Yes, my typo. The 80 years is from 1572 to 1650. Dummett says," We know from the order of 1572 that the game was already practiced in Switzerland by German speakers; but the practice of writing the names on the cards of the triumphs originated probably eighty years later." If the Tarot de Paris is 1559, then it is the only deck for 100 years that has written titles that are the conventional ones. Dummett does mention the Rouen and Sola-Busca; he doesn't count them because they are unconventional. I agree that a lot could happen between 1572, or earlier, and the first known decks with French standard titles on them in German speaking areas.I don't understand Dummett and his 80 years. I assume, 1750-1770 is your typo, you mean 1650-1670.
But the Tarot de Paris is given as c. 1600 by others and 1559 by myself. And the Tarot of Rouen (Leber Tarocchi) has titles at the cards. Well, these are not the common Tarot titles. The Sola Busca has titles, also not the common Tarot titles.
Huck wrote,
This seemed to be something I could summarize, then quote directly if there was an issue. The descriptor "translator" is Dummett's. What he says is:Johann Fischart, which you call here profanly the "translator of Garantua's list", was a German language giant, something like a 16th century James Joyce. He wrote mainly in the 1570s, not 1590. 1591 he was dead. He didn't really translate Rabelais, but exaggerated Rabelais.
Huck wrote,La prima edizione della Geschichtklitterung di Johann der Tàufer Fischart, traduttore tedesco di Rabelais, apparve a Strasburgo nel 1575; la seconda edizione uscì nel 1582 e la terza, in versione ampliata, nel 1590, anno della morte di Fischart. Fischart ampliò moltissimo la lista rabelaisiana dei giochi di Gar-[end of 381]gantua, non solo nella prima edizione, ma ancor di più nella terza; deve aver faticato enormemente per mettere insieme una lista così dettagliata di giochi 19. Nonostante ciò, egli tralasciò il gioco dei Tarocchi che Rabelais aveva incluso. È impensabile che avrebbe potuto farlo se a quel tempo il gioco fosse stato noto in Alsazia, la via più ovvia per cui esso poteva giungere dalla Francia alla Germania.
(A very convincing argument suggests that the game was still unknown in Germany in 1600. The Geschichtklitterung, first edition, of Johann der Täufer Fischart, German translator of Rabelais, appeared in Strasbourg in 1575; the second edition came out in 1582 and the third, extended version, in 1590, the year of Fischart's death. Fischart greatly expanded the list of Rabelaisian games in Gargantua, not only in the first edition, but even more so in the third; he must have greatly struggled to put together a list of games (19) so detailed. Despite this, he left out the game of Tarot that Rabelais had included. It is unthinkable that he could do it if at that time the game had been known in Alsace, the most obvious way that it could come from France to Germany.
________________
19. A modern reprint of the third edition of the Geschicktklitterung of Johann der Täufer Friedrich Fischart was published in Dusseldorf in 1963, edited by Ute Nyssen. The chapter on games is XXV, pp. 238-51 in the edition of 1963, and the game list is on pages 239-49.)
Actually, Dummett does not say that Fischart didn't know about Tarot. He must have, if he'd read Rabelais and, as you say, been in Italy, etc. Dummett just says it's unthinkable that he would not include a mention of "tarau" of some sort it if the game was known then in Alsace. Under what conditions would he have left it out? I can think of three. One, that it was poorly known. Two, he was afraid of what the censor might say. Dummett never considers the possibility of censorship. But would a censor really look that closely at a list of games? Or three, it was too easy just to list it, when he could have some fun instead. Dummett rarely if ever sees "hidden" meanings, i.e. meanings not spelled out explicitly, in anything, not even jokes. In that context you quote Fischart's "Tonneau, der kein Sternen in der Karten will zulassen: sind doch schöne Farben drin, inn welcher, wann einer gekleidet geht, glück hat unnd Schätz findet, wie D.Thoman von Filtzbach im Planetenbuch schreibt" [Barrel, which no stars in the card will allow: beautiful colors are still there, in which, when one is dressed [in them?], gives happiness and esteem, as Dr. Thoman von Filtzbach writes in his Planetbook] and so on (in your post that you link to). I suppose that could be meant to refer obliquely to the tarot cards (and the idea is indeed sustained for several more lines) and perhaps someone with a name similar to "Fitzbach" (e.g. Fischart). But as it stands, not knowing whether people knew these cards, especially the one with the barrel (as opposed to other cards with barrels, which you say there were) it's hard to say. It's an interesting idea. Thanks for calling attention to your other post.It's true, that he didn't translate Tarau with Tarot or Tarocchi or similar. But this does't mean, that he didn't know Tarocchi cards.
Actually it seems, that he knew them and that he even knew about their prohibition in Geneve, and that already in the 1570s (well, we know of Troggen prohibitions in Geneve, but not as early as 1570). But we know already of difficulties between Calvin and a playing card producer already in the 1540s.
I gave my position here, 2 years ago:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=837&p=11911&hilit=fischart#p11911
Huck wrote, about my remark that Depaulis didn't mention Honl:
Thanks. I must have been half asleep when I looked for Honl. I see indeed on Depaulis p. 70 that Honl saw a reference to "Triumphus hispanicus" along with a description of the four suits and the word "Triumphspiel" and thought it was tarot. I know about Spanish Triumphs from Andrea Vitali's essay on the four suits. It is a game with the regular deck where a card is turned over to determine trumps; Depaulis says it was described in a book published in Basel in 1539. Good. One less red herring.Wrong. Depaulis notes Honl in his IPCS article at page 69-70 with more than a half page and considerable research.
Huck wrote,
Good point. Lorraine is even better than Alsace, because there is some actual evidence. The Academy would have known that Alsace had been promised France in 1648 and therefore, in their eyes, would have never been German, even though it had been separate from France for centuries. Actually, the Academy quote doesn't say that tarot was played in Germany. It says that "les Allemands" ordinarily do not play at any other game. Perhaps the Academy considered Alsatians to be Germans living in France.The academy 1659 and the King's physian in 1655 might have easily taken Lorraine as a German region, when they talked of Tarot in Germany.
Depaulis (p. 71) points out that Pierre Borel, 1655, uses the same language, in the supplement on "ancient French" to his dictionary: "THAURAVTS and tarots. jeu de cartes des Allemends". Borel was from Castres, in Languedoc, and never went further than Paris, Depaulis tells us. But he got that idea from somewhere.
I did not follow Depaulis's point about German dictionaries. That they didn't know of an identifiably German word for tarot in the 17th century doesn't mean they didn't play the game and have a word for it. The visual encyclopedia by Comenius that he cites thinks that the French word for tarot is "tarocs". Likewise the 1711 German-French dictionary from Leipzig has "TARAUX. Deutsches oder Welsches cartes." Some Germans, at least--of the social circle of writers of dictionaries--might have used the French word or what they thought was the French word for the game, just as they used cards with French titles but not French suits. Dictionaries tend to be conservative and copy each other. So that taraux was thought of by Germans as German is unsettling. The 1740 Frankfurt dictionary has "TAROTS. triplix-carte, auch auch eine Deutsche oder Italienische carte." Here they think of tarot as German or Italian. So they know where the the suits come from, not France, even though they have only the French word. Depaulis only looked in French-German dictionaries. I wonder what the German-only dictionaries said. Do you know, Huck?
However Depaulis's failure to find literary references in German books of the early 1700s in places one would expect to find them, where numerous card games are described, does suggest that by then, if tarot had ever been played in Germany, it was largely forgotten. Tarot, with its Catholic roots and fearful images, seems to me the kind of game that could easily be a casualty of inter-religious warfare, and there was all too much of that in 17th century Germany. For the same reason, documentation before the 17th century will also be hard to come by, because of so much destruction.