> Date sent: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 00:22:44 -0800 > Send reply to: Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]> > From: Lucy Skjelstad <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: Tarot Cards > To: [log in to unmask] > >[According to Webster's, Tarot cards] > are "a deck of 78 playing cards, with 22 of them used for fortune > telling and as jokers in the game of tarot" So it would be misleading > to use the same term for both. > > After further consideration, based on the Webster dictionary > description, I'd now vote to use a Nomenclature classification of > Recreational Artifacts/Game and the term "deck, card" which then says > "use for standard playing cards.... such as bridge or pinocle" (eg. is > Tarot any more non-standard than pinocle?) > > > Lucy Skjelstad > > I think Webster's is wrong here. While Tarot cards can and are used for playing games, they are primarily designed for divination. I think that a classification under Cerimonial Artifact is more appropriate for the intended use. As far as I know, bridge players make no claims to see the future while playing cards, they are just having fun. Tarot readers do claim that they are reading past/present/future events via the cards, and many of them sincerly believe this. The fact that both are little paper rectangles isn't enough to put them in the same classification. James H Tichgelaar Registrar, Arkansas State University Museum