Interpreting Minors in Marseilles Decks

Teheuti

Kircher Tree said:
In the pre-GD classical tradition, are there any individual cards or combinations that you personally view as "less positive" than others?
Regarding upright meanings only:

Traditionally the whole sword suit is problematic, according to pre-GD and many contemporary Continental tarot interpretations -- though the 7 of Swords seems to be the best of the lot.

For Etteilla the 2 of Wands was a bad card. This trend is followed by Saint Germain, Chambers (playing cards), Poinsot, Warmoth & Steiger, and, though less difficult, Bellenghi.
The 9 and 10 of Wands were not so good for Etteilla, but most other authors see them in a better light.

The 4 of Cups is usually not terribly good, in an otherwise good suit.

In the Coin suit, the 2 of Coins seems to be the only card in the pre-GD and Continental traditions that is usually bad (Etteilla, Papus, Saint-Germain, Chambers, Poinsot). The 6 of Coins is not good for a few commentators.

Mary
 

Teheuti

eugim said:
Hello Teheuti...
1-One I just think must keep in mind that we are watching the cards from ours place and time,so different from the decks were done.
Eugim - I don't understand the points you are making here. This thread is on the Marseille Minor Arcana meanings so I don't understand the reference to the Hanged Man. It is also in the history section, so I was simply referring to historically what is known about the traditional Continental European, non-Golden Dawn meanings since de Gebelin, though possibly influenced by earlier Pythagorean number symbolism. I don't have any idea what meanings were intended when decks like the Dodal were manufactured. I hope I didn't sound like I was claiming to know meanings stemming from that period.
 

Kircher Tree

Teheuti:

Thank you so much for your kind (and unbelievably rapid) reply.

As an exercise, have lately been trying readings that attempt to turn back the clock and forget about interpretations that have emerged since 1760. So I am conflicted about Etteilla. Not sure if he is the last classic, or the first modern.

I threw a 12 card Marseille spread when Ted Kennedy was sent to the hospital, but before the diagnosis had come out. It seemed quite positive, with a balance of suits, some favorable majors, and mainly even numbered minors. I took it then, and still hope that it means that a good recovery is quite possible.

However, it did include three "6"s (Lovers + 2 minors). That particular combination seems to be a strong negative in my personal lexicon.

Thank you for your time and kindness.
 

Melanchollic

Kircher Tree said:
As an exercise, have lately been trying readings that attempt to turn back the clock and forget about interpretations that have emerged since 1760.

I prefer to stick with pre-Enlightenment paradigms myself when pondering esoteric uses for these gaming cards. This has to with the open, matter-of-fact holistic worldview concerning correlation and correspondences of the various levels and orders of the cosmos of the period, its historic congruence with the game tokens, the didactic manner of image and allegory before Romanticism, the unquestioning belief that everything in the universe was indeed purposefully ordered by divine hand, a personal believe in the necessity of internal congruence as a prerequisite for successful magical operations, or meaningful philosophical models, and a general distrust of last-century (20th) relativism and the total lack of objectiveness in certain 'projective' methods hijacked from the more speculative side of early last century psychology.

One specific application of this view was the use of temperament to reach highly detailed meanings of specific pip cards - taking the elemental natures of both number and suit, and applying to it the characteristic of classical temperaments. For example the Neuf of Swords would be of a Sanguine-Choleric temperament, this would of course be used in addition to the general nature of the suit and the quality of the specific number. The problem with the system was it generated so much specific detail that one had to consult their notes when doing a reading. Single pip cards had over twenty pages of detailed notes. Certainly not the best method for the 'intuitive' reader.

Recently I've been using a 'stripped down' approach to pips and courts. As most are aware, in traditional forms of the game of Tarot, the cards within each suit rank as follows (from high to low):


Swords and Batons: King - Queen - Knight - Page - 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - ace

Cups and Coins: King - Queen - Knight - Page - ace - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10



So instead of worrying about specifics at all, the higher the rank, the better dignified the card is. So, a Dix of Swords is well-dignified, and a Deuce of Swords is poorly dignified. Following the convention of astrology, the better dignified a planet (or card), the better behaved it is. This does away with specific meanings for each number (aka. Numerology) and the numbers are used merely to indicate the rank or level of dignity.

I apply this idea to the simple conventions of the early cartomancy:


Swords = Malefic - The instrument of war. Emblematic of man's aggressions and the right of rule. Martial. Choleric.

Batons = Slightly Malefic - The instrument of agriculture and husbandry. Emblematic of labour and productivity. Saturnine. Melancholic.

Coins = Slightly Benefic - The medium of trade, security, material comforts. Mercurial and Lunar. Phlegmatic.

Cups = Benefic - The instrument of giving and receiving drink. Emblematic of sociability, pleasure, and the forming of bonds and alliances (holy union, marriage, etc.)



Though it lacks specifics, this system gives a good overall structure in which more intuitive readers may enjoy.


Cheers,

M
 

frelkins

ok M, I'll bite. please offer a sample spread in this system -- this seems to imply that certain cards are always bad! do you use reversals with this system?
 

eugim

Hello everybody here...

-Teheuti: I mentioned XII topic as an example of how must we consider and believe finally,in the iconographic details of the cards.
With regard to my topic of the time when the decks were done,I mean that we here at ours time,are analyzing the cards from another culture regard to the period of the deck de Marseilles of Jean Dodal dated between 1701 and 1715 just as one example.

-Kircher: Yes,for many reasons that I don t want to explain here,because we are here at a minor thread,I think LE PENDV card must be placed upside down.I could send to you by e mail some examples of decks of Marseilles.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-Well I been thinking to much about the topic of which must be the order of the suit of the pips.
Which comes first ? / And why ?

A-The named cards suggested that we must read the card from left to right
B-The numbered cards that there is a sequence from left o right
C-The numbered card thus as is a numerical progression,show also a position from a card with regard to the another.
By extension,a place determined.(And that is why I sustain that LE MAT as unnumbered is,hasn t a place at the card sequence,he is out of it)

1-So as deniers aren t numbered I think they must be first placed,as Aces show us
2-The epee the second as it s Ace show that his left hand sustain the sword
3-The baton the third for the same reason that is the right hand sustain the polo stick
4-The coupee fourth
5-The Ace of epee show that them must be placed with the hilt below on the cards 3-5-7-9-10
6-The suit deniers is the only named in plural so the rest are in singular.So another reason for me to place them first

Eugim
 

thinbuddha

Kircher Tree said:
Is the XII IIX switch because the hanging man is upside down?
I would like to see a picture of that one.


I think not....

Check out the pic here. If the lettering were also upside down.....

It the custom in that time for roman numerals to be additive (meaning that "IV" was 6, and never 4 because the I & V are always added to each other). So a person of that time would never have read IIX as anything other than 12- though it is interesting that this particular card is often the only one in a deck numbered in such a way- I suppose that then, as now, people would often turn the figure so he was head side up....

-tb
 

Kircher Tree

thinbuddha:
That IS very interesting. Thanx.
 

eugim

Hello Thinbuddha...
People of that time were illiterate and romans numbers weren t familiar having in mind that TdM were created after 1499.
If they watch the card sequence surely they will place it upside down,even if they don t understand why.
You re right Roman number system work by addition and subtraction so as you said IIX isn t an 8 but also isn t a 12.
That leave us placing that card upside down.

My best regards,

Eugim
 

Melanchollic

frelkins said:
ok M, I'll bite. please offer a sample spread in this system -- this seems to imply that certain cards are always bad! do you use reversals with this system?

Well, I wasn't intending to go fishing, but if they're biting I'll see if I can take one home.

The implication that some cards are always bad was of course universal in the cartomantic tradition, and the tarot tradition, up until fairly recently. Not to mention astrology - Saturn is called the great malefic, Mars the lesser malefic, and so on.. In Geomancy, seven of the figures are 'bad'. With standard playing cards, and tarot pips/courts, the general idea was the black cards are negative, the red cards positive, clubs and diamonds less extreme than spades and hearts. It is as good a convention as any other. If all the cards were positive, the answer to the question "Am I going to be rich and famous?" would always be 'yes'.

It seems rather straight forward, but I'll give an example since frelkins requested one, and her avatar is cool.

Here is how my Great Aunt Opal (yes, that was her real name) used to tell fortunes with playing cards (I'll use tarot pips for the example).

Opal would have the querent shuffle the deck, then she would perfectly, and I mean perfectly fan the cards out on the table. (She was also a hell of a card magician and a card shark in general.) Only then would she ask the querent what they wanted to know. She'd then ask for a few details, for example if a man asked about a romantic interest she would ask how old the girl was, how far away she lived, etc.. Then Opal would say,

"Pick a card."

The querent would pick a card from the 'fan'. So let's say the man asked,

"Will I have a relationship with Betty Lou?"

He draws the Wheet (8) of Swords. Opal would simply say,

"Doesn't look too good, Raymond.."

If that's all Raymond wanted to know, that's all Opal would say. But if the querent pursued the issue, Opal would oblige them. So Raymond might say,

"Why the heck not??"

Opal would say,

"Pick another card."

He pulls the Sice (6) of Cups. Opal would say,

"Well somebody is already having a pretty good time, is it you Raymond? You been prowling down at Ms. Haddy's again?" (The local bordello.)

"Heck no Opal!!"

"Well, I guess it's her then. She's got a beau!"

"Is it that fella from Conroe?

"Don't know Raymond."

"Well... How long is it gonna last?"

"Pick another card."

He pulls the Sept (7) of Swords. (Now this is a 'bad' card, so it will suggest what ever timing is 'bad' for the querent, the number suggesting to what degree. For Raymond here a 'long time' is bad.) Opal says,

"Quite a while longer I'm afraid. How 'bout a cup a coffee?"

Actually I don't know exactly how Aunt Opal would have interpreted those specific cards. But the rest of the story is pretty accurate.

So basically Aunt Opal used a one card draw, with additional cards used to clarify peripherals of the main question.

The only time I was ever offered a reading by my Aunt, I asked,

"What am I going to be when I grow up?"

She told me,

"That ain't the sort of thing you want a deck of cards to decide. Go figure it out yourself."


M