jmd
It would be useful for me to have another look at the referenced versions of the Steele sermon... and so here reply as to my thoughts on the matter, which I will need to temper with later reflections.
Though the Steele sermon certainly orders the appelations, and appears to number them, there is some reason to assume that perhaps some may be inaccurate. After all, the sermon was not written in support, but rather against card play. Still, one would assume that the author did as much as possible to present the sequence with some knowledge or he may otherwise have been taken as an ignoramus with regards to that which he sought to diminish.
The positioning of the Fool is therein clearly lastly listed. That it is called 'nulla' does not indicate a numbering of zero, but of a value that adds no score in counting. Depending on the actual text, it may also indicate that 'nothing comes after' - here indicating that it is the final of the sequence, but with no numerical value (perhaps, as you and I also suggest, due to a desired totalling of 231 when the twenty-two cards' values are added).
With regards to your earlier questions, neither the Sola Busca nor the Etteilla depict the important symbolism of the Atouts of the Tarot - hence my statement that neither of these are 'truely' Tarot. They certainly each seem to have some connection - and in the case of the Etteilla, a clear historical connection.
In contradistinction, both the Waite/Colman-Smith and the Crowley/Harris, despite inversions of cards, addition of the actual numbering of the Fool, or picturesque pips, seek to emulate in various ways the central qualities of Tarot.
Though the Steele sermon certainly orders the appelations, and appears to number them, there is some reason to assume that perhaps some may be inaccurate. After all, the sermon was not written in support, but rather against card play. Still, one would assume that the author did as much as possible to present the sequence with some knowledge or he may otherwise have been taken as an ignoramus with regards to that which he sought to diminish.
The positioning of the Fool is therein clearly lastly listed. That it is called 'nulla' does not indicate a numbering of zero, but of a value that adds no score in counting. Depending on the actual text, it may also indicate that 'nothing comes after' - here indicating that it is the final of the sequence, but with no numerical value (perhaps, as you and I also suggest, due to a desired totalling of 231 when the twenty-two cards' values are added).
With regards to your earlier questions, neither the Sola Busca nor the Etteilla depict the important symbolism of the Atouts of the Tarot - hence my statement that neither of these are 'truely' Tarot. They certainly each seem to have some connection - and in the case of the Etteilla, a clear historical connection.
In contradistinction, both the Waite/Colman-Smith and the Crowley/Harris, despite inversions of cards, addition of the actual numbering of the Fool, or picturesque pips, seek to emulate in various ways the central qualities of Tarot.
