What makes a Marseilles?

Lee

In recent posts in a thread in the Tarot Decks section, I was corrected after I stated that (in my opinion) the 1804 Swiss Marseilles deck was a Marseilles deck.

It just seems to me that there is a certain amount of arbitrariness and subjectivity involved. But then, I believe there is a certain amount of arbitrariness and subjectivity involved in many issues surrounding Marseilles decks and how we read them, a view which makes me about as popular as a skunk at a tea party around here.

So my question is, how do we categorize or determine what is or isn't a Marseilles? I don't really mind if we are to consider the 1804 deck not a Marseilles, but then I have to ask, why do we consider the Camoin-Jodo or Hadar decks to be Marseilles, since they also contain significant differences from the Conver deck (which I'm assuming is considered to be the standard)? Isn't this all in the eyes of the beholder to a certain extent?

-- Lee
 

Diana

Lee said:
(......) since they also contain significant differences from the Conver deck (which I'm assuming is considered to be the standard)?
Click to expand...

Not "the" standard. Rather "a" standard.

The Conver also has differences from, for instance, the Dodal, which is an older deck.
 

Lee

Diana said:
Not "the" standard. Rather "a" standard.

The Conver also has differences from, for instance, the Dodal, which is an older deck.
Click to expand...
I think this basically proves my point, which is that there is a gradual evolution among tarot decks, and any lines we draw between them are rather arbitrary.

-- Lee
 

Sophie

Lee said:
I think this basically proves my point, which is that there is a gradual evolution among tarot decks, and any lines we draw between them are rather arbitrary.

-- Lee
Click to expand...

I can just imagine some snooty Parisian in a tavern in 1760 saying something like this:

"Have you seen what that Marseillais fellow, Conver, has done to the Tarot? Those Marseillais! always exaggerating ! [reference to a common prejudice against the people of Marseille] He's changed some ESSENTIAL elements of the Tarot. I don't call that Tarot at all! He's added all sorts of Italian elements [reference to nearby Italy] and God knows-what else from God-knows-where, and it is no longer FRENCH [reference to Marseille's multi-cultural identity since Antiquity]. And therefore, no longer TRUE TAROT."

To which his more easy-going friend would answer: "Shut up, Pierre, and keep playing". The gypsy in the corner grumbled, because she had got used to the old ones...
 

jmd

I suppose that if I was a skunk at a tea party held by skunks, I might become as popular...

But to revert to the question.

For myself, I do not think there is so much arbitrariness as there are, certainly, variations. To use an analogy I have oft made hereon, there are many variations to each specimen of the dogrose, yet there are also certain characteristics that makes each a specimen of not any rose, but the dogrose.

Given the general groupings or broad characteristics of decks, the Ace of Cups and the Hanged Man are usually clear indications as to whether the deck, though otherwise similar, is not a Marseilles, but a Swiss Schaffhouse or early Besançon. With the Papesse and the Pope replaced by Junon and Jupiter, we have another clear general category I believe coined by Dummett (though I may be incorrect as to who coined it) the Besançon.

Other differences between decks that otherwise display quite similar characteristics to the Marseille are whether the all swords are straight - usually a sign that it may be a Portuguese deck - or whether the pomels are actually showing - again either a Swiss or Italian deck.

These may indeed seem like arbitrary differences that are mentioned, but are rather a reflection as to the various groups of decks that otherwise do have certain characteristics in quite similar fashion.

For myself, these other 'deviations' from the Marseille (and by saying this I am assuming what is for myself a somewhat 'purer' Tarot depiction in the Marseille) also indicate and highlight what is indeed a Marseille.

When I have written in critical reflections on some Marseille decks, this is likewise as a consequence of having been able to study and reflect on the details amongst the decks.

A modern Marseille such as the Félicité, the Camoin or the Hadar do not arise from the Besançon or Schaffhouse tradition, but from the Marseille... as does that other ultra-modern rendition that is Major Tom's.
 

Diana

Oh please! Can I please come to the skunk party??? *Diana jumps up and down in excitement!!!!!*

Helvetica: The Conver "fellow" may not have ever existed. Firstly, it is highly unlikely that this was "his" real name, just as Payen's name speaks beautifully the language of the birds. It is highly possible that these "persons" were groups of people.... working in silence, in the secret of their individual laboratories, but producing these works of artful wisdom in a collective form which came to be known as the Tarot of Marseilles.

Ah.... the Tarot of Marseilles. It never ceases to take my breath away. Not only figuratively. But literally.

As to what makes a Marseilles a Marseilles... well, it starts off at Arcanum number I. The little "disk" and the direction of the baton the Bateleur is holding; the number of legs on the table.... .... ... ... ... (...)
 

Rusty Neon

1650 Noblet TdM deck

RN will enter the coliseum shortly. In the meantime, RN would like to post a link to scans of the Jean Noblet deck (circa 1650). The Noblet deck is considered a Tarot de Marseille deck, notwithstanding that it has iconography quite a bit different from the 1701 Dodal and the 1760 Conver and ... gasp ... has a XIII card with a title (LAMORT).

http://letarot.com/pages/46.jeu-de_jean-noblet.htm

P.S.: RN has no concerns that the Noblet deck is considered a Marseille deck.
 

Sophie

Rusty Neon said:
RN would like to post a link to scans of the Jean Noblet deck (circa 1650). The Noblet deck is considered a Tarot de Marseille deck, notwithstanding that it has iconography quite a bit different from the 1701 Dodal and the 1760 Conver and ... gasp ... has a XIII card with a title (LAMORT).
http://letarot.com/pages/46.jeu-de_jean-noblet.htm
Click to expand...


Good link. Distinctive differences in several cards - just look at XVIIII Le Soleil, and - Le Fou! (check out what the dog-cat is biting at there!).

I'm hardly a specialist or even a figted amateur, but it seems to me that only the purest of all purists (a princess feeling a pea) would cast Noblet out as being not a "Marseille". Although, of course, it would never have been called a Marseille in the 17th Century, simply a Tarot.
 

Diana

Helvetica said:
I'm hardly a specialist or even a figted amateur, but it seems to me that only the purest of all purists (a princess feeling a pea) would cast Noblet out as being not a "Marseille".
Click to expand...

Helvetica: What does figted mean? (It's not in my dictionary.)
 
Has anyone done Kris Hadar's course? Jodo-Camoin, second edition