Earliest order of the triumphs
Posted: 20 Apr 2008, 22:56
I have been persuaded by the material found primarily in Kaplan and Dummett that the earliest order of the Triumphs was likely that which the earliest extant evidence (in my eyes, at least) points to, as per below. Most tarot enthusiasts do not identify the tarot with this hierarchical order, found in the 15th century in the eastern Italian territories of Ferrara and Venice.
I would like to discuss historical evidence that points to the earliest order of the triumphs. I am not a card historian, and do not have access to the reference works needed to cite the documents that will be discussed here (I am currently in Wellington, New Zealand, which has limited library resources, and I personally have only a handful of books with me), but perhaps others are and do have.
Here is my boiled-down take on the subject:
The earliest recorded description to name the whole set of 22 cards is found in an anonymous sermon against gaming (Sermones de ludo cum aliis or Sermons of games with dice) written by a Dominican friar. The manuscript has been dated to between 1450 and 1480. Published by Robert Steele in 1900, it now resides at the Cincinnati Museum of Art. The 22 cards mentioned in the Friar’s description were listed in a precise order.
Of the 15th century cards in existence, two packs are numbered: the one in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art and in Budapest’s Museum of Decorative Arts, and the Rosenwald Collection deck residing in Washington’s National Gallery of Art. Both are woodblock sheets that are apparently difficult to precisely date. The Metropolitan deck is commonly dated circa 1500.
Two other decks from this time had numerals written on them after their printing. It is also quite possible that the Metropolitan Triumphs were copied from an original deck that had numbers later drawn on them. There also exist seven numbered Triumphs from a 16th century pack housed in the Leber Collection of the Bibliothèque Municipale at Rouen, France. The Rouen cards are numbered with Arabic numerals.
There remain extant several poems composed prior to 1600 detailing people of the court playing Tarocchi. From these, historians have made lists of the Triumphs’ names. Two of the poems list the Triumphs in an order. The earlier of the two dates from around 1550, the later from the second half of the same century. These are generally referred to respectively as the Bertoni and Susio poems. The Trionfi were also listed in a manuscript from the late 1500’s by Tomaso Garzoni entitled Piazza Universale.
This quick synopsis points to the fact there exist only a handful of early attestations informing us of the names and order of the original triumphs. Three out of the four early literary references, including by far the oldest – the Steele manuscript – list orders that correlate with the Metropolitan deck. The Rosenwald deck is evidently aligned with several non-standard decks appearing later in time. The order of those decks is not affirmed by any early literary source. It seems to me that it is quite possible, given the evidence, that the Rosenwald deck was created in the 16th century.
So cutting to the chase, I see three similar orders that evidently were the earliest (apologies for the lack of tabbed formatting...I can't seem to get it to work):
Steele MS Metro & Rouen Bertoni & Garzoni
21. World World World
20. Justice Justice Justice
19. Angel Angel Angel
18. Sun Sun Sun
17. Moon Moon Moon
16. Star Star Star
15. Tower Tower Tower
14. Devil Devil Devil
13. Death Death Death
12. Hanged Man Hanged Man Hanged Man
11. Hunchback Hunchback Hunchback
10. Wheel Wheel Wheel
9. Fortitude Fortitude Fortitude
8. Chariot Love Love
7. Love Chariot Chariot
6. Temperance Temperance Temperance
5. Pope Pope Pope
4. Popess Emperor Popess
3. Emperor Popess Emperor
2. Empress Empress Empress
1. Magician Magician Magician
I would like to discuss historical evidence that points to the earliest order of the triumphs. I am not a card historian, and do not have access to the reference works needed to cite the documents that will be discussed here (I am currently in Wellington, New Zealand, which has limited library resources, and I personally have only a handful of books with me), but perhaps others are and do have.
Here is my boiled-down take on the subject:
The earliest recorded description to name the whole set of 22 cards is found in an anonymous sermon against gaming (Sermones de ludo cum aliis or Sermons of games with dice) written by a Dominican friar. The manuscript has been dated to between 1450 and 1480. Published by Robert Steele in 1900, it now resides at the Cincinnati Museum of Art. The 22 cards mentioned in the Friar’s description were listed in a precise order.
Of the 15th century cards in existence, two packs are numbered: the one in New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art and in Budapest’s Museum of Decorative Arts, and the Rosenwald Collection deck residing in Washington’s National Gallery of Art. Both are woodblock sheets that are apparently difficult to precisely date. The Metropolitan deck is commonly dated circa 1500.
Two other decks from this time had numerals written on them after their printing. It is also quite possible that the Metropolitan Triumphs were copied from an original deck that had numbers later drawn on them. There also exist seven numbered Triumphs from a 16th century pack housed in the Leber Collection of the Bibliothèque Municipale at Rouen, France. The Rouen cards are numbered with Arabic numerals.
There remain extant several poems composed prior to 1600 detailing people of the court playing Tarocchi. From these, historians have made lists of the Triumphs’ names. Two of the poems list the Triumphs in an order. The earlier of the two dates from around 1550, the later from the second half of the same century. These are generally referred to respectively as the Bertoni and Susio poems. The Trionfi were also listed in a manuscript from the late 1500’s by Tomaso Garzoni entitled Piazza Universale.
This quick synopsis points to the fact there exist only a handful of early attestations informing us of the names and order of the original triumphs. Three out of the four early literary references, including by far the oldest – the Steele manuscript – list orders that correlate with the Metropolitan deck. The Rosenwald deck is evidently aligned with several non-standard decks appearing later in time. The order of those decks is not affirmed by any early literary source. It seems to me that it is quite possible, given the evidence, that the Rosenwald deck was created in the 16th century.
So cutting to the chase, I see three similar orders that evidently were the earliest (apologies for the lack of tabbed formatting...I can't seem to get it to work):
Steele MS Metro & Rouen Bertoni & Garzoni
21. World World World
20. Justice Justice Justice
19. Angel Angel Angel
18. Sun Sun Sun
17. Moon Moon Moon
16. Star Star Star
15. Tower Tower Tower
14. Devil Devil Devil
13. Death Death Death
12. Hanged Man Hanged Man Hanged Man
11. Hunchback Hunchback Hunchback
10. Wheel Wheel Wheel
9. Fortitude Fortitude Fortitude
8. Chariot Love Love
7. Love Chariot Chariot
6. Temperance Temperance Temperance
5. Pope Pope Pope
4. Popess Emperor Popess
3. Emperor Popess Emperor
2. Empress Empress Empress
1. Magician Magician Magician