reconsidering a cathar connection

[foolish]

So, if this is another example of how cards were used in a satirical and anti-papal fashion, then it seems the only difference in accepting a similar theme to the tarot is in it's less overt format - that is, the images on the cards don't come right out and make any such references as obvious to the viewer.

 

[foolish]

I think it's important to keep in mind that this anti-papal symbolism was only an individual symptom of a wider questioning of the church's policies, which by definition branded those who stepped outside its boundaries as heretics. The many local inquisitions in France and Italy were not set up to address the wrokings of a few dissidents, but rather were a counter attack against a growing movement which attracted large numbers of people. This sentiment could not have simply dissipated with the rulings of the inquisitional courts, but remained as an undercurrent of political and religious forces.

The question remains whether such a culture could have used the tarot to represent these sentiments. Obviously, there is still no proof.

 

[Huck]

The difference is, that the Tarot Marseille typus is a serial form imitated by many printers ... political (also rebellious) inspired decks shine occasionally up, but aren't usually imitated very much.

Recently I analyzed the circumstances around teaching decks from 17th century, they became popular then. Between them were also political decks, inspired by the "Popish Plot" in 1679, which possibly wasn't one.

The whole is either about a projected assassination of an English king or an attack on the Jesuits, who are accused to have projected an assassination. The accuser was finally put to prison, but later released, the king died peaceful as a catholic (so I've read in English wikipedia, ... though I've also read, that wikipedia gets a lot of contributions of the Vatican, so occasionally one must prepared to find possibly not objective presentations).

I quote from my articles elsewhere:

Another deck of MGM Joker ...

... the Papal or Popish plot ... a book has been written about it.
http://books.google.com/books?id=-G...Q#v=onepage&q="charles II" papal plot&f=false

Another version:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3686/is_3_38/ai_n29061228/

The shorter Wikipedia version
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popish_Plot

An English article with the focus on the cards:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~pvrooden/Jo/2010a.pdf
... with a lot of the pictures and these in good resolution, though the deck is a Dutch version.

I'm not sure, that these presentations all will tell the same story and perspective ...

This happened 1679. In the same year somebody felt inspired (likely by the deck about Popish plot and possibly also about related political circumstances) to reflect the Cromwell time, in 1679 not a forgotten conflict.

published by "R.T." = Randal Taylor - engraved by Francis Barlow (not mentioned)
(at the top Cromwell with the devil)

The Knavery of the Rump

From: http://exchanges.history-compass.co...-the-rump-playing-cards-as-historical-source/

The title card of the pack establishes the satirical tone for what follows in the subsequent illustrations. It depicts an encounter between Oliver Cromwell and the devil, with Cromwell suggesting that they ought to ‘accord for ye good old Cause’. It also depicts the arms of the commonwealth regime of the 1650s: the cross of St. George and the Irish harp.

One of the main emphases of the cards is on the low social status of prominent parliamentarians and army officers. For instance, on the nine of hearts, attention is drawn to Colonel John Hewson, governor of Dublin in the 1650s, and to his original status as a cobbler. Another card depicts Thomas Harrison, ‘the Carpenter’.

Oliver Cromwell also inevitably features prominently. The High Court of Justice is labelled as ‘Olivers Slaughter House’, while another card presents ‘Oliver seeking God while the K.[ing] is murthered by his order’. Cromwell is also portrayed in a compromising position with the wife of John Lambert. Many other prominent events, such as the trial of the king, are also included and commented upon in a hostile manner. However there is also some far less predictable content. For example, the king of hearts reports that ‘The Saints think it meet that the Rump make a League w.th Oneale’. This is a reference to a short-lived alliance which was agreed between the parliamentary forces and Owen Roe O’Neill in the north of Ireland in 1649.

Various versions at:
http://a.trionfi.eu/WWPCM/decks04/d03535/d03535.htm

Oliver Cromwell's Slaughter House

Oliver seeking God while the K.[ing] is murthered by his order

Francis Barlow, the engraver
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Barlow_(artist)

Oliver Cromwell
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Cromwell

Some years later the English king died ... with the new King the Monmouth rebellion took place. As still the "political playing card" was living, again there was a new deck and in the course of time not only one.

Monmouth Rebellion - 1685 / James II 1688

Wikipedia-Article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monmouth_Rebellion

Wikipedia: James II, King of England (1685-88)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_II_of_England

Wikipedia: William and Mary (1689 - )

Playing Card Museum: Monmouth Rebellion 1685
http://a.trionfi.eu/WWPCM/decks04/d03542/d03542.htm

Playing card Museum: James II 1688
http://a.trionfi.eu/WWPCM/decks04/d03542/d03612.htm

Playing Card Museum: James II 1689
http://a.trionfi.eu/WWPCM/decks04/d03538/d03538.htm

The new English king was abdicated about this and took refuge in France.

 

[foolish]

I understand your point of distiction, Huck, between these cards which have a more obvious agenda and the TdM, which uses a more traditional or orthodox set of images. One thing that we can learn is that, in the least, cards were open game for other uses. It is left to us to decide if the images used in the TdM were all intended to simply represent the motifs they resembled in other art forms, or whether these images were borrowed from these other art forms to perhaps depict an "alternative" viewpoint. This seems to be the crux of this discussion.

 

[foolish]

One of the cards which, to me, keeps popping up as a problem for many of the more traditional theories out there is The Popess. Even if we use the moral story or the groupings which Michael eluded to, the card just doesn't seem to fit in quite easily. Michael points to the "Emperor and Empress, the Pope and Juggler", but then where does that leave The Popess, which was placed right in between these other cards? The fact that it's named The Popess should be at least an indication of its heretical or anti-papal nature.

Earlier, Mary had brought up the point that these images should be seen in their most simplest interpretation, without placing other levels of interpretation on top of each other. She suggested that this card could simply represent Faith, since this virtue has been depicted in a similar fashion. But then, the same image has also represented the city of Constantinople, so why shouldn't it be thought of in that way? To try to arrive at the most basic perspective, I think to we should ask the question, "If The Popess was meant to represent Faith, then why was it not simply named 'Faith,' as the other virtues in the deck were?" This doesn't seem to be consistent with the pattern of the cards.

 

[Huck]

Mary said "Faith" cause this picture in the Arena Chapel in Padova by Giotto ...

Fides = Faith ... which indeed has similarity to Popess in the Pierpont-Morgan-Bergamo deck.

The picture is earlier than Tarot.

Not Mary but I say, that Tarot developed with an influence of Chess. Also I say, that Tarot had in the beginning other numbers of trumps, not 22. Some of the early versions had 16 trumps and that's definitely proven by the Michelino deck and suspected for two other decks at least.

Chess has King - Queen - Bishop - Bishop ... at least in some versions of chess (also chess hadn't always the same figures).

As Kings and Queens were already in the card deck, the Triumph-idea had been to top the Kings with an Emperor ... and, somehow naturally, the Queens with an Empress. What now do with the bishops? The bishop is weaker than the Pope, so the Pope is the triumph - this is a good "advanced bishop".
Now, if the King-Emperor had a female counterpart, the pope also needn't one: So the Popess, just for reasons of the "right balance".
One could justify this: this figure stands for the church for instance.

Naturally this wasn't everywhere accepted.

Florence, nearer to Rome and papal influence, saw the conflict, and took no Empress and Popess in their deck. Finally, in the Minchiate, they hadn't even a pope.

The older "game figures" were in any case chess figures, not figures at Tarot cards.
Chess during 14th century was a dominating theme in Western literature, playing cards was new media, starting with small beginnings. Chess had been behind the dominating religious themes the 2nd place at the bestseller list of 14th century.
An orientation of new playing card motifs towards chess is simply logical.
Filippo Maria Visconti had an own chess club installed in 1427.

The Cathars in Southern France are not under suspicion to have taught or invented chess.
Often there was a prohibition for clerics to play chess. It was an activity for knights and nobility during 13th century, during 14th century also the citizens started to play it. At begin of 15th century it started to be allowed also for clerics.

 

[foolish]

Huck,
Your depth of knowledge is truly amazing. Thank you for lightening up the discussion with the much needed humor: ("The Cathars of Southern France are not under suspicion to have taught or invented chess.") I had a good laugh!

 

[Huck]

Huck,
Your depth of knowledge is truly amazing. Thank you for lightening up the discussion with the much needed humor: ("The Cathars of Southern France are not under suspicion to have taught or invented chess.") I had a good laugh!

... ... you should have said: but they were Manichaean and Mani lived in Persia and in Persia they have invented chess. No, I would have said, it's from India ... But you might have proven, that Europeans believed, that it came from Persia ...

 

[foolish]

Sounds like you've got the whole argument figured out. Have you ever played both sides in chess? That's an intresting experiment in shilfting your perspective.

 

[gregory]

Sounds like you've got the whole argument figured out. Have you ever played both sides in chess? That's an intresting experiment in shilfting your perspective.

Actually I have - and I cheat...

But Huck - that is really interesting - thanks.