> 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