Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-26T14:28:39.462Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Die pergamenische Zauberscheibe und das Tarockspiel. By S. Agrell. Pp. 130; 68 illustrations in text. Lund, Gleerup, 1936.

Review products

Die pergamenische Zauberscheibe und das Tarockspiel. By S. Agrell. Pp. 130; 68 illustrations in text. Lund, Gleerup, 1936.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

H. J. R.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Notices of Books
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , 1937 , pp. 103 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1937

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 103 note 1 One might also suggest βδέλυγμα.

page 104 note 1 K. is of course omitted.

page 104 note 2 One of the most forced explanations is connected with some bad etymology. The card which Agrell would put first bears the figure of a fool or jester. By means of the equation fool = ox and the further equation ox = Apis-bull he gets the letter A. He further supposes that the name of the pack is itself derived from one of the Romance derivatives of taurus. But tarocco implies something very different. Its a cannot originate from au, for that gives rise to an open o, not to a; and if a vulgar Latin word tauruccu—is postulated, as Agrell does, p .65, its second syllable would result in a close o, but the first o in tarocco is open. However, such difficulties do no invalidate the whole theory, but only some of its details.