The "Soprafino Tarot" pattern

[Jewel-ry]

I do hope I am not jumping the gun here or even going off topic, but when looking through this deck (classical) last night I noticed several things which I thought worth mentioning :

Il Matto (Fool) has only one shoe on - perhaps a reference to his eccentricity, but then I realised that his shoe is the one on the Il Bagattel's (Magician) table. Is the Magician a cobbler then? and what then is the significance behind it?

I love the way the L'imperatrice (Empress)appears to stroke the eagle (?), he even looks up at her lovingly.

On the other hand the bird (?) in L'imperatore (Emperor) looks like he is being ruled, he can't move, he is kept in his place.

La Giustizia (Justice) has her eyes shut, which reminds me of some of those decks where Justice is blindfold.

I would still like to understand the artists palette in the un-named (Death) card.

A man in the bottom right hand corner of the Il Giudizio (Judgement) card appears to have his hands over his ears!!

There is a lot of humour in this deck, I am sure you all have your own observations. Can we discuss some of these? Or am I off topic?

J

[Cerulean]

She might be the only one of the designs that I am aware of from the Dotti/Di Gumppenberg Soprafino designs with her eyes closed and the open eye/eyelet design on her lower collar reminds me of something I heard somewhere about Blind Justice and yet having an eye open...I'll modify when I can find a link.

Here's a discussion on Justice, but no one mentions various historical designs when she is blind or eyes are open, so I don't know if it is a historical reflection of the time Della Rocca designed the deck...

http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread...tice+third+eye

If any Marseilles or other fans can tell me if the eye motif is a period reflection that might have started at a certain period or throughout history, I'd be glad.

I'm a little puzzled if I would refer to this deck as Romantic or Victorian or perhaps a variation French/Italian Baroque . (It may be the searches that I am doing, but I put baroque art and the date 1835 in and come up with many hits. However I am guessing, as my sister gave me a set of art history black and white small art prints from an old Baroque period class and this date maybe showing retrospective art of that style)


Mari H.

[filipas]

Originally posted by Jewel-ry
I do hope I am not jumping the gun here or even going off topic, but when looking through this deck (classical) last night I noticed several things which I thought worth mentioning :
Il Matto (Fool) has only one shoe on - perhaps a reference to his eccentricity, but then I realised that his shoe is the one on the Il Bagattel's (Magician) table. Is the Magician a cobbler then? and what then is the significance behind it?

Hi Jewel-ry,

You're not jumping the gun at all. The details you mention are precisely the kind which help make Dellarocca's deck so fascinating. They are also the ones often missing in subsequent versions of the pattern. For instance, in contrast to the Dellarocca, Dotti's Il Matto is not missing his shoe nor does he have a feather in his cap or the leaves covering his right shoulder. Look close and you'll also see that the creatures accompanying Il Matto are different in the two versions. This is why I think it's important for those interested in this pattern to have one of the Dellarocca reproductions (either the Lo Scarabeo or an Il Meneghello version) even if one artistically prefers a later version such as the Dotti or one of the woodcuts.

And the historical conundrum of the pattern is this: what, if anything, was the rationale behind the numerous innovations incorporated by Carlo Dellarocca into his "Soprafino" trumps? Many of these details appear for the first time with Dellarocca, details such as the eyes you mentioned on Trump VIII (two eyes closed and the open one upon her chest, suggesting that "blind" Justice sees with an inner, truer vision), the urn and fox on Trump X, the many items at Death's feet, the crayfish on a platter in Trump XVIII, the crossroad beneath the dancers of Il Sole, Il Matto's single bare foot, or even the portrayal of Il Bagattela as a cobbler with cobbling tools arrayed -- a portrayal not seen in previous decks.

Tom Tadfor-Little and Bob O'Neil tried to solve this puzzle jointly about five years ago. They posited that Dellarocca's trump innovations might (at least in part) be his re-interpretation of illegible iconography found in previous decks. Tom discussed this with us online and shared their working list of possible precursors to which some of the Dellarocca iconography might reasonably be traced. But as far as I recall, even Tom allowed that their findings were inconclusive; only a subset of the elements could be explained in this way and no rationale or pattern was revealed which could explain Dellarocca's innovations as a whole.

In 2001, I published an e-book titled An Alphabetic Masquerade which proposed the theory that the Marseilles pattern indicates an intended connection to the Hebrew alphabet. There are, in my opinion, more than one indication of that alphabet within the Marseilles, one of these being the letterform shapes which are reflected in the iconography, an historically unexplored area which I plan to present new data on in the future. The main topic of An Alphabetic Masquerade, however, is the fact that the 22 subjects of the Marseilles sequence can be found in alphabetical order within the medieval Hebrew lexicon. Although that lexicon is extensive, I found that a full set of correspondences presents itself only when the trumps and letters are paired in their ordinal sequence, i.e, when the first trump is paired with the first letter, the second trump with the second letter, and so on through the series, with the unnumbered card thus left to the final position. The odds of such correspondences being attributable to coincidence are very high, suggesting that an alphabetic arrangement may have been intended by the original designers of that sequence. The odds increase dramatically when we consider that not only do the subjects follow alphabetic sequence but that virtually every object within a given design can be found in Hebrew to begin with the same letter. The first letter aleph, for example, begins words for magician (Hebrew: AMGVSh, AShP), to juggle, to perform magic tricks (AChZ OYNYM), bench (ATzTBH), coin (AGVRH), cup (ANBG), balls (ASQRYTY), thin hollow tube (ABVB), dagger (AVGRTh, ARRN), pouch or money bag (ARNQ), hat (APYLYVTh), and festive suit (ASTLYTh). A more complete presentation of this theory can be found here:

http://www.SpiritOne.com/~filipas/Ma.../allusion.html

with the trump subjects presented in alphabetical sequence here:

http://www.SpiritOne.com/~filipas/Ma...ays/alpha.html

(Please bear with me, I will connect all this to the Soprafino in a moment!)

This research involved the reading of every page in lexicon sources; two of these were dictionaries which specifically represent the body of Hebrew words existent at the time of the early Tarot, and these were read cover-to-cover several times. This process was obviously labor intensive and mind-numbing but was necessary in order to determine whether the body of correspondences was truly singular or whether a similar set of matches could be found by using any pairing of trumps and letters. In other words, I was trying to determine whether the correspondences were there by design or by coincidence. And, after having spent much time with lexicon sources, coincidence is clearly the least likely explanation.

It was during this research that I realized all of the "Soprafino" elements -- even the most enigmatic ones -- were present within the lexicon in the same alphabetical pattern I had posited for the Marseilles. These "Soprafino" correspondences are listed here:

http://www.SpiritOne.com/~filipas/Ma...says/iota.html

As could be said for the Marseilles, what argues so loudly for the "Soprafino's" alphabetic basis is not just the fact that its hundreds of elements can be listed in Hebrew alphabetic sequence but the fact that those elements cannot be so listed if the letter-to-trump association is shifted around. All one needs to do to test this assertion is to choose one of the busier cards (such as Il Bagattel, Il Matto, La Luna, Death, or Il Mondo) and look for its many iconographic elements under a different letter; if one were to do likewise with an additional one or more cards, it soon becomes apparent that the collective elements of the Soprafino simply cannot be found within the lexicon using just any letter-to-trump association.

In my opinion, mathematical odds and the Hebrew lexicon argue fairly convincingly that Dellarocca's original designs evidence an intentional alphabetic scheme.

Thanks,
- Mark

[Cerulean]

The Vision (eye on girding) third note?

Thanks, I'll check out the deck for more detail notes.

I think I'm beginning to understand your notations finally!

Mari


Chet

Judgement, Verdict — ChYThVK, ChLT
Visionary, Seer (eye on girding) — ChVZAH, ChVZH, ChZH
Vision (eye on girding) — ChZVN
Ornament — ChLYH
Sword — ChRB
Scales — ChRSPYThYN
To weigh — ChShB
Fine white linen — ChVR
Girding around waist — ChGVR, ChShB
Thick blanket — ChMYLH
Embroidered design — ChVTBA
Hem, Garment border — ChYQ, ChBTh
Sandal thong — ChBT, ChVT

[le pendu]

In case any of you haven't gotten it already, I just want to put a plug in for Mark's wonderful e-book.

I found it fascinating and very convincing. Please make sure to visit his site, and if interested, order the e-book.

The continued correlation with the Soprafino is truely amazing.

robert

[felicityk]

Originally posted by filipas
It was during this research that I realized all of the "Soprafino" elements -- even the most enigmatic ones -- were present within the lexicon in the same alphabetical pattern I had posited for the Marseilles. These "Soprafino" correspondences are listed here:

http://www.SpiritOne.com/~filipas/Ma...says/iota.html

Finally, a possible explanation for the dinner plate underneath the lobster on The Moon (my least favorite Dellaroca element and one of the main reasons I prefer the Dotti).

Tzaddi

Heavenly bodies — TzBA HShMYM
Pincers, Pair of tongs — TzBTh, TzNVRTh
Banquet dish, Plate — TzVOH, TzOA, TzOH, TzLChTh
Plate of fried fish — TzChNH, TzLY
Hunting dog — KLBY TzYD
Baying at the Moon— TzOQ HY VQYM
Landmark or pillar — TzYVN
Cone-shaped roof — TzRYP
Water — TzNYM, TzNYNYM
Ship, Fleet — TzY, TzYM
Flower — TzYTzH

Another brilliant research job, Mark!

Felicity

[jmd]

As mentioned by Robert, I too would highly recommend Mark's e.book (which I have been recommending since it came out - and before Mark was a member here).

It is not a book which many will want to read through, but forms one of the most important reference and original contributions to Tarot since Gareth Knight's 'four-fold mirror of the universe' Tarot book.

Whether in terms of the 'soprafino' or the Marseille, Mark's careful analysis is only slowly becoming more widely recognised for what it is: a careful important study in the overall ordinal pattern of the deck.

[filipas]

Robert wrote:
I found it fascinating and very convincing. Please make sure to visit his site, and if interested, order the e-book.

The continued correlation with the Soprafino is truely amazing.

Thanks for the wonderful comments, Robert!

In the interest of 'full disclosure', let me point out that my e-book primarily discusses the metaphysical ideas which I think can be gleaned from the lexical construct and symbolism of the Marseilles. It doesn't really discuss the Soprafino symbolism other than to outline its correspondences.

Thanks,
- Mark

[Rusty Neon]

Hi everyone ... I' curious as to where does the deck photoreproduced as the Lo Scarabeo Ancient Italian Tarot fits within the Soprafino taxonomy.

Any help would be appreciated! Thanks.

[Jewel-ry]

Mark,

I noticed this post just before I went to bed last night and then spent the whole night thinking about it. I couldn't wait to get up and check it out further. What a clever system. I have just gone through a couple of my cards and feel excited that so much of this symbolism can be explained in this way. It makes perfect sense to me. The correlations in the Death card and Sun cards are amazing and I havn't even checked the rest out. I need to get me a later Dotti version now so I can see the differences!

Mark, this was truely an amazing feat, and to describe it as 'mind-numbing', I suspect is an understatement, but thank-you for undertaking this and sharing it with us.

J