The Order and Meaning of the Trumps

[MystiqueMoonlight]

Just to throw in a few dates which may be pertinent.

"c. 1460 Florence, Italy.

The earliest known Italian examples of the Children of the
Planets prints "probably comes from Florence and dates from
around 1460-1463." These astrological works have been
presented as a kind of key to understanding the alleged
astrological content of Tarot. A somewhat modernized version
of such a block book is available online at
http://www.billyandcharlie.com/planets/hansensplanets.html.
(Shephard.)"

Also note:-

c.1470 P Ferrara, Italy.

Six replacement cards (Fortitude, Temperance, the Star, the
Moon, the Sun, and the World) for the Visconti-Sforza deck
were created. John Shephard considers this evidence of a
revisioning of the deck, changing the content from a
Petrarchian themed series of triumphs to a complex
astrological design based on the Children of the Planets. He
also considers the Mantegna series and the Tarot de Marseille
pattern to reflect this redesign.

The Mategna Deck (Trumps only was 50 cards)

c.1470 P Ferrara, Italy.

The so-called Mantegna Tarocchi, a series of 50 engraved
images in a cosmographic hierarchy is probably from this
period. This series was influential in various ways over a
long period. Cf. the 1459 Council of Mantua, the 1471
Lazzarelli work; the 1484 tomb of Sixtus IV; the 1496 images
of Durer; and the 1616 Labyrinth game of Ghisi, as well as the
more distantly related 1463 Globe Game of Cusanus.

My point with all this is not that the Ancient Minchiate is older than the Marseilles, but that modern decks are a condensed version of what the Tarot is. Some of the "missing" Trumps may simply be incorporated onto the other cards such as the astrological cards for example.

I should clarify that I do not consider a deck of cards to be the actual Tarot. I understand Tarot to be very much on a spiritual level such as Taoism. The cards are merely man made representations of Tarot based on those people's spiritual understanding of it.

 

[venicebard]

Personally, I think the earliest "TdM" cards did not have titles or numbers, that numbers were added early, followed shortly after by titles.

(What you call early I call late, for I push earliest to early in the history of cards, on grounds of content as well as style of dress and arms.)

I completely disagree about the quality of the Vieville. To me, it has preserved details from an older version of the "TdM" that were lost in existing TdM that we have. Part of this is because of the lack of titles enabling us to see portions of the cards that were later covered.

What you express here I did not mean to demean: just because I find it distastefully crude does not negate its rich harvest of clues for the detective. I intend to devour your posts on the subject before even attempting to write my book on tarot, in trying to perceive things to the last detail if possible (short of being able to identify every plant used as decoration in the pips, perhaps).

The "Conver Style" also knew an earlier style, but seems to be a later, updated version. While I think it is interesting how much care was given to this deck, cards like the Knight of Batons shock me in their lack of care of the details. The details were either ignored, or simply not known.

I’m not sure. This card seems to me to be intended to look somewhat unreal: being burnable Batons or fire, the knight or water aspect here is still a projection, one that will become real as the Grail Knight, in Cups.

I think the Sforza Castle cards show two important things.. that there were probably no titles, and that numbers were added. Frankly, I doubt the Italians would have taken the French cards and *removed* these things, much more likely that the French took the Italian cards and added them.

Don’t you see? This supports your contention that the French cards lacked them early on, since the Italian offshoots would not have had them removed if they were there.

I don't think the cards we have can be trusted to show what the earlier decks looked like. I think it is only by comparing all of the earlier decks that we can get a sense of the development of the TdM style *into* what we have today.

To this, you have previously converted me . . . except that I would add the heretical viewpoint that the obvious (or at least clear) symbolic content demonstrably bearing out a ‘bardo-Qabbalistic’ paradigm—in the Grimaud especially, with regard to color at least—can be used as guide. This allows us to distinguish what is indicative of the less-distorted, less-truncated original still consistent with that paradigm, and what merely shows aspects of off-shoots, interesting mainly in terms of art and sociology . . . though that's cool too.

Cheers.

 

[kwaw]

In Children of the Planet series, it is perhaps worth noting that images of both the magician and the fool appeared under mercury, the moon and saturn to my knowledge, and perhaps more that I am unaware of. The attributions then, as now, were somewhat variable. Then as now take, or impose, your personal preference; such cannot be taken however as an historical proof in favour of one's own personal preference [excepting that such is as variable as it ever was]. Perhaps confining a variable to a specific category is where mistakes lie, turning a symbol into a sign, who knows? Perhaps you have hit the nail on the head and your solution is dead on, who cares?

Kwaw

 

[DoctorArcanus]

Children of the Planets

I think the topic you touched deserves a new thread

 

[le pendu]

What you express here I did not mean to demean: just because I find it distastefully crude does not negate its rich harvest of clues for the detective. I intend to devour your posts on the subject before even attempting to write my book on tarot, in trying to perceive things to the last detail if possible (short of being able to identify every plant used as decoration in the pips, perhaps).

hee hee.. well.. I just love the Vieville, and find it very rich indeed. My posts aren't full of much, as you know.. I'm just curious about the history of the cards, I love the mystery.

I’m not sure. This card seems to me to be intended to look somewhat unreal: being burnable Batons or fire, the knight or water aspect here is still a projection, one that will become real as the Grail Knight, in Cups.

My issue with the Knight of Batons is that I don't think any TdM version is very good. I so often hear people discuss the creators of these decks as if they were holding some great secret, passing down hidden traditions... etc. But when I look at them.. most of the time I see hack-jobs.. with what seems like more concern for just getting a deck cut and produced... sometimes adding, often loosing details. Conver, which on so many cards seems to place a lot of care into his cards.. to me really screwed up the Knight, and basically just threw the covering on the horse haphazardly. Dodal and Payen are not much better, losing lots of lines so that one can hardly make out the legs at all. As discussed in this thread: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=52074 , the Vieville, Sforza Castle, Besancon and other decks seem to have had better references.. and produced better art than the TdM decks on this card. My personal favorite is the Austrian card posted by Firemaiden. To me.. this is a fine, fine example of the card, and I would really like to learn more about Trapolla and its part in history.

Don’t you see? This supports your contention that the French cards lacked them early on, since the Italian offshoots would not have had them removed if they were there.

I think that's what I said?? Or am I misunderstanding (I must confess to being a bit sleepy today). I've suggested that the early cards, as exampled in the Cary-Sheet, some of the Sforza Castle cards, the Vieville, and internal evidence in the TdM suggest that the images are older than the names and numbers. I lean to Italy for the development and suspect in France had examples without.. then added numbers and names. Are you suggesting that the images are French, transferred to Italy where they remained unnamed and numbered, and then back to France where the numbers and names were added? Which of course is possible but.. as has been discussed here before.. there is no evidence that the cards existed outside of Italy before the 1400s.. is there??

To this, you have previously converted me . . . except that I would add the heretical viewpoint that the obvious (or at least clear) symbolic content demonstrably bearing out a ‘bardo-Qabbalistic’ paradigm—in the Grimaud especially, with regard to color at least—can be used as guide. This allows us to distinguish what is indicative of the less-distorted, less-truncated original still consistent with that paradigm, and what merely shows aspects of off-shoots, interesting mainly in terms of art and sociology . . . though that's cool too.

... and of course we disagree here. I honestly hope I don't sound sure or settled in my opinions.. because I'm not. I am open to any consideration, and very much consider myself a novice among many of the people on this forum, and a poorly educated one at that. But for me.. and it is just the way my mind works I guess.. I look to the cards themselves as the primary source, and still remain unconvinced that there is connection to Kabbalah, or the Bards, or the Cathers, or the Knights Templar, or Egyptians. Maybe this really is just because I don't understand the concepts and connections presented by you and other members in the other forums.. so I might dismiss it only by ignorance.

But I do confess a *desire* to find some older tradition or connection behind the cards. I'm personally interested in a very remote possible connection to Coptic Christianity right now. I daydream about a connection to Byzantium, on another day it might be to the Sufi, or maybe some long forgotten sect in Armenia... I do hope for an answer that will make me say.. "Ah! That's why these images were chosen, they're based on _____!", but for me, I remain unconvinced of anything other than what seems the most historically likely one.. they were created in Italy in the 1400s for a card game.

I have even less faith in the meanings of color.. the sheer variety of colors used, the limitations of the technologies, and the inconsistancy of style lead me to think that, generally speaking, the colors used were the colors most available or appropriate to the market. Some traditional color schemes were in adopted here and there, but "meaning" to the colors seems to me a red herring.. so to speak. Hee hee.

best,
robert

 

[venicebard]

My issue with the Knight of Batons is that I don't think any TdM version is very good.

Look for unreality in this card, rather than realism, as it is a sort of ‘projection’ of knightliness, being in Batons or Clubs (i.e. crudeness), and the Conver and Grimaud look as if it were a couple of people dressed in horse costume, not a horse.

I so often hear people discuss the creators of these decks as if they were holding some great secret, passing down hidden traditions... etc.

Skepticism in this area is essential, I grant you. But I, at least, speak not of ‘the creators of these decks’ but of the creation of the original TdM design, to which Grimaud TdM is at least close enough for deducing the underlying paradigm, given letters’ bardic numeration, not simply their order in an alphabet to which tally-numbers were assigned later (concurrent with square Hebrew, evidently).

But when I look at them.. most of the time I see hack-jobs.. with what seems like more concern for just getting a deck cut and produced... sometimes adding, often loosing details. Conver, which on so many cards seems to place a lot of care into his cards.. to me really screwed up the Knight, and basically just threw the covering on the horse haphazardly. Dodal and Payen are not much better, losing lots of lines so that one can hardly make out the legs at all. As discussed in this thread: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=52074 , the Vieville, Sforza Castle, Besancon and other decks seem to have had better references.. and produced better art than the TdM decks on this card. My personal favorite is the Austrian card posted by Firemaiden. To me.. this is a fine, fine example of the card, and I would really like to learn more about Trapolla and its part in history.

Yeah, I recall that thread. The Austrian is a fine card. To me, even the Dodal is better art—rather Picasso-esque. But I see the Conver as descended from a tradition of making this knight seem like he is riding a pair of citizens dressed as a knight in some pagent, just as the TdM XIIII Temperance card is a mother dressed as an angel in one. As art, the Conver is inferior to all but the Vieville (which is atrocious: is it Asian, or Roman?), yet what you call ‘better references’ I call distance from the source allowing artistic freedom.

I think that's what I said?? Or am I misunderstanding (I must confess to being a bit sleepy today). I've suggested that the early cards, as exampled in the Cary-Sheet, some of the Sforza Castle cards, the Vieville, and internal evidence in the TdM suggest that the images are older than the names and numbers. I lean to Italy for the development and suspect in France had examples without.. then added numbers and names. Are you suggesting that the images are French, transferred to Italy where they remained unnamed and numbered, and then back to France where the numbers and names were added?

Why back to France, if they were (as I suggest) already there? What I meant was that lack of numbers and names in Italy, rather than being evidence French cards came from there, could have resulted from the French originals not having names and numbers, thus supporting your contention but based on my chronology, which pushes French tarot, at least, back before Italian tarocchi (which I know is heretical, not born out by extant examples).

I look to the cards themselves as the primary source, and still remain unconvinced that there is connection to Kabbalah, or the Bards, or the Cathers, or the Knights Templar, or Egyptians.

This is what makes you an invaluable source of ideas for me, my friend, since my head is filled with ‘preconceptions’ having to do with working on the organization of the trumps ‘in the abstract’ for three-plus decades before ever coming on-line to become educated about the variants, earliest examples, etc., having previously only had the resources of Kaplan and such.

But I do confess a *desire* to find some older tradition or connection behind the cards. I'm personally interested in a very remote possible connection to Coptic Christianity right now.

Here you get my full attention, for the insular Kelts—as well as their cousins in southern ‘Gaul’—had a Christianity that was much more closely related to the Coptic than to Rome. Monastic in nature, the British Church had eastern roots and ties, and this would have been the bardic perspective on religion, a non-confrontational (quiet, monastic) and non-dualistic (i.e. with its Manichaeism ‘in perspective’) form of Gnosticism.

I daydream about a connection to Byzantium, on another day it might be to the Sufi, or maybe some long forgotten sect in Armenia... I do hope for an answer that will make me say.. "Ah! That's why these images were chosen, they're based on _____!", but for me, I remain unconvinced of anything other than what seems the most historically likely one.. they were created in Italy in the 1400s for a card game.

I now think the four suits were probably invented solely as a game (more or less), but the trumps I feel sure were added as if to say “these are the powers that loom large even over your kings and queens and knights,” and even they are in a hierarchy ending with God, alias World, to whom the laurels of victory at Armageddon or Judgment. This may account for the immense variety of Knights of Batons, for instance, that is, the relative age of the suits as compared with the trumps. I am new to this point of view, having been skeptical of it and torn up till now, and even so am inclined to make an exception for the court, since the inclusion of one female and three males is so clearly linked to the Name (vav, a teat-pouring-forth-milk in Phoenician, is the letter of the Name corresponding to the Queen, yod to the King, and the two hehs to the Knight and Knave, neither being female just as circumcision should never be).

Sufis are sort of the Gnostics of the Muslim world, methinks, whilst Armenia boasts about the oldest form of Xianity, does it not? As for Byzantines, their main draw for me is the strategy, often using the ‘indirect approach’, by which they maintained their empire over a truly amazing span of time, considering the forces attempting their dissolution.

I have even less faith in the meanings of color.. the sheer variety of colors used, the limitations of the technologies, and the inconsistancy of style lead me to think that, generally speaking, the colors used were the colors most available or appropriate to the market.

Here I basically agree, except that I find certain glaring mistakes in moderns’ attempts to ‘restore’, as in Jadorovsky’s (sp?) atrocious choice of red for the Hermit’s stick! There is a definite pattern, however, involving trumps containing one figure that is large and dressed in blue-and-red (Grimaud, etc.), for these stand at the macrocosmic signs of the Egg (Seal of Solomon) save at the bottom, where it is offset one sign in, to scorpio (from libra), parroting the tension in the Name (the 8th sign being heh originally, as confirmed by circumcision being on the 8th day). This out-of-balance (out-of-libra) state stands for the tension whence the Name derives its power, seemingly. In case you wish to observe this pattern, the order of trumps on the Egg, starting with aries or up, is: VIII-XX-0-XVII-IIII-XVIII-XXI-II-III-XVIIII-XIIII-XIII.

 

[venicebard]

Corrections:

I am new to this point of view, having been skeptical of it and torn up till now, and even so am inclined to make an exception for the court, since the inclusion of one female and three males is so clearly linked to the Name (vav, a teat-pouring-forth-milk in Phoenician, is the letter of the Name corresponding to the Queen, yod to the King, and the two hehs to the Knight and Knave, neither being female just as circumcision should never be).

I should perhaps have mentioned here that heh was the letter added to Abram to make Abraham and that this commemorated the Covenant of Circumcision (clearly shown in the male member holding her cloak together in front in its trump, II LaPapesse).

Sufis are sort of the Gnostics of the Muslim world, methinks, whilst Armenia boasts about the oldest form of Xianity, does it not?

I meant boasts roughly the oldest form, not boasts about it.

 

[dminoz]

The first post on this thread (from Ross) mentions the "A", or Southern order. I have a question: What historical decks do we know of that use this order?

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

The first post on this thread (from Ross) mentions the "A", or Southern order. I have a question: What historical decks do we know of that use this order?

"A" is Michael Dummett's taxonomy for the orders of Bologna, Florence, Rome and Sicily. Minchiate decks are also of this order, with the addition of 20 trumps. Tom Tadfor-Little called it "Southern", which helps when placing the order geographically, except for Bologna.

The outstanding features of this order are that the Angel (Judgment) is higher than the World, and the three Virtues are grouped together below the Wheel of Fortune.

The earliest examples of "A" are probably the "Charles VI" and Castello Ursino cards (Kaplan I, pp. 112-116 and 109 respectively), from around 1450. The designs of the Rosenwald Sheet and the Beaux-Arts and Rothschild Sheets (Kaplan I, pp. 128-131) also show that they are of the Southern type.

The modern Bolognese Tarocco pack is made by Dal Negro and Modiano; the Tarocco Siciliano is made by Modiano (Kaplan p. 55). Kaplan shows an older Bolognese pack of modern design on page 50.

Note that the Minchiate sheet illustrated on p. 52 is up for sale at Christie's next week! (as are several of the decks illustrated in the Encyclopedia).

Ross

 

[mjhurst]

The Virtues of TdM

Then after these follow the Hunchback, the Traitor, Death, and the Devil. By the hunchback, who is none other than time, it is shown that all these are vain and transitory, thus it is the sum of folly to love them and desire them so intensely that nothing else is considered, since in a short time old age is reached, with all of the miseries accompanying it, and then one begins to know the deceptions of the assassin world, placed before the eyes by the traitor, but having acted on the hardest neck (most stubbornly?), and living sadly, and with difficulty, not being able to hold back at all from nefarious errors, comes upon unforeseen death, in the horror of which, terrified and desperate, he brings upon himself the devil, that is to say the cause of everything (that happened). And this is the miserable end I say, of those who are so immersed in vain and lascivious delights which the world promises, and can give, following madness for a guide, and having no regard to his end, or of God, from whom only are born and depend the greatest goods, and perfect and everlasting happiness.

At last, someone who actually understands the trumps!

LOL! Great quote. Robert wrote:

Ya know... that bothers me. I guess I'm not a huge fan of the TdM ordering, it just feels strange to me. I like the virtues grouped together, not split up like this. To me, the flow would be much smoother if it did go Wheel (or Hermit), Hanged Man, Death, Devil, Tower. The virtues seem unnatural in the TdM order, (well, to lil' ole me at least).

I replied offlist, but he told me I should post... so...

The sense, or lack of it, depends almost completely on whether there is an overall design. Robert didn't state what overall design, if any, he had in mind, so I used my interpretation.

The lowest trumps represent Mankind, with the highest possible figures of human society -- emperor and pope -- directly represented as Tarot's Emperor and Pope. This reading is consistent with a moral allegory, and is actually represented in many other works of art.

This is quite clearly the overall design, and the context in which the lower subjects must be interpreted. One can either interpret them in a manner consistent with this design, a manner which makes sense of this design, or in a manner that does not make sense of the overall design. So far, every would-be interpreter I've read insists on interpreting them in a manner that makes hash of the overall design, but that's not a necessary choice.

The highest trumps represent eschatological subjects, specifically the triumphs over the Devil -- the lowest card of this section -- and Death, which is overcome in the Last Resurrection. Again, eschatological subjects of one kind or another were shown as the culmination of many works of art. And again, one can either interpret the subjects in this section so as to create a congruent narrative, or one can take them out of that larger context and interpret them in any manner desired, making hash of the overall design.

The middle trumps show mortal life, in an ordered cycle or narrative arc. Successes in both personal and public realms (Love and the Triumphal Chariot) are followed by the reversals of Time (or the renunciation of the Hermit) and Fortune, leading to downfall (either Shame or Betrayal) and Death. This cycle, success-reversal-downfall is yet another conventional motif, known as the Fall of Princes or De Casibus narrative arc. This is the life-cycle of Everyman, although most commonly illustrated via the biographies of great men.

Then there are the three Moral Virtues, those virtues which are concerned with the three "appetites". In decks where the three Moral Virtues are shown with the successes (Love and Chariot) the meaning is clear: No level of success, nor even virtue, can protect one from the vicissitudes of reversal, leading to downfall and death. This also was a common theme in the De Casibus tales.

In the TdM order a vastly superior story (i.e., a more complex and carefully designed cycle) is observed. Each of the three sections of the Fall of Princes cycle is triumphed over by one of the three Moral Virtues, and each one is (arguably) appropriate to that section of the cycle. Success in love and war confers dominion, husband over wife and victor over vanquished. The appropriate virtue for the exercise of dominion is Justice, and it just happens to triumph over these two cards. (An amazing coincidence if it wasn't designed that way.) The reversals of Time and Fortune are hardships to be endured with Fortitude, and Fortitude is a conventional "remedy" for turns of Fortune. Again, the placement would be an amazing coincidence if it wasn't designed that way. This design, with Fortune's ups and downs being "remedied" via virtue, is not only analogous to Petrarch's De Remediis but also to the entire tradition deriving from Prudentius' Psychomachia.

Finally, although no virtue can literally triumph over Death in this world, the TdM deck -- the deck with the order we're discussing -- is also the only one in which Temperance is turned into an ANGEL! The winged figure triumphing over Death is thus, quite naturally, a psychopomp -- a guide for the soul after death. The water being mixed with wine (a conventional attribute of Temperance) becomes the saving sacrament, which is also water mixed with wine, symbolizing the dual nature of the Savior. Again, an amazing coincidence to have such a triumph over Death, unless it was designed that way.

The only orderings in which the virtues are "unnatural", as Robert put it, are those where Justice was removed from the middle section and placed between the Last Resurrection and the New World. The meaning of that makeshift placement is obvious, as Judgment, but it is an awkward kludge given that the image was not redesigned to correspond to the card's new role.

In any case, I would argue that although the different orderings necessarily suggest somewhat different readings, the TdM ordering is one of the several that make extremely good sense of the virtues. If TdM, as most people assume, was a latter design, it is a miracle on the order of loaves and fishes that just the right pieces were available to create such a complex and neatly ordered design, given that all the other orderings are rather sloppy. In every other ordering one can see the generic meaning as described above, but you can move cards around and still keep that generic meanings. Only in TdM is there a more detailed structure to the design, one in which each of the three virtues fills a specific function.

Best regards,
Michael