Rosanne
I have been reading A Cultural History of Tarot by Helen Farley.
In the section on the Devil after explaining that the Devil is the only card not represented in the 15th Century hand-painted cards; and various reasons by different scholars why not, she writes…
The problem remains, according to the author, “was evil personified in this way in Renaissance Art and if not, what did the ‘devilish’ figure represent?”
Then there is this statement…
From the ninth to the sixteenth century, depictions of the Devil in art were rare.
And..
Rather than portray the Devil, medieval artists preferred to depict the contest for a person’s soul as a battle between the Virtues and Vices and those that did exist usually expressed neither personality nor feeling.
The author gives an extensive notes and cites various authors with each opinion.
I have read everything I can on this subject and I wonder if I have ground to dispute these statements.
Any ideas?
~Rosanne
In the section on the Devil after explaining that the Devil is the only card not represented in the 15th Century hand-painted cards; and various reasons by different scholars why not, she writes…
Unless a hand-painted example of the Devil comes to light, the only way to determine whether a such a card possibly existed is to examine Renaissance attitudes to the Devil and to examine more modern interpretations of the symbolism on the card.
The problem remains, according to the author, “was evil personified in this way in Renaissance Art and if not, what did the ‘devilish’ figure represent?”
Then there is this statement…
From the ninth to the sixteenth century, depictions of the Devil in art were rare.
And..
Rather than portray the Devil, medieval artists preferred to depict the contest for a person’s soul as a battle between the Virtues and Vices and those that did exist usually expressed neither personality nor feeling.
Until the middle of the 15th Century, the Devil was usually portrayed as a microbe; hardly a worthy adversary of God, there was no literary tradition that portrayed the Devil and there was no pictorial tradition at all.
The author gives an extensive notes and cites various authors with each opinion.
I have read everything I can on this subject and I wonder if I have ground to dispute these statements.
Any ideas?
~Rosanne