Where did Waite get these meanings?

La Force

I've always seen the Majors as the cards with the most meaning and these are not part of the tradition of Cartomancy. These are Golden Dawn and keys to the system.

I agree

The pips I see as a mix of Cartomancy and ideas from other people at the time such as Etteilla, Mlle. Lenormand, Madame Clement and Julia Orsini and other 'Gypsy' meanings common at the time. I can only assume they were brought together by a common thread and not just random imaginings.

Yes the pips are a mix of cartomancy, taken from other traditions and sources. I think he brought what he felt worked best as in common thread, not saying it was of random imaginings at all. but on the other hand there are a couple card where I was like where on earth did he get that from :confuse:

I don't believe Waite created new 'meanings' and am not sure where you got this from. I have already shown you an essay written by Waite on French Cartomancy and others have talked about his research into the subject. He was deeply and well read in issues of the occult.

Yes I read the essay, that should've been included in the PKT. seriously, cause at least his essay made more sense, then the meaning on pages 186 - 195.

These meaning have me :confused: but anyway I feel that Waite should've at least made reference to where he got them from. as it stands "UNKNOWN Author/ Resource" or at least have said those meaning were past down by a gypsy or something.

I am not arguing or disregarding how deeply well read he was.

I don't agree that Waite "goes off on his own",he was part of a magic circle of scholars. I don't think he gave as much (magical/esoteric) importance to the minors and perhaps based his meanings on common interpretations.

What I meant by going off on his own, is that he took upon himself to mix up on the meaning, trying to suit everyone. which I my option just sets the road for confusion, because most of them are contradictory.

How can I say this. okay think people are creating decks based of RW and his meanings, so you get decks that are done based off contradictory meanings. Believe me I had a few of those, and they went out the door.

IE: 7 of Swords, Waite even says " The design is uncetain in its importy, because the significations are widely at variance with each other".

and yet everybody keeps painting that image, or something very simular. "Hello people". Stop painting that image and paint what the card really means.

Now there are some of the pip cards that he stayed true to, but the other ones just send mixed messages.

I hope you are understanding what I am trying desperately to say, that in my head. (well, my brain could be miss firing again, wouldn't be anything new.)

In Distinction between the Greater and Lesser Arcana,Waite says:

"...their utter distinction from the Trumps Major is shewn by their conventional character. Let the reader compare them with symbols like the Fool, the High Priestess, the Hierophant, or--almost without exception--with any in the previous sequence, and he will discern my meaning. There is no especial idea connected on the surface with the ordinary court cards... We seem to have passed away utterly from the region of higher meanings illustrated by living pictures. There in was a period, however, when the numbered cards were also pictures, but such devices were sporadic inventions of particular artists and were either conventional designs of the typical or allegorical kind, distinct from what is understood by symbolism, or they were illustrations--shall we say?--of manners, customs and periods. They were, in a word, adornments, and as such they did nothing to raise the significance of the Lesser Arcana to the plane of the Trumps Major; moreover, such variations are exceedingly few. This notwithstanding, there are vague rumours concerning a higher meaning in the minor cards, but nothing has so far transpired, even within the sphere of prudence which belongs to the most occult circles; these, it is true, have certain variants in respect of divinatory values, but I have not heard that in practice they offer better results..."

Waite goes on to say and quite explicitly so:

" I shall recognize at once that the Trumps Major belong to the divine dealings of philosophy, but all that follows to fortune-telling..."

And finally,

"... it is only necessary to add that the difference between the fifty-six Lesser Arcana and ordinary playing-cards is not only essentially slight, because the substitution of Cups for Hearts, and so forth, constitutes an accidental variation, but because the presence of a Knight in each of the four suits was characteristic at one time of many ordinary packs, when this personage usually replaced the Queen. In the rectified Tarot which illustrates the present handbook, all numbered cards of the Lesser Arcana--the Aces only excepted--are furnished with figures or pictures to illustrate-but without exhausting--the divinatory meanings attached thereto..."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/tarot/pkt/pkt0301.htm

Thanks for posting this.

You know I didn't realise until you said this how much I love these cards. I love the Victorian background, the magic circle, the whiff of Empire and all the knowledge that brought from far off lands.

You have to remember that the RWS is the first deck to have illustrated pips. Other decks really concentrated on the Majors (I'm talking about Golden Dawn decks esp Mathers). If the RWS does indeed base the minors on Cartomancy and other elements such as astrology, then it's even more wonderful as that has a long history. I think the common thread that binds the minors is astrology.

So for example, The Queen of Swords which may (or may not) correspond to the Queen of Spades is a Widow. That is a traditional Cartomancy meaning. She is therefore drawn with a widow's bracelet. She also has symbols of Air in the butterflies etc and in astrology is Libra/Virgo (I think).

So Waite makes it very clear that he sees a massive difference between the Majors and Minors and no particular philosophical or higher meaning. He attributes common attributions, places a Knight in and illustrates them. The Minors are not Trumps and should not be looked upon with the same significance.

I have the PCSC deck I love it, it just has that feel about, that why I kept this deck, and rid of all the other RWS decks.

I also agree that there is a difference that he made with the Majors and Minor, this is why I have only been focusing on the minor arcana and not the Majors. I get the Majors, and understand where he is coming from with them. It was the Minors that were driving me nuts.

"The Minors are not Trumps and should not be looked upon with the same significance".

hmmm, Then why do readers, using older deck attach the pips to the Majors for interpretation? This is just a thought, that passed through my head.
 

caridwen

I

hmmm, Then why do readers, using older deck attach the pips to the Majors for interpretation? This is just a thought, that passed through my head.

Because this is also a tradition and you will see many mixed messages regarding this. It wasn't until the Thoth that related the minors to the paths of the Kabbala and certain tablets that this actually began to make sense.

Waite refers to this in the PKT:

Now, I am practically in the same position; but I shall make no attempt here to save the situation by drawing on the mystical properties of numbers...

Papus in the Tarot of the Bohemians, does indeed try to link all the minors to the mystical meaning of numbers of the Kabbalah and numerology and other 'divine' aspects.

However, Waite says that he is not going to do this as it doesn't really make a lot of sense in the scheme of things. He prefers to asign magical and mystical meanings to the Majors and leave the Minors to fortune telling and even says he'll 'gamble' with the meanings.

In my opinion it makes the RWS a lot of fun and steeped in the fortune telling tradition. There are also stages of freemasonary depicted in the minors and in particular the Pentacles but perhaps that is for another thread.

A lot of RWS clones in my opinion, don't truly understand the deck and I find them really annoying for their superficiality.:D
 

Richard

Because this is also a tradition and you will see many mixed messages regarding this. It wasn't until the Thoth that related the minors to the paths of the Kabbala and certain tablets that this actually began to make sense.....
The (correct) correlations of Tarot with the Hermetic Tree of Life did not originate with Thoth. It was known before the end of the 19th century, but it did not come out of hiding until Crowley blew the lid off the Golden Dawn.
 

La Force

It was known before the end of the 19th century, but it did not come out of hiding until Crowley blew the lid off the Golden Dawn.

Haha, Thats why I like AC, :D
 

ravenest

Contradictory meanings of a card ????

I dont get this nor understand what the problem would be with that.

I mean, if you are going to remove a card from the deck and look at it alone ... sure it may seem contradictory. But in a reading cards are read in relation to other cards.

The same in astrology, kabbalah, alchemy ... they are hermetic systems and need to be viewed holistically , for example one might hear that Saturn gives freedom and liberation and is also restriction, form and discipline ... either view depends on whether one is 'travelling up or down' the Tree.

I think it was Steiner that said a microscope is an instrument for looking at something while shutting out its relationship to the rest of the universe ( well, that was before they had electron microscopes ;) )



I hope no one gets disconcerted if the Rider-Waite may not quite conform to what we may hope is true about it. Waite has an unusual way of expressing himself when he is trying to do two things at once: not to actually lie, but at the same time not to reveal information which he was under oath to keep secret. This may cause some misunderstandings. .

Unless one 'gets' this , one is going to have continual difficulties.
 

caridwen

Contradictory meanings of a card ????

I dont get this nor understand what the problem would be with that.

I don't think the post is about cards contradicting each other. It's about where Waite got his pips meanings from. The OP couldn't find a definitive source.

I believe that Waite was deliberately obtuse when writing the PKT when describing the Majors but used various traditional and 'fortune teller' meanings for the Minors, perhaps pulling them together with GD astrological attributions.

It was not until the Thoth (as far as I'm aware) that the Minors became any more significant.

eta I believe the Pentacles are significant in the RWS because they depict stages of Freemasonary - but apart from that,no.
 

ravenest

I don't think the post is about cards contradicting each other. It's about where Waite got his pips meanings from. The OP couldn't find a definitive source.

I was referring to the OP's seeming confusions at post #31 - which seemed tied in to his original question. If one doesnt realise the underlying dynamics one WILL become confused and not see where some of the influences on where he got his meanings came from.

It may not seem directly and strictly related to the OP question, but the OP bought it up and it seems integral in gaining an answer to that question.

I believe that Waite was deliberately obtuse

Yes, again, for the same reason as above ... plus, IMO, he liked that ... he was just that sort of guy .... but how do you write something you are not supposed to write about ? There are a few approaches.
when writing the PKT when describing the Majors but used various traditional and 'fortune teller' meanings for the Minors, perhaps pulling them together with GD astrological attributions.

Its common ; see the Book of Thoth and LWB , there are passages of deep esoteric meaning, divinatory traditional meanings, mnemonics, etc . I dont see a problematic issue of having a card explained on different 'levels' or in different 'worlds'.

I posted somewhere else recently about definitive sources; why do we need that ? ... some Liber that sanctions every view? Like our own personal systems (if we develop them) they are sourced from various things , including our own insights and developments. So, I suppose the definitive source is ..... nature and its processes.

It was not until the Thoth (as far as I'm aware) that the Minors became any more significant.

Sorry , 'any more significant' than what ?

eta I believe the Pentacles are significant in the RWS because they depict stages of Freemasonary - but apart from that,no.

Could you outline the reason for that belief? I have yet to see that clearly in the suits progression ... I have seen random associative symbology but not the suit depicting the stages (I assume one here means the progressive stages of Freemasonic initiation ? ).
 

caridwen

I was referring to the OP's seeming confusions at post #31 - which seemed tied in to his original question. If one doesnt realise the underlying dynamics one WILL become confused and not see where some of the influences on where he got his meanings came from.

Perhaps you need to have that conversation with the OP and/or read the thread. As this has all been discussed.

It may not seem directly and strictly related to the OP question, but the OP bought it up and it seems integral in gaining an answer to that question.

See my answer above.



Yes, again, for the same reason as above ... plus, IMO, he liked that ... he was just that sort of guy .... but how do you write something you are not supposed to write about ? There are a few approaches

Perhaps he was I have not read any of his biographies so don't know that much about him. I think we have all agreed that he was writing about something he was not meant to be writing about.


Its common ; see the Book of Thoth and LWB , there are passages of deep esoteric meaning, divinatory traditional meanings, mnemonics, etc . I dont see a problematic issue of having a card explained on different 'levels' or in different 'worlds'.

It may help to read the thread to get an idea of what has already been argued and discussed regarding this.

I posted somewhere else recently about definitive sources; why do we need that ? ...

No idea - it wasn't my question. I like the idea that some of it is based on this or that.

Sorry , 'any more significant' than what ?

eta Fortune Teller meanings; cartomancy; tradition.

Could you outline the reason for that belief? I have yet to see that clearly in the suits progression ... I have seen random associative symbology but not the suit depicting the stages (I assume one here means the progressive stages of Freemasonic initiation ? ).

Not here no as it isn't relevant to the thread. In another thread perhaps:)