Diana's suit + number method?

Re: suit + number = ?

Fulgour said:

This brings to mind the "Quintessential Card" reading method.
If you drew three cards, being the 2 of Coins, 3 of Swords and
2 of Wands, added together their "number" would manifest as
VII Le Chariot. Readers using the quintessential card method
then reference their interpretation to that Major Arcana card,
and more or less leave the pips behind, but to what end..?

Click to expand...

Interesting. I heard somebody, not long after I fisrt joined AT, said that they added up all the numbers of the numbered cards at the end of the reading and took into account the corresponding Major - but not at the exclusion of anything, just in addition to, like an overall theme. I started doing this and discovered that almost without exception, said Major does give a big-picture idea of the reading.

Shalott said:

I started doing this and discovered that almost without exception, said Major does give a big-picture idea of the reading.

Click to expand...

Yes, this has been my experience as well, but considering that we're
speaking about Tarot cards, any card, Major or even Minor, could well
prove to be significantly revealing, however its selection was made...

Aye, true enough. I try to avoid forcing a card, kicking and screaming, to fit into something just because I want it to, but of course, they usually do!

Bean Feasa said:

Hi Shalott,
Hope you don't mind me chipping in here - I know your question is mainly for Diana, and I'm writing this from a standpoint of being an absolute beginner at this stuff - but I found Gail Fairfield's Everyday Tarot (which seems to be a re-issue of Choice-Centred Tarot) very good on this number + suit aspect. She has a way of describing what you might call the character of each number that sticks in the mind, and clarifies a lot of things - or at least it did for me.
blessings

Click to expand...

YES! The book arrived today, I've skimmed through and it definitely seems worthwhile. She seems to be using Pythagorean numerology, which is what I was hoping. (I really want to learn this kind inside and out.) One thing which isn't in the the Epic is reversals. That's nice to see. She spend at least as mush time, if not more, on the Minors

Thanks for the recommendation, Bean Feasa!!! (which I keep thinking of you as "Bean." )

Glad you like the book, Shalott - I'm re-reading it myself at the moment and getting pretty good mileage out of it in tandem with the LS Conver! And the beautiful Hadar arrived for me yesterday, can't wait to start getting to grips with it.

Shalott said:

Thanks for the recommendation, Bean Feasa!!! (which I keep thinking of you as "Bean." )

Click to expand...

Hehe - I suspect you're not alone with the 'bean' thing - that's why I turned my signature into an explanation. Mind you - when I'm hyper I'm a bit like a jumping bean, so maybe it's not so far off the mark

Coo - kind of fleshes out the ideas in from the Epic.

I'm fascinated by the Celtic and Welsh languages (guessing "Bean Feasa" is Celtic?)...seems like one ends up not pronouncing half the letters in any given word. Seems like it wasn't Anglicized phonetically way back when...hm

Shalott said:

I'm fascinated by the Celtic and Welsh languages (guessing "Bean Feasa" is Celtic?)...seems like one ends up not pronouncing half the letters in any given word. Seems like it wasn't Anglicized phonetically way back when...hm

Click to expand...

This is a common fate for languages that have been written down for a long time, and change in the interim. English is no better, of course, arguably worse, in that multiple systems are in play in English. Gaelic is worse than Welsh. French also has major discrepancies, as does modern Greek.

Re-persuing the tangent with a clearer brain...

Yeah French makes my brain spin too. C'est Marseille s'il vous prefere'?

Gosh I can't remember if it was George Carlin who did a whole thing on English: "big" is little and "little" is bigger. Tomb comb huh?

If I were Empress of the world, we'd all be speaking Latin.

For the benefit of Shalott and others like myself who use the Pythagorean Tarot companion book as a major sourcebook for their numerological associations with the pips I wanted to mention that the Web version of Opsopaus' book has a set of tables of keywords that doesn't appear, at least in this form, in the book itself: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mclennan/OM/BA/PT/Tables.html You can refer to this or even print it out to keep handy as you study the numerical associations between the suits, pips and Courts. This page also has the keyword associations for the Quadriliterum, the Greek version [IOVE] of the Tetragrammaton. Though the Marseille is not the Pythagorean Tarot, it does seem to me that the sources described in the book are more likely to be at the root of the Marseille deck than does the Kabbala.

Thanks, fyreflye. Since getting the book I haven't perused the web version...also with my home puter currently toast !!