Interesting observation ...
... though I think, that this Fool was intended as pawn.
Do you know
In the Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo Tarocchi in the original state there were only 14 cards (according the 5x14-theory). The participating 14 trumps (= group 1) were recognized by the fact, that the decks were painted by two painters and the first (probably Bembo) painted 14 special cards only and all the small arcana.
The 14 cards of group 1 are parted in group 1A (6 cards) and 1B (8 cards).
The original order probably was so:
14 Judgment ( later in Marseille order 20
) ... in card game King ... in chess part of group 1B
13 Death (13) ... Queen ... group 1A
12 Hanging Man (12) ... Ober ... group 1A
11 Fool ((later 0)
) ... Unter ... group 1A
10 Wheel (10) ... 10 ... group 1A
9 Hermit (9) ... 9 ... group 1B
8 Justice (8) ... 8 ... group 1B
7 Chariot (7) ... 7 ... group 1B
6 Love (6) ... 6 ... group 1A
5 Pope (5) ... 5 ... group 1B
4 Emperor (4) ... 4 ... group 1B
3 Empress (3) ... 3 ... group 1B
2 Popess (2) ... 2 ... group 1B
1 Magician ... 1 ... group 2
The difference between group 1A and 1B is the "precipice" or cliff in the foreground at the bottom of the card. See ..
It appears at six cards of group 1 (in the presented version at 0-1-6-10-12-13) and it is occasionally very difficult to see (very clear at 13 and at the most cards of group 2).
Best you take a look to see, what I'm talking about ...
A clear precipice or cliff
A difficult to see precipice or cliff
In the original version 1-14 this was used at 1-6-10-11-12-13
In the Hofämterspiel the courts were used at 1-6-9-10-(11)-(12), so very similar, the tail just moved for one place.
1-6- . 10-11-12-13 ... PMB
1-6-9-10-11-12 ... Hofämter
Well, the feature of the cliff in the Milanese deck was probably not used accidental. Both decks (PMB and Hofämter) carry the memory of another deck.
... court 1 - court 2 - court 3
The deck with 13 cards per suit was the most used deck of the early playing card time, at least for Johannes of Rheinfelden and he is the only early observer, that we have in this matter.
In such a suit 5 cards offer to be painted with special attention (1-10-11-12-13).
5 cards you need to present the 5 different chess officers, 8 cards (2-9) you need to present the Cessolis professions.
The Hofämterspiel is a reduced and modified version of the 5x13 original, the 14 special cards of PMB have enlarged the concept (and also modified it), but both have a common base, which both decks "remember".
Now, curiously, both newer decks unite in the idea, that the "6" presents the 2-9 (or 2-8) series and both present a "female" version at this place: the Hofämterspiel has the 6 as "Jungfrauwe" and the PMB - group 1 as 6, "Love".
We have the general feature, that chess has 16 figures, but only one is a woman (Queen). As the 13 suit cards present 5 elements for the officers and 8 for the pawns. If we assume
11 Bishop (unknown additional court card)
10 upper Marshall = Knight
2-9 makes 8 pawns
1 lower Marshall = Rook
... then this seems to present an original version.
If we look at the presentation at a chess board, we see, ...
1 - 10 -11-13-12-11- 10 - 1
2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9
... that card Nr. 6 becomes the Queen's pawn. Also 6 is a "half Queen" (Queen = "12"). Also the sum of 2-9 = 35, so nearly 6x6=36. And 2x3=6, somehow the "lowest" multiplication of different numbers, already used by Pythagoreans as "marriage".
Somehow one of these definitions wandered through playing card history and caused the observed similarity between Hofämterspiel and PMB-group-1.
Now: Which was the thinking model of PMB-1A and PMB 1B ?
Cards 1-6-10-11-12-13 in the PMB have - astonishingly - "dangerous" content:
1 - Magician, somehow the "player"
6 - Love, a "dangerous" matter
10 - luck or wreck
11 - Stupidity
12 - Traitor
13 - Death
In contrast to this the other 8 positions are relatively "safe":
2 - Popess
3 - Empress
4 - Emperor
5 - Pope
7 - Triumph (with horses)
8 - Justice (with knight in background)
9 - Hermit (a well-clothed hermit, not a suffering cripple)
14 - Judgment (all ends in heaven)
In my opinion the two groups 1A and 1B present two different versions of chess, a "bad one" and a good "one".
The bad chess:
King ... the Magician, the "player"
Queen ... his wife, Lady Fortune
Bishop ... Death
... (the bishop was in contemporary chess occasionally interpreted as bow-man; this death has a bow)
Knight ... a Fool with a baton, wrecked clothed (Stupidity)
Rook ... Hanging Man ... the Traitor, hangs from "above" (above associates Tower = Rook)
Pawns ... Love, as discussed before
There is another "bad" Chess recognizable in the 8 court cards used in a deck described by Master Ingold 1432:
"Nun sind auf dem kartenspil fier küng mit iren wauppen, und hat ieglicher under im XIII karten, das macht an ainer sum LII, und hat ieglichü das zaychen irs küngs. Etlich kartenspil hat dar zu fier küngin und fier junkfrawen, etlich haben den ackerman, den edelman, den wuchrer, den pfaffen, die toypel, den riffian, den wirt; und gewint ie ains dem andern ab: dem edelman der wuchrer, dem wuchrer der pfaff, dem pfaffen das täppelweib, dem täppelweib der riffian, dem riffian der wirt, dem wirt der weinman, dem weinman wider umb der pauman der den wein pauwen sol, der nimpt das gelt wider von dem wirt."
The first part describes, that the card game has 4 kings and 52 cards. Then he indicates, that there are cards
with kings, queens and "junkfrawen" as court cards and then he describes a deck, which has ...
* edelman = noble man
* wuchrer = man who lends money
* Pfaff = name for a priest with a "negative touch" in German language
* "toypel" and "täppelweib" = likely a woman who sells sex for money
* riffian = the male protector of the Toypel, who takes money from her
* wirt = innhouse-keeper
* weinman = man, who sells vine
* "ackerman" = farmer, identical to "pauman der den wein pauwen soll" = "Bauer = farmer", who shall plant the vine
... probably presenting as Ober and Unter the role of trumps in the game, and the edelman is lowest and the ackerman/pauman is highest. The "Toypel" has the role of the Queen, the "Riffian" the role of the King, and the whole deck idea presents a sarcastic irony about the momentary state of the world (and is as such attacked by the religious Master Ingold).
The other 8 cards (group 1B) present the Good Chess
* King Rook ... Father Time with an hourglass (as Tower ?)
* King Knight ... Justice with a knight on horse in the background
* King Bishop ... Pope
* King ... Emperor
* Queen ... Empress
* Queen Bishop ... Popess
* Queen Knight ... Chariot: woman at triumphal chariot with horses
* Queen Tower ... Judgment, indicating with trumpet the Elephant figure, from "above" (Tower symbol)
... (the Elephant figure seems to have been used in Italy - at least occasionally - as a rook and not as a bishop)
With this diversion between the 8 good and 6 bad cards it was possible to reduce the 70 cards deck to a 64-cards deck, if it was necessary in the intention of the players.
Generally the Trionfi card development started ca. 1440 with the exception of the Michelino deck, which is ca. 1425. However, socalled "Imperatori" existed around this time and possibly also additional Karnöffel cards (which included at least the figures Emperor, Pope and Devil) ... the Imperatori cards were (at least in the one example, that we know) connected to the number "8", probably developing from the basic 4x13-structure (52 cards) with the interpretation, that the kings reigned in the suits and the other court cards (Ober and Unter in usual military dress or otherwise) worked as trumps. In other experiments 8 additional trumps might have been used to reach from a usual Italian 56-card-game the card number 64 ... as we see it, if we add the 56 small arcana in the PMB deck to the 8 good chess trumps.
Generally we've to expect a lot of more creative attempts in this time than decks, that we really know of. Some of these decks might have been so obscure, that we would have really difficulties to understand them, so for instance Murner's deck of 1507 looks really like a brain-killer and it is even difficult to understand, if you've complete information.
A look at the court cards in the small arcana in the PMB:
All Kings and Queens use a solid platform, as we see it for Emperor-Empress-Pope-Popess ... if we would like to reduce the court cards and trumps to this feature, we would have a usual 4x13 deck. None of the knights and pages has it.
The precipice or cliff is recognizable at 1 of the knights (knights of baton) and at 3 of the pages. The page of coins has it not (this said on the base of not totally perfect pictures). Why ever they did it this way, it's their mystery.
But judging it from the content, it says, that a knight with loving heart (cups) or with money (coins) or with a sword (sword) is not in danger, but a knight, who tries to fight only with a baton, would be. The foot soldiers (pages) however, are always in danger, but not, if they have some money. So a rather practical view of life.
From another view we would have between 24 court cards of an assumed 64-cards-deck (without the 6 dangerous cards).
12 with solid bottom
8 without precipice
4 with precipice
so somehow arranged towards a logic based on "4"