Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

In matters of interpretation, one analogy would be with the interpretation of Renaissance literary texts.

Hamlet says to Ophelia, "Get thee to a nunnery!" (Act III, scene i)

The literal meaning is that Ophelia should go where she is not a temptation to young men such as himself.

But in Elizabethan society "nunnery" was also, it is maintained, a slang term for "whorehouse". That also fits the general tenor of his interaction with Ophelia at that point, which is a torrent of abuse. Surely the elucidation of such a second meaning enriches the significance of Hamlet's line and is a matter of historical research. It is not dependent on "nunnery" being used with such a meaning, but more clearly, elsewhere by Hamlet or even in Shakespeare. It is defensible by means of quotations from other sources at the time, or at a reasonably close time, or from works of previous times popular then. An example of the latter would be "What a piece of work is man", an ironic reference to the opening of the Aesclepius, defensible by looking at the influence of the Corpus Hermeticum in Renaissance England, and also at Giordano Bruno's use of the quote in a book recently published in England ("Triumphant Beast"), now doubly ironic due to his shocking fate. Again, more history.

There are also lines which can be interpreted by reference to ideas and symbols rather than language, for example the "paradox" to which Hamlet refers earlier in his tirade:
Ay, truly, for the power of beauty will sooner transform honesty from what it is to a bawd than the force of honesty can translate beauty into his likeness. This was sometime a paradox, but now the time gives it proof. I did love you once.
The operative word here is "his". Who is the masculine figure Hamlet is referring to, and why? Since when did honesty have a gender, much less a masculine one? My answer is that he is speaking in the tradition of Mercury's antipathy (as well as attraction) to Venus, as seen in Ficino's Three Books on Life and Botticelli's Primavera: Hamlet embodies Mercury, toward whom we apply "honest" and "dishonest" in one sense, and Ophelia embodies Venus (honest or not, given that she is lying to Hamlet, but also, in an attractive woman, chaste--another sense of "honest"--or not), or so I think. Such an interpretation does not depend on having to defend that Shakespeare was consciously using such sources, as the same could be got from Elizabethan astrology, or the Poimandres. Ir is a matter of reading the play in terms that a sensitive educated Elizabethan would have read it, who also may not know these particular sources.

That is the manner in which a Pythagorean interpretation is historical research. If Shakespeare did use "nunnery" in the second sense elsewhere, that would be relevant. Likewise orders of triumphs in which the Fool does appear at the same end as "Mondo" is relevant in the other case, just not decisive.

Re: Request

Alain had asked for a new thread, I understood for the article "order of trumps":
This thread begin was an excellent work of Marcos Mendez Filesi, who already is inactive for some longer time. Maybe somebody else could open a thread like "OVERVIEW: The order of the trumps (II)" and work on an update of this collection, keeping the first post as a place, that he occasionally updates, if a new document appears.
see also: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=552&start=30#p17047

So somebody might do it. I'm not very close to that theme, but I generally think, that such OVERVIEWs have some value, and help to keep some order of the occasional chaotic literary productions here (more than 16.000 now, and it will become more and more complicated to find earlier discussions and results.

I personally would suggest to create a new subforum for OVERVIEW- or collection-articles (as I called them occasionally, THEMEs might be another good word). Overviews only get their function, if you can find them quickly. But on the many pages especially in the Research forum it becomes more and more difficult to find older productions, if you search them.
Perhaps we could even move older threads with the Overview character in this new subforum.

Other opinions?

Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

The problem about opening a new thread is that it quickly becomes old, and we are back to where we started, but now with two old threads instead of one. A subforum would not have that problem, but I do not know that we can do such a thing. And then we have to know to look in subforums. I personally have no trouble finding old threads once I get the right search word or words, which I usually dredge up from memory. "Order of trumps" won't work, unfortunately. So I have to use some other word; "appropriati" will bring it up eventually, as will the name of any historical writer who presented an order of trumps, the less known the better (Pomeran will bring up fewer threads than Aretino). That method is less useful to someone who doesn't know infrequent words in the ol )d threads. Perhaps we just have to be conscientious about giving helpful links and thinking up easy to find titles for threads that also don't use words that the search engine will say are too common; sometimes that may be impossible, as in "order of trumps". There is also the problem of whether to look in the "research" forum, the "unicorn" forum, or somewhere else, like "exhibition". I personally have a hard time with those distinctions. Pratesi, for example, I always put in "research", but sometimes they are more properly "unicorns", in the sense of containing unsubstantiated hypotheses (which nonetheless may be correct)--for example, the hypothesis that the Rosenwald is a minchiate.

I for one have no idea what to do in this particular case, so I will just use the old "order of trumps" thread, now listed among the most recent, precisely where any new thread would go.

Added later: One possibility: in the "Reception" section, perhaps there could be a short post on "how to search Tarot History Forum". Others have had problems, too. For example, Pratesi once complained that "Cary-Yale" is a term that the search engine won't find anything for. "Visconti" won't work either, or a whole host of words that come to mind. In that case another strategy is to search "Cary-Yale Tarot History Forum" on Google. It will bring up 120 threads, but at least it does it. Adding words will reduce the number. If you search "tarot history forum order of trumps'", the right thread comes up immediately.

I will follow this suggestion, in fact, after a few days thinking about what it should say and what it should be called. Any other suggestions for how to do searches here?

Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

The forum-owner can create new subforums.

The reception section would be possible, though it moves the active installments (research etc.) to the bottom, which might technically not so nice.

For the OVERVIeW from "order of trumps" we could handle it, as we did it in Etteilla thread at AT or as the recent arrangement to find the Pratesi translations: Keeping the first post updated, which only works, if somebody, who is active, takes some responsibility.

Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

mikeh wrote: I have found only one tarocchi appropriati from the type A region that honors the ambiguity of the Fool's placement. It is a riddle, one of a series posed by Giulio Cesare Croce, a late 16th century(1550-1609) Bolognese writer and blacksmith ( Here is riddle number 56 (
Fra gli pianeti albergo, ed ho sollazzo
Mescolarmi col sole e con la luna,
E ben, che ciaschedun mi tenghi pazzo,
Ceder non voglio ad essi in parte alcuna.
Non son’ucciso, ed altri non ammazzo,
E me non può sforzar sorte o fortuna,
Anzi, con essa son spesso a le strette,
Né stimo morte, diavol, né saette.

(I live among the planets, and I enjoy
Mingling with the sun and the moon,
And even if everyone thinks I'm crazy,
I don’t want to surrender to them any part of me.
I am not killed, and I don’t kill others,
Fate or fortune can’t compel me,
Rather, I often quarrel with it,
I do not esteem death, devil, or lightning bolts.)
To which the answer, of course, is, in the "Declarations Table":
56 - Il matto de’ tarocchi (The fool of the tarot)
He is said to consider himself superior to Fortune, looks down on the devil and lightning, and mingles with the sun and moon. To that extent, he is in the higher end of the sequence. At the same time, this is all in his own eyes, a foolish illusion: he is really at the bottom.
Croce also wrote a tarocchi appropriati in ottava rima, in which he puts the matto at the bottom, so I don't think we were in any way meant to take from the riddle the placement of the fool, which elsewhere he clearly and without riddles puts at the bottom :

(There are only 20, no pope or papessa, or four papi - just the emperor and empress)


The Ladies names were put in a jar, and as they are drawn out they are given a card in order, from highest to lowest, and the poet makes up an ottava rima for them in accordance with the card. As well as their ottava rima, each of the Ladies is also given a prize as their names are drawn out, such as perfume, flowers or gloves for example. The first to be drawn out was Ms. Isabella, who won a mirror, and an ottava rima on the subject of the Angel. The second was Ms. Valeria, whose card was the World, the won perfume and an ottava on the world, etc.,

After reading the last ottava rima on the Fool, there were joyous cheers and the waiter put on the table fennel and seasonal fruit for the company. Thus ended the lottery with the Tarot Trumps. Since it was very hot, knights and ladies went for a walk around the villa, while Mr. Flavio sang some songs. After similar pleasantries, having made evening, everyone returned to their homes, promising to meet again every year on the same day to play in the same way.


Lotto Festevole Fatto in Villa

Fra una nobil schiere di Cavalieri, & di Fame, con i Trionf de’ Tarroch, esplicati in lode delle dette Dame, & altri bei trattenimenti da spasso.
Di Giulio Cesare dalla Croce. In Bologna, Per Vittorio Benacci, 1602
Con licenza de’ Superiori.

A Festive lottery done in a country house, among a noble crowd of Knights and Ladies, with the Triumphs of Tarot, explained for the pleasure of these Ladies, & other beautiful amusements to hoot. ... &q&f=false
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

20-40 Angelo
19-39 Mondo
18-38 Sole
17-37 Luna
16-36 Stella
15 Saetta
14 Diavolo
13 Morte
12 Traditore
11 Vechio
10 Ruota
9 Carro
8 Fortezza
7 Giustitia

6 Temperanza
5 Amore
4 Imperatore
3 Imperatrice
2 Bagattino
1 Matto

Somehow a relative to Minchiate with twists in Ruoto/Carro and Fortezza/Giustitia and some upset in 1-4. Well, it's from Bologna.

Added later:

Croce was also topic to Andrea Vitali ...

Strange enough: it's in its changes nearly the same as in the strambotto poem around 100 years earlier (he just additionally missed the pope and not only Papessa ...

I wrote yesterday in the Rosenwald thread:
We don't have much orders from Florence. The Strambotto (also only 21 trumps) is believed to be from Florence:
Strambotti de Triumphi

Mi racomando a quel angelo pio,
al mondo, al sole, alla luna & lo stello,
alla saetta & a quel diavol rio,
la morte, el traditore, el vechierello.
la rota, el caro & giusticia di Dio,
forteza & temperanza & amor bello,
al papa, imperatore, imperatrice,
al bagatello, al matto più felice.
... see: viewtopic.php?f=11&p=17064#p17060

Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

Huck ...
Adrian ...

... :-) ... 1+4+7+10 results indeed in 22

1 - Libra ..... / object
4 - Gemini - Virgo - Sagittarius - Aquarius .... / humans
7 - Aries - Taurus - Cancer - Leo - Scorpio - Capricorn - Pisces / animals

... at least the inventor of the zodiac found 1 - 4 - 7 interesting

… I really ask myself often what it is that drives you to belittle yourself EVERY TIME you are talking to ME?!
That 1 + 4 + 7 + 10 = 22 was OBVIOUSLY NEVER subject to ANY QUESTION – only what Alain did DO with IT!

You just had to read my post on the 1st page here ...
Adrian Goldwetter wrote:
Re-bonjour Alain.

Since I went over your "arithmological sequence" >> 1+4+7+10 = 22 << which should be an "arithmetic sequence" I suppose by the standards of math...
An arithmetic sequence is a sequence of numbers in which two consecutive terms always have the same difference.
In general, the terms of an arithmetic sequence with the first term a0 and common difference d, have the form
an = dn+a0 (n=0,1,2,...).

Examples of arithmetic sequence:

1, 7, 13, 19, 25, 31, 37, ...

5, 11, 17, 23, 29, 35, 41, ... ... cans13.htm
... your "core model" for the 22 doesn't fit those standards in a formal way because adding "3" to every term beginning with 1 and ending with 10 would make the sequence "closed". So 22 won't be a part of the sequence.

The addition of the 4 terms 1-4-7-10 is a step that belongs not to "sequencing" - or does it?
Well of course you could make a special rule for that step too - like you did.

But when you do that and create a new closed sequence of 78 with 6 separate clusters with 1 of them the 1-4-7-10 core sequence at least the "sequential(?) law(s)" for the other 5 (sequences? No - can not be by their defined numerical nature taken from Tarot) clusters should be defined too - because you put them in a closed grouped model. You instead seem to understand them (the 56) as pure variables in a non defined mathematical way - so you should define them all to add some logic to the model of 78.

Furthermore if you impose the "tetraktys" model on the whole 78 in your triangle it is only fully present (of course) in the 4 clusters with the 10 number cards because the tetraktys consists of 10 points. You may even be able to explain the 16 court variables in your model as the tetraktys mirrored in a way. But still you would have to define what court card is where between those 16 points.

For the 22 core model - that is the outcome of the added 4 terms of the closed 1-4-7-10 sequence - the tetraktys doesn't really apply.

You arranged those 22 dots just in a "pseudo tetraktical" way that throws all that you WANTED to BE in the mix.

When the tetraktys is composed of 10 points that symbolize the whole Universe it is per se complete.
You did arrange 3 teraktyses (? :) ) in an overlapping manner without defining the specific overlapping dots - just to make your sequential idea fit an ancient model of renown that would be totally destroyed to it's core by your idea.

Of course 3 teraktyses (? :) ) would add up to 30 dots with 2 GAPS between them - but that wouldn't fit your sequential idea - so you MADE it fit!

Obviously this is all said out of the top of the mind of a layman and I do not share "Andrea VITALI's" elusive standards that urged him to publish your work ...
Le Tarot Arithmologique
... and since you seem not to be keen on replying in a topic that you opened I'll leave it at that.

:ymparty: Adrian

If you should have intellectual problems with understanding this post – please let me know where I can be of any help!

Since you are so deep into the I-Ching right now and dare to draw cross-references between IT and Tarot in GENERAL you should really look up the 22nd hexagram there (this is of course only meant as a "bon mot" dear friend for general amusement and to add some spice to your pareidolia discussion here!


Pareidolia (/pærᵻˈdoʊliə/ parr-i-doh-lee-ə) is a psychological phenomenon involving a stimulus (an image or a sound) wherein the mind perceives a familiar pattern of something where none actually exists. )
Your 2nd statement about the „inventor“ of the zodiac clearly shows how DEEP your frightening shallow knowledge of such matters IS in an alarming manner.

If you should ever want to educate yourself on such delicate subjects I would be proud to be your guide into the unknown …

This NASA version for children could be right up your alley I suppose ...
But even according to the Babylonians' own ancient stories, there were 13 constellations in the zodiac. (Other cultures and traditions have recognized as many as 24 constellations in the zodiac.) So the Babylonians picked one, Ophiuchus, to leave out. Even then, some of the chosen 12 didn't fit neatly into their assigned slice of the pie and slopped over into the next one.
But here – IF you got hungry now for REAL knowledge – is a version for grown ups too …

… and even Wikipedia has material on the Babylonian calendar ...

... where you (if you really DID care) could have found this ... ... dar#Months

BI or KAŠ (for example!) that occupies the space of Gemini is a in it's cuneiform usage a really complex sign …

… that could be used also …
As a sumerogram, (capital letter (majuscule)), sign bi is used for KAŠ, Akkadian language for "šikāru",[3] beer.
Now even you may understand that GEMINI and BEER do not have much in common ...
OK: both could be DRUNK I suppose – well ...

The same goes of course for other Babylonian constellation names.
LEO for example was perceived as: āru what COULD be transcribed as „LIBERATOR“
āru "délivrer"

(but it could be that YOU won't get access … :) ) ... 3%A9livrer
I could do this with every item on the list but what would be the effect (on YOU?)?

Your „comment“ ...
1 - Libra ..... / object
4 - Gemini - Virgo - Sagittarius - Aquarius .... / humans
7 - Aries - Taurus - Cancer - Leo - Scorpio - Capricorn - Pisces / animals

... at least the inventor of the zodiac found 1 - 4 - 7 interesting
… is simply beyond stup … endous in it's own ignorant way and will cost you your reputation as a „researcher“ in the long run – because YOU made THIS „comment“ AFTER I introduced the GOLDEN RECTANGLE which was ABSENT by all means in the minds of ALL „experts“ who deal with Tarot.

Have you nothing better to do?

The rest of your allusions about The TREE go also into The BIN – but NOT for recycling.

It is simply to tedious for me to explain everything to someone who has NO background in these mythical fields of expertise – and has discarded on several occasions Freemasonry and Alchemy and Rosicrucianism for Tarot – just on a whim.

The PREGNANCY thing of course belongs also in the pareidolia section.

Whenever I read some of your older posts (not to ME!) I think that you have so much to offer – but you won't while replying to ME!

It seems nowadays you are much more engaged in folklore.
Well – to each his own.


Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

Huck wrote: 14 Diavolo
Ms. Giulia who is drawn against the Devil, and feels wary of what the poet has to say, but he reassures with an ottava that seems to me to be a twist on the Pluton & Proserpina story.

While Croce does not name Pluton directly, it seems to me the ottava rima associated with it is a twist on the tale of Pluton & Proserpina. However, the Devil here, his heart being stolen by this most rare and excellent pilgrim, seeks her not for himself in continuance, but to show that our salvation flees violation and embraces virtue.

The Plutonic allusion reminds me of the Leber (and several others who identify the Devil with Pluton):



Stupissi il cielo e tutti gli elementi,
quando con faccia vaga e pellegrina
costei, fra le più rare ed eccellenti,
comparve a far de'cor dolce rapina.
Porta lo Spirto rio con occhi ardenti,
non per lui seguitar, né sua dottrina,
ma per mostrarci che nostra salute
è fuggir vitio e abbracciar virtute.

Although he does not name Pluton directly, classical references are also among the other ottava, e.g., Jove in Saetta, Phoebus with the Sun.
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

Huck wrote: The Boiardo Trionfi poem is the oldest, for which we have a clear "22" as number of the trumps (rather different to the usual trumps). There are good reasons to date this poem to January 1487, wenn Lucretia d'Este, illegitimate daughter of Ercole d'Este married ... the highest trump in the Boiardo poem addressed the Roman Lucrezia.
Have you got a link to the full argument for 1487, I remember reading some fuller explanation somewhere sometime, but having searched can't find it. I do remember I found the argument rather weak, but perhaps the argument has been more fully expanded since then.

The arguments for an earlier dating is the poem itself - for a start it is not very good, far from the qualities for which the poems of his maturity are more famous. It is full of the faults of beginners (archaic language, simplistic rhymes, commonplace phrases & themes), and also its imitation of Petrarch is typical of the poetry of his youth - c.1460's.

As well as somewhat archaic Petrarch like language, there is the triumphal model, the Petrarchian women (a Petarchian woman is one that is unattainable, or a model of virtue), the four passions of the soul,* and the mention of the Petrarchian woman herself (Laura), amongst an otherwise array of women from the bible or classic history and myth.


S. Augustine. Do you know what stands in the way of your purpose of heart ?

Petrarch. That is what I want to know; what for so long I have earnestly desired to under- stand.

S. Augustine. Then listen. It was from Heaven your soul came forth: never will I assert a lower origin than that. But in its contact with the flesh, wherein it is imprisoned, it has lost much of its first splendor. Have no doubt of this in your mind. And not only is it so, but by reason of the length of time it has in a manner fallen asleep; and, if one may so express it, forgotten its own beginning and its heavenly Creator.

And these passions that are born in the soul through its connection with the body, and that forgetfulness of its nobler nature, seem to me to have been touched by Virgil with pen almost inspired when he writes--

"The soul of men still shine with heavenly fire,
That tells from whence they come, save that the flesh
And limbs of earth breed dullness, hence spring fears,
Desire, and grief and pleasures of the world,
And so, in darkness imprisoned, no more
Look upward to heaven's face."

Do you not in the poet's words discern that monster with four heads so deadly to the nature of man?

Petrarch. I discern very clearly the fourfold passion of our nature, which, first of all, we divide in two as it has respect to past and future, and then subdivide again in respect of good and evil so, by these four winds distraught, the rest and quietness of man's soul is perished and gone.
End quote
PETRARCH'S SECRET Trans. William H. Draper

Petrarch also discusses the four passions in his Remedies, for Fortunes Fair and Foul

Petrarch's Remedies address the life of man on this earth. Of all living creatures, man alone is endowed with the powers of reason—memory, intellect, and foresight—hence capable of thinking in terms of the past, the present, and the future. This unique gift allows man to consider, to weigh, and to judge before be wills and acts; yet he remains subject to his natural emotions and impulses which, more often than not, deceive the mind and interfere with its findings. Man has to negotiate the inner conflicts between reason and the senses as he tries to cope with the conflicts of this world, the exigencies of life?

This action is represented as man's everlasting war with Fortune, the ancient goddess Fortuna, fickle and inexorable, who smiles and frowns on all men, granting prosperity today, inflicting abject adversity tomorrow—the hidden cause behind the ups and downs of man." The battle involves each man's reactions to the "two Fortunes," fair and foul, as they beset him. Victory or defeat is implicit in his state of mind at the end of each encounter, which, in turn, decides how he will fare during the next one. Fortune herself is beyond these earthly circumstances. Whether she reigns supreme as willed by God, or is invoked as a popular figure responsible for the inexplicable, she remains forever man's existential dilemma.

The allegorical battle in every man's bosom, which takes place in the concrete, particular world familiar to the contemporary upper-class reader or listener : against a background of universal instability and cosmic strife, is fought by Reason in debate with the four Passions borne by Fortune's emissaries, Prosperity and Adversity, two sisters who, at the same time, each gave birth to twins: GaudiumJoy—and Spes sive Cupiditas—Hope or Desire—the children of Prosperity; and Dolor—Sorrow—and Metus—Fear—the children of Adversity.' Joy and Sorrow are concerned with the past and the present; Hope or Desire and Fear, with the future." The Passions afflict the mind, as diseases the body.

In the ensuing psychomachia—battle of the mind—the weapons of the attacking four Passions are their very essence--man's natural proneness to joy and wishful anticipation, to sorrow and to fear. Reason's weapon against their onslaught is virtue and its corollaries, man's power to think, will, and act right toward God and fellow man." Specifically, Reason urges the exercise of moderation and patience, and all their manifestations, as active ingredients of remedies for the ills caused by Prosperity and Adversity, respectively, and rings the changes on an involved system of the virtues, confusing to modern readers, but probably much less so to those of Petrarch's time."

End quote
"Petrarch's Remedies, for Fortunes Fair and Foul" p.xxiii, Trans. Conrad H. Rawski
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: Le Tarot arithmologique - la séquence 1+4+7+10 = 22

SteveM wrote,
Croce also wrote a tarocchi appropriati in ottava rima, in which he puts the matto at the bottom, so I don't think we were in any way meant to take from the riddle the placement of the fool, which elsewhere he clearly and without riddles puts at the bottom :...
As I said in my post, it is clear that the high position of the Fool as presented in the riddle is only in the Fool's own mind: his actual position is elsewhere. It is merely the possibility of it being high that is contemplated. But it would not be a contradiction if Croce made it the lowest trump in one place, a riddle, and the highest in another, an appropriati. It is all a matter of interpretation, and even if there were conventions in appropriati, they do not necessarily apply elsewhere.

We could not conclude from this appropriati that in Bologna of Croce's experience there were only 2 papi and not 4, or that they weren't called "papi" but rather "imperator" and "imperatrice" (although I expect, at least as regrds the names, the situation was rather fluid in the 1520s). He is simply choosing that interpretation, perhaps borrowing from elsewhere in the process, and does not want to cause controversy for perpetuating a pope and a popess in the cards, both offensive to the Church.

Strictly speaking, the Fool is not part of the sequence at all, because it does not function as a "triumph" in the game. It triumphs over nothing, except in points it can account for at the end. Its value is only in the "afterlife" of the game, when the points are counted up. If one insists on putting it in the sequence anyway, it is a matter of interpretation what one does. From the common point of view, it goes at the beginning, since it can take even fewer tricks than the Bagat--but also, no tricks is not a number of tricks at all. (If I say I have a number of cows, that means more than one; if I had zero number of cows, it would be false that I had a number of cows. Thus the Pythagoreans sometimes argued that even 1 was not strictly speaking a number.) From another point of view, that of winning the game, it is one of the highest, perhaps even the highest, in the sense of "most valuable", because of the "verzicole", that is, its ability to fill a position in point-getting sequences, a rule that seems to have applied in Bologna from an early period.

Thanks for finding another "tarocchi appropriati". Does that count as the earliest, or as one of the earliest, of type A?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mikeh and 10 guests