Minderwiz
The Tarot and Astrological Correspondences
My theme in this week is the astrological correspondences of the Major Arcana. I don’t intend to provide definitive answers, but I do want to stimulate you into considering whether such correspondences are valid for Tarot (and indeed Astrology).
To start with look at this table drawn from Stuart Kaplan’s The Encyclopaedia of Tarot, Volume 1.
http://www.standishastrology.co.uk/page2.html
Kaplan’s comment on this table is simply that it shows ‘the divergent viewpoints are obvious’, with the implication that it simply comes down to personal opinion and that there’s nothing more worth writing about. Nevertheless despite Kaplan, the attempt to identify clear links is widespread and you will find many threads on Aeclectic to that effect.
All of the writers that Kaplan uses lived between the mid eighteenth century and the early twentieth century. That’s significant in terms of the history of Astrology in the West. From the late seventeenth century till the early twentieth century Astrology was very much out of fashion. In the seventeenth century it was taught in universities and indeed was the underlying rationale behind the practice of medicine (see Nicholas Culpepper’s ‘Astrological Judgement of Diseases from the Decumbiture of the Sick’ or Richard Saunders’ The Astrological Judgement and Practice of Physick’) but the Rationalist revolution in Science and William Harvey’s demonstration of the circulation of the blood, ended Astrology as a serious academic discipline.
By the mid eighteenth century only occultists made any use of Astrology and then their learning was impeded by the lack of practising astrologers. This situation held until the early twentieth century when gradually the revival led by Alan Leo took place but even then only grudgingly. It still is a very long way from the acceptance that it had in the mid seventeenth century. So the list of authors is a list of people whose astrological knowledge was probably rudimentary and who certainly had an obsession with it’s supposed Egyptian roots (Horoscopic Astrology – using charts set for a time and place – did arise in Alexandria around the beginning of the first millenium but by then it was a Greek colony and the Astrologers spoke and wrote in Greek).
There was clearly a problem with associating 22 Major Arcana cards with planets and signs, or at least there was in the period Kaplan uses. Astrologers used the seven visible planets and twelve signs, which gives only 19 possible correspondences, even if you believe that the signs and planets are totally independent. So at least three cards have to have no correspondence or correspondences have to be based, on combinations of planets and signs or have to be used more than once.
This does not invalidate the use of correspondences but it does demand that you think of which cards do not have a correspondence. Crowley attempts to get round this problem by introducing the use of the four elements, Fire, Earth, Air and Water. Again though this begs the question as to whether the elements are independent of planets and signs.
Astrology assigns the elements to four groups of three planets – the Triplicities. Thus ‘Air’ is the group of Gemini, Libra, Aquarius – all three are equally airy, there difference is based on a second characteristic of signs, their relationship to the equinoxes or solstices. Aries marks the March equinox, Cancer the June solstice, Libra the September equinox and Capricorn the December solstice.
Also absent from the suggested correspondences is any reference to astrological houses, the key concept in interpreting an astrological chart, nor is the Part of Fortune used in these correspondences.
To conclude this opening post I’m going to set you an exercise that will run through the week. You will need your chosen deck plus some descriptors of the planets and signs. Choose up to 5 Major Arcana cards. Check with the notes that came with your deck as to whether the designer has allocated astrological correspondences.
Exercise
Using your chosen cards the notes of the deck, Kaplan’s table and the resources post, see if you feel that there is a correspondence between planets or signs and the cards. I would advise you to use only the seven visible planets at this stage, unless the designer has specifically included reference to the outer planets or other objects. What matters is whether you can see a link and that you find it helpful in interpreting the card. There’s no right or wrong answer and feel free to disagree with the deck designer if you want. Try doing one card per day
I’d love to hear any conclusions that you reach and of course any queries or questions I’ll try to answer. The following posts gives links to some resources and provide some background but also feel free to ask any questions or raise any issues that you have. Remember there are no right answers, only helpful answers.
My theme in this week is the astrological correspondences of the Major Arcana. I don’t intend to provide definitive answers, but I do want to stimulate you into considering whether such correspondences are valid for Tarot (and indeed Astrology).
To start with look at this table drawn from Stuart Kaplan’s The Encyclopaedia of Tarot, Volume 1.
http://www.standishastrology.co.uk/page2.html
Kaplan’s comment on this table is simply that it shows ‘the divergent viewpoints are obvious’, with the implication that it simply comes down to personal opinion and that there’s nothing more worth writing about. Nevertheless despite Kaplan, the attempt to identify clear links is widespread and you will find many threads on Aeclectic to that effect.
All of the writers that Kaplan uses lived between the mid eighteenth century and the early twentieth century. That’s significant in terms of the history of Astrology in the West. From the late seventeenth century till the early twentieth century Astrology was very much out of fashion. In the seventeenth century it was taught in universities and indeed was the underlying rationale behind the practice of medicine (see Nicholas Culpepper’s ‘Astrological Judgement of Diseases from the Decumbiture of the Sick’ or Richard Saunders’ The Astrological Judgement and Practice of Physick’) but the Rationalist revolution in Science and William Harvey’s demonstration of the circulation of the blood, ended Astrology as a serious academic discipline.
By the mid eighteenth century only occultists made any use of Astrology and then their learning was impeded by the lack of practising astrologers. This situation held until the early twentieth century when gradually the revival led by Alan Leo took place but even then only grudgingly. It still is a very long way from the acceptance that it had in the mid seventeenth century. So the list of authors is a list of people whose astrological knowledge was probably rudimentary and who certainly had an obsession with it’s supposed Egyptian roots (Horoscopic Astrology – using charts set for a time and place – did arise in Alexandria around the beginning of the first millenium but by then it was a Greek colony and the Astrologers spoke and wrote in Greek).
There was clearly a problem with associating 22 Major Arcana cards with planets and signs, or at least there was in the period Kaplan uses. Astrologers used the seven visible planets and twelve signs, which gives only 19 possible correspondences, even if you believe that the signs and planets are totally independent. So at least three cards have to have no correspondence or correspondences have to be based, on combinations of planets and signs or have to be used more than once.
This does not invalidate the use of correspondences but it does demand that you think of which cards do not have a correspondence. Crowley attempts to get round this problem by introducing the use of the four elements, Fire, Earth, Air and Water. Again though this begs the question as to whether the elements are independent of planets and signs.
Astrology assigns the elements to four groups of three planets – the Triplicities. Thus ‘Air’ is the group of Gemini, Libra, Aquarius – all three are equally airy, there difference is based on a second characteristic of signs, their relationship to the equinoxes or solstices. Aries marks the March equinox, Cancer the June solstice, Libra the September equinox and Capricorn the December solstice.
Also absent from the suggested correspondences is any reference to astrological houses, the key concept in interpreting an astrological chart, nor is the Part of Fortune used in these correspondences.
To conclude this opening post I’m going to set you an exercise that will run through the week. You will need your chosen deck plus some descriptors of the planets and signs. Choose up to 5 Major Arcana cards. Check with the notes that came with your deck as to whether the designer has allocated astrological correspondences.
Exercise
Using your chosen cards the notes of the deck, Kaplan’s table and the resources post, see if you feel that there is a correspondence between planets or signs and the cards. I would advise you to use only the seven visible planets at this stage, unless the designer has specifically included reference to the outer planets or other objects. What matters is whether you can see a link and that you find it helpful in interpreting the card. There’s no right or wrong answer and feel free to disagree with the deck designer if you want. Try doing one card per day
I’d love to hear any conclusions that you reach and of course any queries or questions I’ll try to answer. The following posts gives links to some resources and provide some background but also feel free to ask any questions or raise any issues that you have. Remember there are no right answers, only helpful answers.
