Thanks for sharing your thoughts Ross. I'd like to add some additional "scattered" thoughts to this discussion.
The
Cary Sheet is unavoidable when looking to the origin of the Tarot de Marseille; it seems to be very old indeed. While I have no training in dating art, from the many, many hours I've spent researching the sheet, I'd agree that it is probably 1480s-ish.
The similarity of the Moon and the Star to the Tarot de Marseille is obvious. The fact that it has no numbers and titles, I think, also suggests it age. Yet it is so different!
I was fascinated to find that
Michael Dummett said:
"The Tarot de Marseille is descended from a particular type of design for popular Tarot cards used in Milan from the late fifteenth century, but acquired some of its features in France. The crayfish on the Moon card is found in the Milanese prototype, but the dogs are not; to my mind, the idea of dogs baying the moon is so commonplace that no resort to arcane pseudo-Egyptian symbolism, such as Dame Frances suggests, is needed to explain their presence."
He's obviously referring to the Cary Sheet, but he uses the words "descended" and "Milanese prototype" in his description of the Tarot de Marseille. Wow!
The question then becomes: "Did the Cary Sheet evolved into the Tarot de Marseille?"
If not, how can we explain the Cary Sheet? If so, how can we explain how so much the iconography changed in such a short time, while at the same time, some cards like the Moon and Star remained so consistent?
The "good" thing about the Cary Sheet is it shows that "something" related to the Tarot de Marseille existed pretty early in the development of Tarot.
We can also learn that there were no titles and numbers on those related images at this early stage. That sort of brings up the question "When did the titles and numbers get added? And why?"
It "makes a good story" to imagine that the Cary Sheet shows an Italian example of the early pattern, and that at some point when the pattern moves to France the titles and numbers are added. It "makes sense" that the introduction of the game to France encourages the titles and numbers, in French, so that the game is easier to play, and in a sense, "transformed" into a "French game". We also see numbers being added early to other Italian decks.
It makes sense that, if it is early, it is Italian as, (as far as I know), all of the evidence concerning the evolution of Tarot points to Italy as the place of origin. The further back we put the origin of the Tarot de Marseille, the more likely it must be that it is Italian.
We've discussed on AT the unusual Devil on both the
Cary Sheet and the
Tarot de Marseille. I did find one very similar image similar to the Cary Sheet from a book of hours in Paris dated to 1407.
http://www.tarothistory.com/images/ms29433.jpg
Of course, that's not to imply that the Cary Sheet is French; but to me, it does show that France can't be ruled out just based on the iconography. I can't find an Italian version of the Cary Sheet style Devil, yet. Of course, with the relationship of "Krampus" to the Switzerland and Germany, I think they have to be kept in mind when considering the origin of the Cary Sheet.
The Tarot de Marseille devil, as you've pointed out, is also fairly unique. I think it's interesting how similar the iconography is to some "eastern" statues, as shown in the thread linked above, and this exploration here:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=77067
Regarding the Pope and Popess, it's hard to know which we are looking at on the Cary Sheet. I thought it was the Popess when I first saw it, but then it was brought to my attention (I don't remember by whom, you?) that the images generally run "backwards" on the sheet, and that it is quite likely to be the Pope. Now I am inclined to see the card as the Pope, and I think it's interesting that the crosier also appears on the Vieville, Noblet, and Dodal.
I think it is interesting to consider that if it
is the Pope, he might actually not be a "Pope" after all. It's also interesting to consider that on the Visconti decks that the Popess isn't really a "Popess" either. Is it possible that in early tradition neither card was originally a pope or popess? It's interesting to think about, although, I suppose, it is probably unlikely.
I'm also, (and really, I'm getting terribly off topic), still inclined to wonder if originally there weren't simply "two popes" , and no popess at all. If the Cary Sheet shows the Pope, it's interesting that he looks so feminine, and similar to the Popess. I think again of the 15th Century mural in Sacro Speco of Pope Agatho, and how similar it seems to a "popess", at least to my eye. (right side of linked image):
http://www.romeartlover.it/Subiaco7.jpg
If we look to the Cary Sheet as an ancestor of the Tarot de Marseille, does it tell us anything about the genealogy of the Tarot de Marseille? How could we get from one to the other? On the other hand, perhaps (as I believe Michael Hurst has argued) the Cary Sheet is just another example of a "one off", "cousin", or simply unpopular pattern that would have faded completely from history had this one example not been found?
I have to believe that the oldest examples of the Tarot de Marseille didn't have titles and numbers on it. Not only does the Cary Sheet support this, but the Sforza Castle World card does as well. How can we explain a card like the Sforza Castle World card being found in Italy? I simply can't believe that the Tarot de Marseille had titles and numbers in French, and that these were stripped off and where they were, "additional" art work was added to complete the images for the Sforza Castles type deck. Instead, I have to believe that the Sforza Castle is an example of the older type of Tarot de Marseille, and that "for some reason" the French titles and numbers were added to the cards.
Where else can we look to help us learn more? What can we do to get closer to knowing if the Tarot de Marseille is originally Italian or French (or something else)?