Base Card in Reading

[Barleywine]

WOW. . .
This is a new concept for me but as I read the thread it turns into a new set of tools for a more insightful reading . . .

Being a curious dabbler I have looked into some pared down bare bones numerology that might be either just enough for inspiration or dangerous . . .

I see the usage of quintessence and sums required and definitely an option to clarify and unify. Now if you were to reduce the quintessence down to a single digit wouldn't this then relate to the meaning of that number -might even relate to the querent's birth number - and therefore wouldn't one stop at not reducing 11 or 22.

I never knew about the possible relationship between the spread and the shadow/base card on the bottom of the deck. If there was a relationship between this card and the quintessence - might it not be related between the card's number and the quintessence.

OK . . . am I just over thinking things . . .
Jim

I used to just reduce it down to the lowest possible number numerologically, but that only leaves you with nine possible "quint" cards. Someone here mentioned "casting out nines" as another way, in which you stop when you get below 22. I've decided to look at the Trumps derived in both ways to see which one has the most to say about the rest of the reading. I don't try to "force-fit" one if the other seems to make more sense, although since they're tied numerologically you could probably look at both for insight. I'm kind of lukewarm about using them in the first place, and only do so when the main outcome is inconclusive.

Here's a list of the astrological correspondences for the "higher" and "lower" card of each set. There could be some interesting stories to tell by winding together the card meanings and the astrological associations of both (or in one case all three) of the cards.

21 = World = Saturn/3 = Empess = Venus
20 = Judgement = Elemental Fire/2 = High Priestess = Moon
19 = Sun = Sun/10 = Wheel of Fortune = Jupiter/1 = Magician = Mercury
18 = Moon = Pisces/9 = Hermit = Virgo
17 = Star = Aquarius/8 = Strength = Leo
16 = Tower = Mars/7 = Chariot = Cancer
15 = Devil = Capricorn/6 = Lovers = Gemini
14 = Temperance = Sagittarius/5 = Hierophant = Taurus
13 = Death = Scorpio/4 = Emperor = Aries
12 = Hanged Man = Elemental Water/3 = Empress = Venus
11 = Justice = Libra/2 = High Priestes = Moon
10 = Wheel of Fortune = Jupiter/1 = Magician = Mercury

Some of these you won't get directly by reduction without having a fairly large initial sum; for example, 91, 82, 73, 64, 55, 46, 37 and 28 could all give you the Wheel of Fortune directly without going through the Sun to get there. And you can never get to zero (the Fool) this way unless you use subtraction for reversed cards, or just consider the Fool to be Trump #22.

 

[G6]

Yes, the Quint is the formal term of Sum. I use to call it the sum all the time, until I realized that most people are probably searching the forums utilizing the term Quint, so I started using that term.



I'm one of the odd balls that would do this differently:

8 + 9 - 10 = 7/Chariot

Additionally, if I do look at the base card, I sometimes view it as something that will happen next that the querent is not aware of.

Yeah! Now we're getting somewhere! The Quint is the formal term of the Sum, thanks Amanda!

Interesting the card on the bottom of the deck is neither and essence or a shadow card for you, but what is coming up next.

Lastly, why are you calculating Strength as 8 and why subtract the last card. Would you explain your quint formula and give another example? Thanks!

 

[Amanda]

Yeah! Now we're getting somewhere! The Quint is the formal term of the Sum, thanks Amanda!

Interesting the card on the bottom of the deck is neither and essence or a shadow card for you, but what is coming up next.

Lastly, why are you calculating Strength as 8 and why subtract the last card. Would you explain your quint formula and give another example? Thanks!

Sure! I'm most familiar with RWS so Strength is 8 for me. However, I consider this by the deck. If Strength is 11 in the deck I'm using, then I calculate it as 11. I'm also one of those people that doesn't count the court cards (because they don't come with numbers on them, and I'm more likely to read them as other people).

Another example would be:

3 of Swords RX + Page of Wands + World + Emperor + 5 of Cups

-3 + 21 + 4 + 5 = 27; 2 + 7 = 9/Hermit

 

[G6]

Sure! I'm most familiar with RWS so Strength is 8 for me. However, I consider this by the deck. If Strength is 11 in the deck I'm using, then I calculate it as 11. I'm also one of those people that doesn't count the court cards (because they don't come with numbers on them, and I'm more likely to read them as other people).

Another example would be:

3 of Swords RX + Page of Wands + World + Emperor + 5 of Cups

-3 + 21 + 4 + 5 = 27; 2 + 7 = 9/Hermit

Thanks, I get it subtract the reversals. Do you always calculate the quint and how does it work for you usually in terms of additional meaning?

 

[starrystarrynight]

Is the base card for you the one on the bottom of the deck, which is different from the quint or sum, but essentially the same thing, right?

Looking at the base card as what is on the bottom of the deck is an easier way to accomplish the same goal of adding up the cards to calculate the quint or sum.

Or do some differentiate by the card on the bottom of the deck is the shadow something hidden, which is different from the quint or sum as the essence if you calculate?

Is this how you all see it?

The base card for me is the card on the bottom of the deck, which I look at after shuffle and throw.

Edited to add: I haven't read every single post here, so if this has all been said already, sorry for the repeat.

The quintessential (quint) is reached by adding all the numerical values of the cards in the spread--except court cards--for the way I read them. I always take the positive values of the cards for adding (I don't read using reversals--I use elemental dignities.) Amanda considers the reversed cards as being negative values in her addition, if I remember correctly, but I'd never heard of doing it that way before. Still, her readings are awesome, so it works for her. You would have to determine beforehand just how you are going to figure your quint, if using one. I would suspect the "Sum" card is just another name for the quint card value.

I don't usually figure a quintessential number in a reading. I would only do that if the reading seems muddled to me for whatever reason. I DO look at numerical values of individual cards in a spread, however. Often patterns stand out--or multiples--and those things give me a lot of insight into readings, as well.

 

[Amanda]

Thanks, I get it subtract the reversals. Do you always calculate the quint and how does it work for you usually in terms of additional meaning?

I usually do consider it, yes. I tend to utilize it as means to amplify the meaning of the card actually drawn. If I had:

9 of Wands + Knight of Wands + Queen of Cups
Quint: Hermit

The Hermit and the 9 are both 9s; they have 'single' or 'alone' or 'personal' in common.

The Hermit and the Knight of Wands have travel in common.

The Hermit and the Queen of Cups have 'insight' or 'reflection' in common.

Doing this gives you a clearer idea of what aspect of each card is coming in to play.

 

[Amanda]

Amanda considers the reversed cards as being negative values in her addition, if I remember correctly, but I'd never heard of doing it that way before. Still, her readings are awesome, so it works for her.

Thanks starry!
I am the culprit of starting the trend of subtracting reversals because I was primarily a reversal-user and when I went on my upright-only binge and learned of things like Quints and elements, I wasn't satisfied that the Fool was neglected in Quint calculations -- and me being a stickler for the numbers on the cards, I wasn't a big fan of assigning him #22 either. So, I'm the culprit behind that one -- I didn't read it anywhere -- the 'norm' for calculating the Quint just didn't make sense to me to neglect the Fool or reversed Quints, so that was my solution to remedy that, by subtracting the reversals. As far as I know it's not in a book anywhere or accepted by any 'experts' but it does seem to work for me, and I've been doing it pretty much ever since I thought of it.

 

[Barleywine]

Thanks starry!
I am the culprit of starting the trend of subtracting reversals because I was primarily a reversal-user and when I went on my upright-only binge and learned of things like Quints and elements, I wasn't satisfied that the Fool was neglected in Quint calculations -- and me being a stickler for the numbers on the cards, I wasn't a big fan of assigning him #22 either. So, I'm the culprit behind that one -- I didn't read it anywhere -- the 'norm' for calculating the Quint just didn't make sense to me to neglect the Fool or reversed Quints, so that was my solution to remedy that, by subtracting the reversals. As far as I know it's not in a book anywhere or accepted by any 'experts' but it does seem to work for me, and I've been doing it pretty much ever since I thought of it.

My previous way of handling the Fool was to just consider it as "apart" from the rest of the Trumps, as some writers do who make a "3 X 7" grid out of the 21 Trumps (I - XXI) and stick the Fool above them. But Amanda's method does make more sense; even if I choose not to read the reversals as part of the spread, I still calculate the quint wih them. It can also give a reversed quint card, which can be useful in some cases. I'm one who does give the court cards numbers (11-14) since they're still part of their 14-card suit, and it makes no difference to me in the quint calculation whether or not they represent people in the reading. I see the quint as a mathematical abstraction or "take-off" using all of the cards on the table. I don't exclude any of them.

 

[nord_drache]

I used to just reduce it down to the lowest possible number numerologically, but that only leaves you with nine possible "quint" cards. Someone here mentioned "casting out nines" as another way, in which you stop when you get below 22. I've decided to look at the Trumps derived in both ways to see which one has the most to say about the rest of the reading. I don't try to "force-fit" one if the other seems to make more sense, although since they're tied numerologically you could probably look at both for insight. I'm kind of lukewarm about using them in the first place, and only do so when the main outcome is inconclusive. . .
. . .Some of these you won't get directly by reduction without having a fairly large initial sum; for example, 91, 82, 73, 64, 55, 46, 37 and 28 could all give you the Wheel of Fortune directly without going through the Sun to get there. And you can never get to zero (the Fool) this way unless you use subtraction for reversed cards, or just consider the Fool to be Trump #22.

Last night I tried a reading using the addition of quintessence and (just because I am who I am) dropped the bottom card onto the table face down.
WOW!
Since this isn't the my readings section I will jump to the gist of things . . .
(here is the reading
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?p=4275665#post4275665 )
I could tell by the reading the issue was about myself. When I did my "sums" I looked at it in all 3 ways and all related.
Using reversals I got 5 - a number close to my heart - the hierophant which I have used as a Significator for myself ( a Taurus).
If I treat the Fool as 22 that's the card I get.
If I used him as 0 and subtract 9 I get Death.

and then since this seems to relate to my plans in the works my shadow card was King of cups . . .

So all in all,
WOW, a tool I will definately use.
Jim

 

[G6]

I usually do consider it, yes. I tend to utilize it as means to amplify the meaning of the card actually drawn. If I had:

9 of Wands + Knight of Wands + Queen of Cups
Quint: Hermit

The Hermit and the 9 are both 9s; they have 'single' or 'alone' or 'personal' in common.

The Hermit and the Knight of Wands have travel in common.

The Hermit and the Queen of Cups have 'insight' or 'reflection' in common.

Doing this gives you a clearer idea of what aspect of each card is coming in to play.

This is really valuable insight, Amanda. Thank you for sharing. Advanced layers of meaning I will eventually like to consider because as you mention it would likely lead to a more accurate interpretation/understanding. Thanks!!!