Pips (suits) associations Dodal deck

The elemental associations I use are similar to the GD - probably for some similar reasons and some different reasons as I'm not really aware of GDs teachings, but simply because the GD propose this doesn't prove it is wrong or right.

There are several reasons which correlate those associations, but most of them are a bit hard to explain (and would probably don't make a lot of sense) in a written form on a forum.

Some are more obvious, for instance the earth/coins association is quite obvious because the coins are seen from above (the only suit for which this is the case), hence they are "on the ground", plus you can find clear geomantic figures within this suit, which isn't much the case for the other suits, then look at the Valet(page) of Denier underground coin which is another hint, etc... Then there are more "clues" one can experiment directly and physically - things that I won't try to explain here.

earth/denier, water/coupes, air/épées and fire/batons is what always worked best for me.

Regarding the purely numerological approach of numeral cards, I don't think it is a safe or valid way of reading them at first, as I detailled in this text
Numeral cards, an inner numerology

Also elements are to be considered for their classical qualities, fire is hot+dry air is hot+wet, water is cold+wet and earth is cold+dry, which may (or may not ?) help understand details such as the colours in the pips and in the whole deck, and also shed some light on relations within the different suits.

Bertrand said:

Also elements are to be considered for their classical qualities, fire is hot+dry air is hot+wet, water is cold+wet and earth is cold+dry, which may (or may not ?) help understand details such as the colours in the pips and in the whole deck, and also shed some light on relations within the different suits.

Click to expand...

I think when we break it down like that, it favors swords=fire and batons=air. Of course, the coloring is also a factor. I don't know, really. Flornoy's coins=water is way too much of a stretch for me. Maybe people flip coins into fountains for good luck?

With just a little bit of thought and free association one can justify an attribution of any of the suits to any of the elements. For example:

LRichard said:

Flornoy's coins=water is way too much of a stretch for me. Maybe people flip coins into fountains for good luck?

Click to expand...

Coins as currency are liquid assets that flow between or are contained in reservoirs. In economics currency valuation is often modeled upon principles of hydraulic (fluid) mechanics:

"“The inlet and outlet pipes between the two reservoirs allow for free flow of gold between bullion and coin usage thus ensuring purchasing power equality between bullion and money uses of gold. Fisher interprets this as due to the hydraulic principle: ‘The fact that gold has the same value either as bullion or as a coin, because of the interflow between them....' Here we see the importance of considering gold bullion and gold coin as liquid which flows freely. This characteristic enables the first use of fluid mechanics – the principle behind the equalising of levels between the two reservoirs...”

end quote from Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science. edited by Mary S. Morgan, Margaret Morrison.

LRichard said:

I think when we break it down like that, it favors swords=fire and batons=air.

Click to expand...

from what I can observe and experiment, it definitely doesn't, but as Kwaw points out, with a bit of thought (words) you can justify absolutely any attributions - which is (in my personal experience) not the case when observations and associations are based on a physical experience of the cards movements and inter relations (again almost impossible to explain by text only).

That being said Air and Fire being two invisible and "immaterial" elements, they are easier to confuse than water or earth.

Regarding my previous observations about colours among other details, I should have tempered it a bit since analogical relations can't be summarized with an analytical and separating eye, thus for instance one can't say "red" is for "wet" and "yellow" is for "cold", if that's one of the details you thought about.

Bertrand

kwaw said:

Coins as currency are liquid assets that flow between or are contained in reservoirs. In economics currency valuation is often modeled upon principles of hydraulic (fluid) mechanics

Click to expand...

As a side not, money as water (or liquid) is a very classical Asian metaphor (hence the frequent aquariums in Chinese restaurants, or so have I been told by a Chinese fellow), I'm not sure this metaphor (or "model") was largely used in the times and places the Marseille tarot was designed - it is possible but I'm not aware of any studies regarding that point, even though in modern french the word "argent liquide" (liquid money) is often used to say "cash".

Bertrand said:

As a side not, money as water (or liquid) is a very classical Asian metaphor (hence the frequent aquariums in Chinese restaurants, or so have I been told by a Chinese fellow), I'm not sure this metaphor (or "model") was largely used in the times and places the Marseille tarot was designed - it is possible but I'm not aware of any studies regarding that point, even though in modern french the word "argent liquide" (liquid money) is often used to say "cash".

Click to expand...

In Austria people say that very literally sometimes. One could e.g. say "I'm not so liquid at the moment", meaning they can't afford something.