Where was the Marseille for 250 years?

[dminoz]

Can someone please let me know where I'm going wrong here:

We can trace the earliest tarot to northern Italy in the 1440-50s with the Visconti-Sforza; I think that's generally accepted. And then we have the Cary sheet which has several very Marseille-type images, both majors and pip cards. The Cary sheet is generally dated to about 1500.

And then we have complete Marseilles tarot decks from the mid-1700s, don't we?

To me, there seems to be something of a gap, and a big one at that. So, my question is: where are the Marseille-pattern decks from the 1500s and 1600s? Are there any? Partial decks? Single cards? What traces, if any, are left of the development of the Marseille pattern between the Cary sheet and the mid-1700s?

 

[le pendu]

Hi dminoz,

You ask a great question.

We have the Jean Noblet tarot in 1650, which many consider a TdM as much and any other (I certainly do). That tighten's it up a good deal. We have the Jean Dodal as well in the 1701-1715 range. The Francois Chosson, whose date is uncertain, falls somewhere after Noblet, possibly after Dodal, but seems to be the design that the Conver is based on.

1450s or so: Visconti
1500 or so: Cary sheet
--Gap of 150 years--
1650 or so: Jean Noblet TdM.

Filling in that gap of at least 150 years, if not trying to go even further back is one of the great treasure hunts of tarot.

Enjoy!

robert

 

[jmd]

We also have Jean Payen in the mid to late 1600s (just a little later than Noblet, it seems).

It is, however, such a fascinating question.

There are other decks also with remnants from the 1600s, but do not recall a full (or implied full) version dating before then.

It could therefore be argued that the pattern becomes more precisely 'Marseille-like' in the mid to late 17th century - though would be happy to be corrected with decks I simply do not have at the tip of my fingers.

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

Yes, a fascinating question.

The trouble with the Cary sheet is that both its provenance and dating is completely uncertain.

Dummett uses circular logic (really) to associate it with c. 1500 and Milan (Chapter 20 of Game of Tarot, pp. 407-408).

First, he argues that tarot must have been introduced to France and Switzerland between 1494 and 1500 (French-Italian wars).

He points out that with minor variations, the order of the trumps in 16th century sources from Pavia and France are "C" order - what we know generally as TdM.

So, if it is assumed that the C order was that originally observed in Milan, and that the tarot was introduced into France around 1500, then it must have been introduced from Milan.

The second part of the argument discusses the designs of the Cary sheet. They are strikingly like the TdM designs - there must be some relation. Since they are not identical in every case, however, they must be ancestral rather than derivative (also because of the reasoning associating them with Milan).

So, given all of the above, the Cary sheet must be from Milan around the time tarot was introduced to France.

This is, as I take it, Dummett's whole argument for his dating of the otherwise undatable and unplaceable Cary sheet. And it has stuck - at least I am not aware of any other discussions.

The problem is that none of the assumptions is proven, and in the 25 years since the publication of Game of Tarot, some things have tilted the balance in favor of the process having worked the other way; i.e. the "TdM" style, Cary-sheet style actually went from France to Italy with the wars, not the other way around.

Even if the consensus is moving toward tarot being in France much earlier (even as early as 1450), the question remains open as to when the TdM style designs developed.

So, we cannot claim, with any real certainty, the date "c. 1500" for an ancestor to the TdM trump designs in the Cary sheet. With different assumptions, the sheet could be dated to 1600.

The earliest good date is 1650 - Noblet.

 

[Rosanne]

So my fine super sleuths of Tarot, what informally do you think happened for aprox. 150 years? Tarot was out of fashion? There was a cardstock embargo going down? Bans and edicts against gaming and fortune telling was working? It was the start of the great disposable society and no one kept their cards- or they could not get new ones? Or the ouiji board was invented? What could explain the gap? ~Rosanne

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

So my fine super sleuths of Tarot, what informally do you think happened for aprox. 150 years? Tarot was out of fashion? There was a cardstock embargo going down? Bans and edicts against gaming and fortune telling was working? It was the start of the great disposable society and no one kept their cards- or they could not get new ones? Or the ouiji board was invented? What could explain the gap? ~Rosanne

LOL - none of the above (except for the "disposable" part).

Tarot certainly wasn't out of fashion... Depaulis calls 1530-1630 the "Golden Age" of Tarot in France. A French writer of 1622 said it was more popular than Chess. Vieville made his deck in Paris in 1650. But by around 1720, Tarot had retreated to a few places (Provence, Savoy and places bordering Germany) and it died out in the capital city and northern France.

And of course it continued to be played in Milan, Bologna, Ferrara, Florence, etc. in Italy, and in Germany, Switzerland, Austria...

But of course by this time the TdM style was already known... SO - it is not that tarot went out of fashion, that's for sure.

No, not cardstock or bans or anything either.

There's a distinction to be made between the *order* of "TdM", and the *designs*. The order of the cards we're talking about, with minor variations, is certain to have existed by 1543. I would guess, it existed by 1500. I would even hazard that it was created by the cardmakers in Avignon or Lyon who first made tarot cards in France. My belief is that it is a "French" order (although Avignon was a Papal city and not technically French at the time).

The designs are not as easy to trace. The Catelin Geofroy tarot (1557), from Lyon, has the TdM order, but not the same style. Maybe it's a "fantasy" deck, however - not typical in any way.The next earliest, the "Anonymous Parisian" tarot (1600?), also has the TdM order, but not the TdM style.

Then along comes Vieville (1643-1664) and Noblet (c. 1650), both from Paris as well. Vieville is different subjects, but (almost) identical order; Noblet of course is the first survivor of the TdM style.

The most conservative answer would be that the TdM images were invented around 1650.

But given how few cards have survived, in contrast to how many we know were made (millions between 1500 and 1650), such conservatism is unwarranted. There is no particular reason to assume the TdM designs were invented then, they could have been invented a century or more before. We just don't know.

This is why the dating of the Cary sheet might be important. If it's really early, it might be an ancestor of the pattern; but if it's late, it might be a derivative. And even if it's from 1500, the French cardmakers could have invented the TdM style already by then. At least, the pip cards already had the TdM form (Paolo Castello 2 of Coins from Milan, 1499). But the trumps? Who knows?

But personally, I believe that the TdM style is not the "original" tarot style. I think that is the Bolognese style, or at least, the southern order and subjects, also known in Florence.

 

[Cerulean]

I do enjoy this and the Bolognese styles are of interest

...to me, as well. When I get a chance to search, I was interested in finding if I had the best examples of that pattern as it morphed through history.

I had found samples of a Marseilles style in a small book (David Fontana's Dictionary of Symbols) from a cardmaker's name that typically I see online associated or only named with a "Beascon" or like-style with Juno/Jupiter...which made me think that French cardmakers weren't restricted just to one type of regional style of tarot game, but made whatever seemed in highest demand or popularity...

I"ll include details later, if there's interest, I'm running back to work...

Cerulean

 

[Huck]

There's a distinction to be made between the *order* of "TdM", and the *designs*. The order of the cards we're talking about, with minor variations, is certain to have existed by 1543. I would guess, it existed by 1500.

What makes you think of 1543?

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

What makes you think of 1543?

Alciato gives his order then in Parergon Juris.

 

[geomancer]

Earliest decks- the Visconti-Sforza deck

Even though the Visconti-Sforza deck of 1440-14450 is said to be amongst our earliest examples of a tarot deck, I question the historic basis of this statement.

The original V-S deck had no numbering or titles printed on the cards. The modern V-S decksdetails (where shown) printed outside original card frame.

Taking the cards of the major arcana, of the 22 cards we use today, only sixteen appear in the original deck by the original artist (Bembo). There are another for cards attributed to another artist about 20 years (nominal) later.
the two remaining cards, the Devil and the Tower are a modern inclusion to make up a traditional set.

The detail in the symbolism presented in a number of the cards does not reflect that of the Marseilles, RWS or any number of decks, apart from the general character portrayed.

My personal belief is that this deck was not originally intended to be a Tarot deck, but rather a deck of playing cards that has been readily adapted tp Tarot. A precursor to the tradition of Tarot.

Through my own research, I am convinced that there is an underlying geometric pattern to these cards that link the artist/s to Sacred Knowledge and the Cathars.

This deck does exude a very spiritual sense to the reader, but you must look into the card and at the detail, do not be constrained by the border of the card, but look within and see where it takes you. Sometimes this is in conflict with standard tarot definitions. Don't be perturbed, go with the flow and enjoy the journey.

Geomancer