Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#31
mikeh wrote: It is not clear that "Tuman" is related to "multitudes" as opposed simply to "clothed in large drawers".
Even if Tuman did mean a type of pants (most often underpants - but is generic for pants of several kinds), it does not translate as 'clothed in pants', that would be like someone translating 'king of flares' as 'king of the clothed in wide-bottom trousers' instead of 'king of [wide-bottomed] trousers'. As you note -al arkan ryhmes with al-jukan (polo-sticks), and al-jukan clearly relates to the emblems of the cards, and so with al-tuman we may expect that 'tuman' too relates somehow to the emblems of the cards, albeit less directly (it maybe confusing that cups are called multitudes/10,000, but they clearly are not representations of underpants).
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#32
I don't remember if I showed these images from Ettinghausen's article in Gatherings in honor of Dorothy E. Miner.

One is of what looks like a boy of princely rank holding a card in one hand and a coin in the other, on p. 76



For some reason he thinks that it is a Kanjafah card, based apparently on the dimensions of the card. Kanjafah is attested in an account about Syria in 1417-1418, of a game of kanjafah played then for high stakes; the author lived "1411-1569?". Ettinghausen says the dish is 13th century in the caption, but "eleventh century" in the text (p. 75); that last may be a typo. He notes that the Istanbul cards are also long and narrow, and its King of Swords has Kanjafah written on top. By then it seems to have been reduced from 8 suits to 4.

Another is of fragments of two playing cards judged Mamluk:

The tears indicate to Ettinghausen that they were deliberately mutilated by someone who didn't want them used. They are both obviously cups cards, and the one on our left, which is the Unger card, is older, based on the black circles on the other, which he says corresponds to a later style of cup. They are placed only "in the Islamic world".

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#33
The literal meaning of Tuman is 10,000, the meaning of 'multitudes' is a figurative meaning. Its spelling is the same as that of the Persion 10,000 dinar, it is a borrowed rather than a native Arabic word:

Image


All of the cards transcribed and interpreted:

'ahad al-arkân malik al-jawkân one of the pillars also is the king of polo sticks
nâ'ib malik al-jawkân the deputy of the king of polo sticks
thâni nâ'ib jawkân a second deputy of polo sticks
ahad al-arkân malik al-tûmân one of the pillars also is the king of multitudes (lit: 10,000)
qushquli nâ'ib malik al-tûmân qushquli is the deputy of the king of multitudes (lit: 10,000)
qarâjâ thânî nâ'ib al-tûmân qaraja is the second deputy of multitudes (lit: 10,000)
malik al-suyûf the king of scimitars
nâ'ib malik al-suyûf the deputy of the king of scimitars
malik al darâhim the king of dirhams/coins
nâ'ib malik al darâhim the deputy of the king of dirhams/coins
thâni nâ'ib darâhim a second deputy of dirhams/coins

http://mamluk.spiorad.net/inscriptions.htm

quote from Andy's Playing Cards:

Another detail of some interest is that a golden Persian coin worth 10,000 Dinar was called Toman. It was introduced in AD 1240, which means shortly after Persia's invasion by the Mongols; this word was borrowed, as it does not exist in Persian, while in Mongolian the word for 10,000 is tümen (almost identical).

Therefore, the suit called [img]http://a_pollett.tripod.com/AR-TUMAN.GIF[/img]Tûmân in the Mamlûk deck matches by the name the Oriental suit of Myriads (i.e. "Tens of thousands"), despite in the Arabic deck the Tûmân cards feature chalices or cups.

It is useful to remark that Toman (the Persian gold coin) and the Arabic suit of Tûmân are both spelt in the same way,[img]http://a_pollett.tripod.com/AR-TUMAN.GIF[/img], and that the apparent discrepancy between the two terms depends on the different translitteration, or romanization, used for Arabic and Persian: both of them were borrowed words, that did not belong to the native language, but were certainly imported from an Altaic language.
end quote
http://a_pollett.tripod.com/cardsc.htm
mikeh wrote: Another possibility, according to Ettinghausen, pp. 52, 62, is that the term was chosen because it rhymes with al-arkan in the verse on the card (the same rhyme is in Polo Sticks, with al-arkan...al-jukan, where "Ahad al-arkan..." means "One of the Pillars of the Game is..."), and did fit the clothing style of these officials.
That it 'fit the clothing of these officials' is pure speculation. As to rhyme, where is the ryhme with the other two officials?

‘ahad al-arkan al-tuman
qushquli na’ib malik al-tuman
qaraja thani na’ib al-tuman

(The titles are titles, not poems. The verses on some of the cards are inscribed seperately.)

Plus Tuman as underpants is a concrete term, as easily represented as coins, polo-sticks or swords: why were underpants represented by cups?
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#34
SteveM wrote:The literal meaning of Tuman is 10,000, the meaning of 'multitudes' is a figurative meaning. Its spelling is the same as that of the Persion 10,000 dinar, it is a borrowed rather than a native Arabic word:
I remember, that I've read occasionally, that "10.000" was a suit in the Chinese playing card decks.

see here:
" The suit sign, printed in blue, is the old form of 'wan', meaning 10,000, as shown on the higher ranking suit(s) of old money suited cards which traditionally showed the Water Margin characters. (Courtesy John Berry)."
http://www.wopc.co.uk/china/

Image


The 10.000 printed in blue, the "x"-similar sign means "10 (of 10.000)"

Somehow an indication, that the Mamluk indeed took the playing cards from Mongols.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#35
Huck wrote: see here:
" The suit sign, printed in blue, is the old form of 'wan', meaning 10,000, as shown on the higher ranking suit(s) of old money suited cards which traditionally showed the Water Margin characters. (Courtesy John Berry)."
http://www.wopc.co.uk/china/
And Tuman [img]http://a_pollett.tripod.com/CN-WAN.GIF[/img] was the altaic (which includes Mongol, and most other altaic/turkic languages, including Turkish) equivalent of the chinese 'wan'. And the Mamluks, though based in Egypt and Syria, were composed of people from Altaic origins (thus the word, with the meaning of 10,000/multitudes, would have been familiar to them, as opposed to purely Arabic speakers).

The old idea we all know of course, that the glyph for Tuman [img]http://a_pollett.tripod.com/CN-WAN.GIF[/img], read upside down, looks like a cup [img]http://a_pollett.tripod.com/CN-WAN3.GIF[/img]
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#36
mikeh wrote: I am left with absolutely no reason to think that the "four seasons" chess game had anything to do with the origin of European-style playing cards. However the book in which it is described may have set a lofty precedent for the cultural interpretation of games in classical and Christian terms, depending on how widely its influence spread (e.g. Cessolis).
... :-) ... the game appears at a suspicious time, short before the playing cards (1277 and 1283)

4-players games have more social fun than 3-players games and naturally also 2-players games, that's a simple fact, if you really play cards or games. Playing card decks (as dice) can realize games for higher numbers of players easily, board games always stay limited.
Dice are more limited than playing cards, playing cards offer much more possibilities for variation of the rules.

German playing cards suits ...



... have a clear "green" (and the suit is occasionally called "Grün"), the suit hearts has a clear "red", the suit bells might (related to coins = gold) be easily recognized as originally "yellow", the suit acorns appears here mixed ...

Image

http://prepare-and-protect.net/2015/02/eating-acorns/

... but might have been originally brown.

It would have been a rather natural (and practical) idea to use 4 colors for the suits in the old original versions.

Spanish cards have green batons ...



... red wine for the cups, yellow for the coins, and blue or black for the swords.

Well, also early evidence, that the English "spades" did develop from the German "Spaten" and not from the Italian/Spanish words for sword.

Well, the 4-colors use is practical for the 4 suits and didn't need the Indish chess colors to exist.

*********************

Added

Well, I've pointed earlier to the condition, that 1277 (English prince and king Edward) and 1283 (Alfonso's book) are close in time, reason to suspect, that both events belong possibly to one connecting action. Which would have been "prince Edward in the Levante having diplomatic contact to the Mongols in 1271". Short after this Edward for some time in Sicily, and ... what I didn't earlier state ... Sicily getting a Sicilian Vesper in 1282 (which solved the problem of a French dominance) and so getting an Aragon influence.

1282, 30th of March .... Sicilian Vesper
1282 ... Peter is at a military operation with 15.000 warriors in Tunis. He gets news about the Sicilian Vesper ...
1282, 30th of August .... Peter III of Aragon arrives at Sicily
1282, 4th September .... Peter III crowned as king of Sicily

The French king Philip III started then a crusade again Peter III, assisted by a pope with French orientation (1284-85)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragonese_Crusade

Recently we talked about Peter III ...
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1097&p=16967&hilit ... iii#p16967
... in the question of a "Tafureria", which we didn't understand. It seems, that this Tufereria or Tuferia later contained later a lot of documents, which were related to games. This was installed around 1283, just, when the game book of Alfonso was declared to be finished.

How does this installment of the Tuferia by Peter III (Aragon) refer to the "book publication" of Alfonso (Castilia) ? Who finished the book?
Alfonso had trouble a longer time with his son Sancho (later Sancho IV). Sancho seems to have declared Alfonso as crazy (in 1282 at the opportunity of a political meeting in Valladolid, as I understand it at 21 April; which would be 3 weeks after the Sicilian Vesper and the news of the event might have reached already Valladolid, about 1100 km at sea from Palermo, 750 km at land). The news was naturally of highest importance and should have been transported very quick.
Peter III seems to have reached a political agreement with Sancho soon. Sancho, already in a marriage contract, married in July 1282 an aunt, Maria de Molina, which was disputed by others a longer time. Alfons seems to have lost a lot of his power in relative short time. I don't know much about the details, but I think, that this "situation of the game book 1283" should be studied.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#37
SteveM wrote:
quote from Andy's Playing Cards:

Another detail of some interest is that a golden Persian coin worth 10,000 Dinar was called Toman. It was introduced in AD 1240, which means shortly after Persia's invasion by the Mongols; this word was borrowed, as it does not exist in Persian, while in Mongolian the word for 10,000 is tümen (almost identical).

Therefore, the suit called [img]http://a_pollett.tripod.com/AR-TUMAN.GIF[/img]Tûmân in the Mamlûk deck matches by the name the Oriental suit of Myriads (i.e. "Tens of thousands"), despite in the Arabic deck the Tûmân cards feature chalices or cups.

It is useful to remark that Toman (the Persian gold coin) and the Arabic suit of Tûmân are both spelt in the same way,[img]http://a_pollett.tripod.com/AR-TUMAN.GIF[/img], and that the apparent discrepancy between the two terms depends on the different translitteration, or romanization, used for Arabic and Persian: both of them were borrowed words, that did not belong to the native language, but were certainly imported from an Altaic language.
end quote
http://a_pollett.tripod.com/cardsc.htm
As Mike has previously pointed out though, they are not spelt the same way. Toman (the 10,000 dinar coin) is spelt تومان, while the Mamluk suit Tuman card is spelt طومان.

Mamluk suit = ط و م ا ن
Persian coin = ت و م ا ن

However, Andy's point holds, that as a foreign loan word the discrepancy is one of a variation in transliteration. Aslo, just as Romance languages have latin words in common, their orthography and pronunciation differs between the languages (or even between the dialects of one language); so tuman (10,000) is a common word to the many Altaic/Turkic languages, with variations in orthography and pronunciation. Also, though both use the same script, the loan word is being transliterated into two very different languages, Persian and Arabic.

The sound difference between the two is a pronunciation like to (toe or tow) man (10,000 dinar coin) and tu (too or two) man (Mamluk suit). The second is more like altaic/turkic pronciation, which all follow rules of vowel harmony -it sounds very much like the Turkish tümen (a division of 10,000 or multiples thereof) for example, and the Mamluks were Atlaic/Turkic, not Arabic (i.e, the Mamluk transliteration is closer to Altaic/Turkic than the Persian one).
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#38
Well, as far I know from my I-Ching studies, the value "10.000" indicated in the early language "without end", or somehow "everything". "10.000 Dinge" (10000 things) is an expression used in the translation of the I-Ching by Richard Wilhelm. The expression was used also in the Tao te king, chapter 42:
Das Kapitel 42 des Dao De Jing enthält die philosophische Deutung der Weltordnung. Der erste Teil spielt mit den Zahlen EINS, ZWEI, DREI und 10.000.
道生一。
一生二。
二生三。
三生萬物。
萬物負陰而 抱陽,
沖氣以為和。
dao sheng yi,
yi sheng er,
er sheng san,
san sheng wan wu.
wan wu fu yin er bao yang,
chong qi yi wei he.

DAO lebt EINS
EINS lebt ZWEI
ZWEI lebt DREI
DREI lebt ZEHNTAUSEND DINGE
ZEHNTAUSEND DINGE: tragend YIN, haltend YANG
Qi unendlich offen : das gewährt Harmonie
http://www.teeweg.de/de/literatur/daode ... %2042.html

In English "Laozi" and "Tao te ching" is used.

For the cards it possibly meant something like "trump suit".
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: Bidev 1979 typescript on playing cards' origin

#39
Huck wrote:Well, as far I know from my I-Ching studies, the value "10.000" indicated in the early language "without end", or somehow "everything".
In Turkish too, 10,000 is figurative for countless things, innumerable:

The figure 10,000 could be used figuratively for a large but indefinite amount, countless, myriads,.

examples:
"tümen yılda berü tul erdim tulas = 'for countless (lit., 10,000) years I have been a pale widow’

"arığ tarımakta edgü yur kentir bir tarısar mir tümen bolur" ‘by cultivating the ground, if one plants one of good cotton or hemp it becomes a thousand or ten thousand’

"töşi ol kamuğ tümen yılan" = ‘her chest is all innumerable snakes’

"tümen çeçek tizildi" = ‘countless flowers have come up in rows'

"sansız tümen yağı yavlak kuvrap" = ‘innumerable enemies and bad men assemble’

As for طومان meaning trousers, so apparently does تومان (specifcally, sailors' "trowsers").

Image
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests

cron