Book of Thoth Study Group #2: The Contents of the Tarot - Origin of the Tarot

Michael Sternbach

I was wondering about that too. That this piece of information is in the only footnote here sort of highlights it.
 

Ross G Caldwell

The question suggested by Crowley’s footnote to page 3 has interested me since it was posted. As far as I can say at present, after more than a week’s research, is that it seems that the Golden Dawn’s Adeptus Minor (5=6) initiation ritual, composed by Samuel Liddell “MacGregor” Mathers in 1892, is the first to claim that the Rota mentioned in the Fama Fraternitatis, and “consulted in the Collegium ad Spritum Sanctum”, is the Tarot. The term “Collegium ad Spiritum Sanctum” also appears to be unique to the Golden Dawn, although I have a hunch it must have been around a bit longer (perhaps used in the Societas Rosicruciana in Anglia, for instance). In any case, it is not used in the Fama Fraternitatis.

This finding surprised me, because it seems that surely some earlier occultist – especially Eliphas Levi - would have mentioned it.

Here are the references (links to all public domain sources cited at the end of the post), to the 1614 first edition of the Fama Fraternitatis; Thomas Vaughan’s 1652 English translation (also published by A. E. Waite in 1887); the Adeptus Minor ritual (see Regardie, The Golden Dawn (Llewellyn, 1971), vol. II, p. 220; The Portable Complete Golden Dawn System of Magic (New Falcon Press, 2013), vol. 7, p. 39)

“…auch altbereit sein newes Gebäw Sancti Spiritus genennet” (1614, p. 104)
“…also whilst his new building (called Sancti spiritus) was now finished”
“These four Fratres also erected a building to serve for the Temple and Headquarters of their Order, and called it the Collegium ad Spiritum Sanctum, or the College of the Holy Spirit.”

“…(weil wir uns erst in unserer Rota wollen ersehen)” (1614, p. 113)
“…because first we would overlook our Rotam
“…they wished first to consult the ROTA.”

Clearly, Crowley’s use of the specific terms “consult” and “Collegium ad Spiritum Sanctum”, neither used in the Fama Fraternitatis itself (nor in Vaughan’s translation, the only one available), explicitly echo the Adeptus Minor ritual. Crowley also uses the phrase “consulting the Rota” in his 1903 “Prefatory Note” to the Goetia. Of course, he also used the terms Rota and Taro interchangably throughout his life.

A further, related Golden Dawn innovation was the identification of the book “T” with the Tarot. The Adeptus Minor ritual (1971, p. 228; 2013, p. 43) says “Upon his breast was the Book ‘T’, a scroll explaining in full the mystic Tarot”; Crowley’s version of the ritual (Equinox I, 3 p. 216) has “…hands rest on shoulders, bearing scourge and crook; between them and under them the Taro.”

There is one interesting exception to the silence of “some scholars” prior to the Golden Dawn’s principal scholar, Mathers. In 1892, William Francis Chalmers Wigston published a Rosicrucian interpretation of Francis Bacon (1561-1626), The Columbus of Literature or, Bacon’s New World of Sciences, in which he wrote a section on “The Tarot of the Bohemians” (pp. 178-183; see links at the end of this post for this and all other references) where he explicitly identifies the Rota in the Fama Fraternitatis with the Tarot. I have no idea if Mathers or Crowley read Wigston, but the Rosicrucian subject matter makes him a plausible source. Also remember that Crowley includes Francis Bacon among the Saints of the Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica, so perhaps Crowley’s phraseology of “some scholars” alludes to Wigston and other less explicit authors, who, with hindsight, seemed to saying the same thing.

My research has been fairly thorough, but not exhaustive; Levi, in 1856, was the first to suggest the ROTA-TARO(T) anagram (Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, volume 2, Ritue, p. 281), but he based himself solely on what he believed to be Guillaume Postel’s clavis diagram, which contains the letters ROTA in a circle. Levi makes no mention of the Fama Fraternitatis, or of the Rota mentioned therein being the Tarot. Levi’s follower Gerard Encausse (Papus), also used the ROTA-TARO concept in 1889, but again only mentions Postel as the source. In his list of authors alluding to Tarot at the end of his book, he mentions the Rosicrucians as having possessed the Tarot, and quotes what he supposed to be the Fama Fraternitatis (but is really a paraphrase of Levi’s quote of a 1792 book of Jacques-François Lefranc), which only mentions a book, but not the Rota.

It is tempting to see both Levi and Papus as strongly implying that the Rota was the book of the Roscrucians, but this must be seen as an anachronistic attitude. The Fama mentions several books (e.g. M, H, and T), and the Rota is not called a book, so we must be cautious about attributing to either of these authors the implicit identification of the Fama’s Rota with Tarot. Wigston, writing about the Rosicrucian Bacon in 1892, and Mathers, writing the Adeptus Minor ritual in the same year, were the first to make this identification explicit.

BACKGROUND SOURCES

The first author to suggest that Rota and Taro are anagrams was Eliphas Lévi, in Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie (1856 edition pp. 279-281; 1861 edition, pp. 382-383; cf. Waite translation, 1896, pp. 359-360). Levi bases himself on a diagram he mistakenly attributed to Guillaume Postel in his Absconditorum a constitutione mundi clavis of 1546, but was actually designed by Abraham Graf von Franckenberg (1593-1652) in his 1646 edition of Postel’s work. of the Fama Fraternitatis was the Tarot,

Papus (Gerard Encausse), Le Tarot des Bohémiens (1889), p. 306

LA MYSTÉIEUSE FRATERNITÉ DES ROSE-CROIX (1604). La Fama fraternitatis Rosae Crucis (1613) montre aux Initiés que les Rose-Croix possédaient le Tarot qui est ainsi décrit :
Ils ont un livre dans lequel ils peuvent apprendre tout ce qui est dans les autres livres faits et à faire.
N’oublions pas que ces Rose-Croix sont les initiateurs de Leibniz et les fondateurs de la Franc-Maçonnerie actuelle par Ashmole.

https://archive.org/details/clefabsoluedelas00papuuoft

“The Mysterious Brotherhood of the Rose-Cross (1604). The Fama Fraternitatis Rosae Crucis (1613) shows to Initates that the Rosicrucians possessed the Tarot, which is described thus:
They have a book in which they can learn everything that is in other books, written and to be written.
“We must not forget that the Rosicrucians are the initatiors of Leibniz and the founders of modern Freemasonry by Ashmole.”

ROTA IN THE FAMA FRATERNITATIS

There are four occurences of the term “Rota” in the Fama Fraternitatis, which I will list below. They are quoted from the 1652 translation of Thomas Vaughan (see links below for the pages):

1. “After this manner began the Fraternity of the Rosie Cross; first, by four persons onely, and by them was made the Magical Language and writing, with a large Dictionary, which we yet dayly use to Gods praise and glory, and do finde great wisdom therein; they made also the first part of the Book M: but in respect that the labor was too heavy, and the unspeakable concourse of the sick hindred them, and also whilst his new building (called Sancti spiritus) was now finished, they concluded to draw and receive yet others more into their Fraternity; to this end was chosen brother R.C. his deceased fathers brothers son, brother B. a skilful Painter, G. and P.D. their Secretary, all Germains except J.A. so in all they were eight in number, all batchelors and of vowed virginity, by those was collected a book or volumn of all that which man can desire, wish, or hope for.

“Although we do now freely confess, that the World is much amended within an hundred years, yet we are assured, that our Axiomata shall unmovably remain unto the Worlds End, and also the world in her highest and last Age shall not attain to see any thing else; for our Rota takes her beginning from that day when God spake Fiat, and shall end when he shall speak Pereat;”

2. “…none of us had in any manner known anything of Brother R.C. and of his first fellow-brethren, then that which was extant of them in our Philosophical Bibliotheca, amongst which our Axiomata was held for the chiefest; Rota Mundi, for the most artificial; and Protheus the most profitable.”

3. “…therefore we gave God thanks and let it rest that same night, because first we would overlook our Rotam;”

4. “…besides by instruction and command of our Rota, there are come to sight some books, among which is contained M.”

Transcription of 1614 edition by Markus Osterrieder, at Adam McLean’s site Levity –
http://www.levity.com/alchemy/fama_g.html

1. “Also fieng an die Brüderschafft des R. C. erstlich allein unter 4 Personen und durch diese Worte zugericht, die Magische Spraache und Schrifft mit einem weitleufftigen Vocabulario, weil wir uns deren noch heutiges Tages zu Gottes Ehr und Ruhms gebrauchen und grosse Weißheit darinnen finden: Sie machten auch den ersten Theil des Buchs M. es weil ihnen aber die Arbeit zu groß worden und der Krancken unglaublichen zulauff sie sehr hinderten, auch altbereit sein newes Gebäw Sancti Spiritus genennet, vollendet war, beschlossen sie noch andere mehr in ihr Gesell: und Brüderschafft zu ziehen: hierzu wurden erwehlet Fr. R. C. seines verstorbenen Vatters Bruder Sohn Fr. B., ein geschickter Mahler G. G. und P. D. ihre Schreiber, alle Teutschen biß an I. A., daß ihr also achte, alle lediges Standes und verlobter Jungfrawschafft waren, durch welche gesamblet würde ein Volumen, alles dessen so der Mensch ihme selbst wünschen, begehren oder hoffen kan: Ob wihr wohl freywillig bekennen, daß sich die Welt innerhalb hundert Jahren treflich gebessert, seynd wihr doch vergewissigt, daß unsere axiomata unbeweglichen werden bleiben, biß an den Jüngsten Tag, und nichts wird die Welt auch in ihrem höchsten und letzten Alter zu sehen bekommen, dann unsere Rotae nehmen ihren anfang von dem Tag, da Gott sprach: Fiat, und enden sich, wann er sprechen wird, Pereat,” (pp. 104-105)

“…daß nach A. Todt unser keiner das wenigste von R. C. und seinen ersten Mitbrüdern gewust, ausser deme, was in unser Philosophischer Bibliotheca von ihnen vorhanden gewesen, darunter unser Axiomatae das fürnembste, Rotae Mundi das künstlichste und Protus das nützlichste von uns gehalten worden, “ (p. 110)

“…darüber wir Gott gedanckt und desselbigen Abends (weil wir uns erst in unserer Rota wollen ersehen) beruhen lassen,” (p. 113)

“…darüber auß anleytung und befehlch unser Rotae, etliche Büchlein, darunter auch die M. hoh …” (p. 121)

1615 edition, pp. 26-27; 33; 36; 44
https://archive.org/details/famafraternitati00andr

1616 edition, pp. 14; 19; 22; 29
https://books.google.fr/books?id=fR...=PP1#v=onepage&q="fama fraternitatis"&f=false

Thomas Vaughan, English translation, 1652, pp. 13; 18; 20; 26
https://archive.org/details/fameconfessionof00vaug

Benjamin Rowe edition (English)
http://hermetic.com/norton/pdf/Rosicrucian.pdf

Adam McLean’s Vaughan versions
http://www.levity.com/alchemy/fama.html
http://www.levity.com/alchemy/confessi.html

Levi, Rituel, 1856,, p. 281
https://books.google.fr/books?id=CwUOAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=fr#v=onepage&q&f=false

Waite, Rosicrucians, 1887
Original (colour PDF) - https://archive.org/details/realhistoryofros00waituoft
Searchable text - http://www.sacred-texts.com/sro/rhr/rhr06.htm

William Francis Chalmers Wigston, The Columbus of Literature, 1892, pp. 178-183
http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/009979233

Waite, 1896, p. 360
https://archive.org/details/transcendentalma00leviuoft
 

Zephyros

Wow, Ross, I'm stunned. That was fascinating! In a way, the story smacks of the Grail legends where, in the castle of Montsalvatch where it was kept, messages appeared on its rim. Only the inner circle of knights loyal to Amfortas were allowed to gaze upon it, although the sick were also allowed to be healed by the Grail by looking at it,
 

Michael Sternbach

These are excellent insights, Ross.
 

Ross G Caldwell

Thank you, Michael and Zephyros. I like nothing more than getting to the bottom of things and finding a satisfying answer, and sharing it with people who like the same.

I am continually amazed at Mathers' genius for synthesis, as well as pure invention. The GD tradition has proven so fertile largely because of his work, relying on primary sources like the Fama Fraternitatis and Kabbalistic texts, and also because of the synthesis of everything on the Tree of Life, particulary the Grades and the Tarot, and developing the doctrines of advancement between the Sephiroth along the Paths.

I do not mean to underestimate Westcott, equally at home in Latin and able to study Hebrew competently, but I cannot say much more about him. His contributions are far more obscure.
 

Parzival

Origin

Hi Zephyros,

You have raised some interesting topics that I would like to somewhat elaborate on. Not least for the sake of readers less familiar with the background of the BoT. :)



My own take on this is that Tarot is an emergent system. It's as though a prototype or archetype exists on the level of the Platonic "ideas", and stuff from various sources accumulates and falls into place in order to fulfill that "idea". The same holds true for other esoteric systems as well: Astrology, today a pretty coherent, logical system, was compiled from Babylonian, Egyptian, Hellenistic, Arab sources. And talking about the Qabalah, of course, the Tree of Life that we (and Crowley) are so familiar with, is a relatively late version given us by Athanasius Kircher; it had precursors, and probably will have successors (i.e. there are already some three-dimensional models of the ToL).

Has Tarot fully emerged, at least as far as its basic structure? Perhaps not. Crowley and other GD members were themselves part of the ongoing attempts to reproduce the archetypal "idea" of Tarot as faithfully as possible. Any given expression of this "idea" may be less than perfect - just like any given crystal may not be a perfect manifestation of its underlying idea. But that doesn't mean it's arbitrary in any way.



Here AC proposes a simple equation: Solar System = Qabalah = Tarot. An interesting equation, to be sure, but one that raises as many questions as it provides answers. Especially if we consider (as you have implied) that we don't know the ultimate form of any of those systems. But we will come back to this in due time.





Rosencreutz may well be a mythical character, but he served as the model of a universal man versed in Qabalah, Hermeticism, magic, physics, mathematics, medicine and philosophy, thus combining mysticism and science. Not least he became the model for Crowley who did not only travel a lot in search of occult knowledge, but also emphasized the union of mysticism and science throughout his career, and not least in the BoT.

Some insightful thoughts, I think. You might think of the history of Tarot as an evolution of intuited and artistically expressed archetypes. An ongoing inductive synthesis. As you say, its an "emergence"--a really good choice of word. Thanks.
 

Zephyros

I am continually amazed at Mathers' genius for synthesis, as well as pure invention. The GD tradition has proven so fertile largely because of his work, relying on primary sources like the Fama Fraternitatis and Kabbalistic texts, and also because of the synthesis of everything on the Tree of Life, particulary the Grades and the Tarot, and developing the doctrines of advancement between the Sephiroth along the Paths.

I quite agree, and this is what betrays thesystem as truly syncretic and perhaps even specially suited for modern times because of its sophistication and interconnection.
 

elektrius

this is my first time reading the BoT and i just wanted to express my gratitude to all the contributing members! such a wealth of information and great analysis of the text and the facts, i can't imagine a better way to get acquainted with this work. thank you for doing the research and for sharing your knowledge and your insights.