Shovel Down Spread

I tried the revised spread, using the same question and the same deck (the Greenwood) ... I'll just post my impressions in a stream-of-consciousness sort of way, so I apologise in advance if it seems a bit rambling ...

As before, laying out the cards, I loved the pattern they made. But this time I did feel that something was missing with the single-card rows rather than double 'avenues'. I know I queried those avenues before as the double cards were difficult to read, but there's nothing like comparison to bring things out you wouldn't necessarily expect, and I'm being honest here!

I love the stone circle, and I love the Long Stone, and they work really well as 'present' and 'outcome'. The central card of the stone circle made me jump and exclaim, as although it was a different card it was definitely a resonant one for the situation and one that has a very specific memory for me - the Nine of Cups, called 'Generosity' in the Greenwood.

Also, I should mention here (perhaps?) that although I shuffled extremely thoroughly, six of the same cards came up in both readings, one of them, the Three of Wands ('Fulfilment') in the same position ('Opportunities' this time, and 'Future events and influences' in the first version).

I think the re-jigged positional meanings do work better, and of course if you didn't like the idea of 'past' and 'future' you could always read the two blocks of four cards together as whatever you wanted, for example 'should do' and 'don't do'. The only positional meaning I had trouble with was card 13, 'The heart of the matter governing all future events' which in practice I found rather similar to the central stone of the stone circle.

I didn't really get a clear reading, but that was, again, partly my question's fault. The spread probably still suits an ' overview' type question better, and I'll try it again with a more suitable question and maybe a different deck too, just to see what difference it makes.

I found myself imagining that the cards had grown into the size of the megaliths and I was walking around and between them. That being the case (and this is where it gets really confusing!) I found I wanted to walk down the avenue between the two rows again. In other words, I missed those doubled-up cards even more than I'd missed them when laying out the spread! I wonder whether there would be any scope for devising two levels of spread here - the simple one with single rows, or a double-row version? With the revised positional meanings it could work well just reading the cards together as you originally suggested, but as you walk BETWEEN the rows, perhaps they could be read as some kind of choice between the two? Or some other permutation of your devising?!

This is such a great idea, Ed. I'm really excited by the idea of megalithic spreads you can walk around!! Thank you for creating it.

oak_woman xx

I missed the rows too, they seemed so esssential when devising the spread at first, but i was forced to admit that whilst some of the pairs that came out were stunning in their combination, others seemed forced together. Perhaps that is my limitation as a tarot reader than the spread though.

Tonight I might try the new positions but with double rows again - maybe they'll click better this time with the newly defined positions.

We're getting there with this one, I can feel it!

PS - Card 1 represents the current position, Card 13 is the theme and energy governing all future events.

My head recognises that there's a difference between cards 1 and 13; I just need to work a bit harder at separating them in my gut! That may say something in itself about the issue I'm reading about.

I look forward to hearing how you get on with the re-instated double avenues

I've had another go at the spread now. I asked a different question, and used the Tarot of the Origins. Now, this was not necessarily a 'safe' choice of deck, as I don't know it very well yet and find it a bit scary. But being based on the theme of prehistory, it just seemed like 'the one'. And I sense that it does no harm to face a challenge. After all, at the time of the Shovel Down people, life wasn't exactly fluffy.

And I can report that, on first impressions, we seem to have the best of both worlds now. Reverting to the double avenues seems to have put sparkle and depth back into it, when read using the new positional meanings. I've only just laid it out and had a quick look, but I know it will repay further study over the course of the day.

Thanks again, Ed!

I would like to thank you profusely for this spread. Not only has it helped me to break in a new deck, as it were, but the messages I read were insightful and helpful. Thank you so much.

I'm glad it's working well for you Divinest.

I've had a really good go with the original positions of the two rows but with the revised postional meanings and I've found it works a treat. Thanks for the input Oak Woman, looks like we've got there in the end!

One thing that really helped it click with me was to read the the first card in each pair and then (at first at least) consciously add a word like "but" "because" "and" "if" "or" "which" "otherwise" - and the pairs of cards made perfect sense. I found after a couple of readings there was no need to consciously do this as it was just a tool to understanding how the pairs wished to be read.

I've had some startling combinations too - like The Devil and Death as the warning postion!

I'm also keeping an eye out for each line in each avenue representing an indiviudal if two people are involved with the reading, one line for each. Sort of showing two perspectives of the same situation.