card playing in Florence than elsewhere ... but it confirms, that results appear, when you make careful researches).

As there had been meanwhile a lot of lucky accidents, the whole body of documentary snippets forms a picture ... naturally that all can't be totally reliable, but it is something, not selfmade by researcher's imagination, but by real inputs of the outer world.

Necessarily some sense for realism on the side of the researcher and that better to a high degree, cause here are the traps for many, who have chosen to find the glorious idea about the origin of Tarot.
The hypothesis "Tarot deck was the mother of card playing" is totally absurd, cause Tarot decks naturally are much too expensive in their production ... this simple, but realistic idea, helps to understand something.

So we've there a game called "Tarot" with specific rules ... naturally our data about Tarot rules is "late", the first of 1637, if we do not count the short passage in the Michelino deck (1418-1425) and some rambling in the commentaries of Viti to the Boiardo game in ca. 1497.

Tarot rules have many variations, but there are a few rules, which always appear and so may be counted as essential and for this reason should have been there from the very beginning. These are for instance the rules about counting ...

Always in Tarot is a longer series of trumps ... from the trumps, which follow a common hierarchie 1 - (for instance) 21, the highest is evaluated specific (usually 21) and the lowest (1) is evaluated specific (they have higher points and the card 1 often has additional chances, mostly if he takes the last trick).
Additionally the "No-trump" card of the Fool (a card of luck) is evaluated specific.

So ... reflecting, that things start on a cheap level, it's a natural assumption, that the game "Tarot" started on a level, where card players didn't need any specified cards. Specified cards are "high culture" and are necessarily "expensive".

So you have a common deck, maybe 4x12, 4x13, 4x14, 4x15, deck-type, from which we know, that they existed. And you wish to play Tarot.

Well ... you need a "predefined trump-series". Let's assume, that we conclude, that "swords" is the chosen trump suit, but if you like the idea, that cups are better, then it's not a problem.
Now you've to conclude, which row the different cards should have, easily you might agree, that the King is the highest, then the other court cards and then a row from 10-1 with the ace as the lowest.
Now you've the problem to decide, which are the 3 special trumps with the higher value. Logically you take the king as the highest and the ace as the lowest.
Now there's still the problem of the Fool ... after some consideration you decide, that the Fool should be the lowest court card. True, it might be any card, but looking at the real examples of early surviving card decks we see, that the lower marshall (called "Unter" in Germany) is often painted in a funny
way ... so therre is no better Fool in the deck as the lowest court card in the trump series.

And with these simple definitions you are able to play the game of "Tarot" with a cheap common deck. No exclusive and expensive Trionfi cards are required.

Well, you may say, that this is fiction ... well, the situation with the cheap cards at the beginning isn't really fiction. And there are further arguments, if you consider, what really happened.

Already in 1377 Johannes of Rheinfelden in his description of his favored deck with 60 cards mentioned, that the suit cards were counted from 1-15, the numbers 1-10 for the profession cards, and the numbers 11-15 for the court cards.
If we variate this information for a deck with 4x14 cards, the typical Italian Tarot-suit, we would have, that

King = 14
Queen = 13
Knave = 12
Page = 11
10 = 10
9 = 9
etc.
1=1

As already told, the lowest trump, the highest trump and the defined Fool (page or servant = 11) are of importance in the Tarot game

So actually in this game we have a brake in the rules of the counting

King = 14 = highest trump
Queen = 13
Knave = 12
Page = not 11, but "0"

Well ...

If you go now to the 14 trumps of Bembo, and you compare these unnumbered trumps with that, what much later became the standard numerology of Tarot, you will see, that ...

"existing 0" -1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10 - "missing 11" - 12-13 - "missing 14-19" -20 - "missing 21"

... is the result. That maybe puzzling at first moment, but actually the state of the 14 Bembo cards gives confirmation, that the "fictious reconstruction" of the game "Tarot with a cheap standard deck" should have had once a reality.

Tarot developed from the standard deck ... that's not an absurd idea, but a standard assumption of many researchers.
The question is how, and above you see an explanation, based on a careful consideration of the given facts.
The idea, that the "4x14+22"-structure dropped from heaven at an unknown moment of time (without any support of accompanying documents), looks absurd ...

Well, this doesn't explain the development of the Michelino deck ... this had another idea.

Hi Huck,
I applaud your knowledge of the playing cards beginning in the 14th Century onward. I actually have some copies of early German playing cards that I copied from an art book in the art history library. So, I can picture these earliest cards and their lovely drawings. I'm assuming you have read, A Wicked Pack of Cards by Ronald Decker, DePaulis and Dummet. Also, I am sure you have read A History of the Occult Tarot, which was the second volume of the series.

Do you agree with these authors? Obviously, you disagree with them on some points, and what are your reasons for disagreement? Of course, they are here writing about Tarot, not about playing cards in general; but you and I are also writing about Trumps (specifically of the Tarotish type) as well. Commenting on Dummet's two books might give us some common ground.

I have both books, and page numbers would be helpful.