Rejected Aeon?

Lillie

Harpo! :D

I thought it was a known fact that the Sangraal was copied directly from the BoT.
And it must have been the '44, because that was all there was.

Or am I wrong?

Like I say, there was a copy of the 1944 book on Ebay, and it was photographed open at a picture page, and the pictures were bordered.
To be honest it loked like mine, exactly like mine, but with a hard cover (and with the pages in, rather than out!)

I'll have to read up on what he says about the Heirophant. I don't like that card (in any deck) so I never pay much attention to it.

It does seem there were many versions of some cards, and that mistakes were made.
This seems to be a deck with a history of mistakes.

Like I say, I don't know nothing, I'm just trying to guess the answer from the little info we have.
 

Ukkonen

I so wish that I'd been able to see the originals at the Warburg Institute...
What I did learn was that the Institute only has a set of 78 cards (as original paintings), as told by prof. Kraye. I was a bit surprised about this, since I thought that they would've had some other versions, sketches, etc. by Harris. Apparently not.

Anyone here ever seen them in the flesh? Thanks for the info on Lancer paperback edition, always wondered it's history..

Wouldn't find it too strange that Harris would've continued on the Aeon after the first printing, after all the deck wasn't even complete during the first exhibition..

-tero
 

Aeon418

Lillie said:
I thought it was a known fact that the Sangraal was copied directly from the BoT.
And it must have been the '44, because that was all there was.
Or am I wrong?
Stuart Kaplan claims that the photographs for the Sangreal version were taken from copy no.105 of the 1944 edition. Before 1969 there are no other editions of BoT.
Lillie said:
Like I say, there was a copy of the 1944 book on Ebay, and it was photographed open at a picture page, and the pictures were bordered.
To be honest it loked like mine, exactly like mine, but with a hard cover (and with the pages in, rather than out!)
Even the modern Weiser editions are photo-facsimiles of the '44. The only major difference is the Aeon card in the plate section.
Lillie said:
It does seem there were many versions of some cards, and that mistakes were made.
This seems to be a deck with a history of mistakes.
Serendipity? :D
 

Aeon418

Ukkonen said:
Thanks for the info on Lancer paperback edition, always wondered it's history..
It was only a guess. It could very well be a pirate copy of the 1944. Someone who owns a 1969 Weiser edition told me that it includes the regular version of The Aeon complete with Harpo, so it might not be a copy of that.
 

Lillie

It's odd that the 69 Weiser book has the Harpo version of the card, but my 74 edition has no Harpo.

So I looked in the front again.

According to that, Weiser first published in 69, with what was a hard back.
2nd, 3rd and 4th Impressions were 71, 72, 73, respectivley.

The first paper back edition (by Weiser) was 74 with a second impression (mine) also 74.

So, the picture could have been changed from the 44 edition for the first Weiser edition.
But when they came to do the paper back they just copied the 44 directly without changing the Aeon. Perhaps they forgot.

I don't know. But Harpo is definately not in mine.

I'm just really weirded out that I never noticed it.
 

Aeon418

Lillie said:
It's odd that the 69 Weiser book has the Harpo version of the card, but my 74 edition has no Harpo.
The person who told me this is convinced it is all a mistake that can be traced to poor photographic technology and wash-out of fine details. I don't agree.
Lillie said:
I'm just really weirded out that I never noticed it.
Yeah, but it's a good kind of weird. :laugh:
 

Abrac

Lillie said:
can someone with the deck check the Llewellyn Hong Kong?
Ghost boy makes an appearance on the Hong Kong, at least on this one I have.
 

Lillie

No! I don't agree either.

I have looked closely at that picture today, and there is not a trace of Harpo in it.

He's not been washed out or anything like that, the places where he should be are clear and distinct, the things behind him are clearly visible.
He is just not there.

There must be two versions of this card. And Harris' letter confirms that there were two. Though we cannot assume that both of the ones she mentions are the ones we are talking about here. But still, it's suggestive.
 

Lillie

Cheers Abrac.

That's a full house for Harpo the ghost boy!
 

Strange2

I stumbled upon an amazing link which has photos of Crowley and Harris artwork, from an OTO exhibition entitled "An Old Master" from April 1998. In this exhibition there were several Thoth deck paintings displayed. I have attached an enlarged image of the Thoth artwork, where there are 2 versions of the Aeon card, one without the Hoor-pa-Kraat child (top center) and one with the child (middle center).

What is interesting is that the top Aeon painting (without the child) looks slightly different than the image from the Book of Thoth plate.

Here's the link to the photos:
http://rodneyorpheus.abrahadabra.net/diary/98apr/index.html

Click "An Old Master" link on that page for the photos. The Thoth artwork photo is at the bottom of the page. The other links are also interesting, with Lon Milo DuQuette featured in several of them.
 

Attachments

  • thoth_originals_500.jpg
    thoth_originals_500.jpg
    129.4 KB · Views: 124