Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#11
To Michael:

Christian symbol of The Chariot is that it is the Human body vehicle- The Wain/Chariot/Cart/Ark is the Church as a vehicle to convey the Faithful to Heaven- in particular for the Catholic, uses it as a metaphor for the main body of the Church building- and according to Dante carries Charity and Prudence.
Sorry if it makes you laugh or cry- it is of no odds to me, go buy some tissues.
~Lorredan~
The Universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.
Eden Phillpotts

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#12
Michael, Michael, Michael.
:D

You know, I love your posts. Even your post questioning my posts(!), I took as a well meaning "call" for me to be more "sensible", and I appreciate the time you take to give such thoughtful responses.

I expect, and appreciate, that I can count on you to cut through the BS and help me refocus on actual details. You're my lead boots when I've swallowed too much helium. I love you for that, and you know I am a fan and supporter of your work and contributions.

... but... ;)

I'm just not at a point where I feel as sure as you seem to be about this. I don't think I'm one to suffer silly ideas too warmly, but I do think it is important to keep an open mind, especially when one considers themselves (as I do) still in the "fact gathering" portion of an evaluation.

When I read your thoughts on these topics, it reminds me of being in a mystery story. You strike me as the detective who has gathered all the facts and has come up with a very compelling theory on how the murder took place. I can't really argue with you about the evidence, I see it as you do; but yet, there is something about the evidence that makes me think that there might be more to it than we currently realize; and that even though you have put it all together in a sensible manner, it doesn't entirely convince me. My "gut" still thinks there is something missing.

I really "got into" tarot history about 5 years ago, it was because I noticed similarities between the Giotto Vices and Virtues and the cards in the Tarot. I came into this with a "Christian" expectation before I had read one word of your ideas on the subject. After that, it was really jmd's posts about the similarities of cathedral iconography and the tarot that further convinced me that there was a strong connection between the two. I think I have found your ideas so rational and appealing, in part, because the expectation of a relationship already made sense to me.

I appreciate your point that to really consider the iconography of the cards, we must take them in context. It's really that that makes me question the tarot as a standard Christian morality game. Out of the thousands of pieces of Christian art of the time, I see little if any signs of a Hanged Man, for example. Why is the tarot, in fact, so different than the other 15th Century Christian representations?

Like Rosanne, it may be my personal upbringing in the Catholic Church that brings me to look at some of this iconography as "not right", but while I find myself in agreement with most of your ideas, and certainly in the impressive amount of data you have contributed to this research, I still find myself questioning if we really have gathered "all the facts", and are really ready to "call out the murderer".

With great respect,
robert
The Tarot will lose all its vitality for one who allows himself to be side-tracked by its pedantry. - Aleister Crowley

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#13
Lorredan wrote:I find Le Pendu's query perfectly acceptable- Tarot does look oddly strange in context of time and place- yet familiar if you were raised Catholic. Not everyone takes the Da Vinchi Code as anything other than a good rollicking read with a theme. I too have been on a long campaign to make Tarot acceptable in a Christian country; fortunately for me it has not been hard as our colonial history is mainstream European Christian. For such a dim-wit I even know the meaning of Crusade and have a cross on my shield.
Thanks for watching my back Lorredan! :)
The Tarot will lose all its vitality for one who allows himself to be side-tracked by its pedantry. - Aleister Crowley

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#14
le pendu wrote:Michael, Michael, Michael.
:D

You know, I love your posts. Even your post questioning my posts(!), I took as a well meaning "call" for me to be more "sensible", and I appreciate the time you take to give such thoughtful responses.

I expect, and appreciate, that I can count on you to cut through the BS and help me refocus on actual details. You're my lead boots when I've swallowed too much helium. I love you for that, and you know I am a fan and supporter of your work and contributions.

... but... ;)
I like Michael's ideas a lot too, and his writings have really helped convince me that my theories about the Tarot being a message from a enlightened extraterrestrial race warning us of Earth's eminent future invasion by a race of time travelling female warrior vampire aliens who intend to kill all of our females and make all the men of Earth their sex slaves is probably not the historic intent of the Tarot creators!! :lol:

Two problems with any definitive theory with Tarot is - 1) we don't have all the evidence, and 2) the meaning must have been reinterpreted over the years. Was the Visconti-Sforza deck really the first one? Did it have 22 cards? In the 200 years between the Visconti-Sforza and the Jean Noblet was the original meaning maintained? Did Jean Noblet know or even care about any intentional meanings the Visconti-Sforza designer may have placed in the cards? I doubt it? How many new ideas 'snuck' into the design in those two centuries? I imagine by the time of the later Tarots like the Jean Noblet, the 1450 Tarot player would have found some of the images as bizarre and historically inaccurate as the 1650 Tarot player would find the Thoth design.

I recently had a 007 marathon, and watched all 21 Bond films (and DVD extras). It was interesting to see how Bond 'evolved over the years, how different Bond actors and directors would try to mold or reshape the character based on popularity of one film or another, or try to get back to Fleming's 'true' Bond, or how they would 'play' with the 'trappings' of "Bond lore", like Daniel Craig's remark about "not giving a damn" if his martini was shaken or stirred, or how Tim Dalton played the character extremely 'straight' in reaction to Roger Moore's camp Bond. And all this is going on in a 50 year time span, and the Bond franchaise has been owned by the same family the whole time!! It really made me ponder how much mutation must have happened from the original Tarot to later designs like the Tarot de Marseille - how many different ideas and interpretations must have passed through all the different versions, many of which are lost forever!!


Cheers,

RAH
When a clock is hungry, it goes back four seconds.

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#15
R.A. Hendley wrote:I like Michael's ideas a lot too, and his writings have really helped convince me that my theories about the Tarot being a message from a enlightened extraterrestrial race warning us of Earth's eminent future invasion by a race of time travelling female warrior vampire aliens who intend to kill all of our females and make all the men of Earth their sex slaves is probably not the historic intent of the Tarot creators!! :lol:
Did you say theories or much-prayed-for fantasies? :lol:

You're right about the variety of decks, just look at the differences between the Geofroy, Mitelli, Paris, Vieville, and Noblet! We've probably lost other varieties too.

sigh.
The Tarot will lose all its vitality for one who allows himself to be side-tracked by its pedantry. - Aleister Crowley

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#17
le pendu wrote:[
EnriqueEnriquez wrote: Amén! :D

The Bible is Tarot’s Little White Book.

EE
You know, I find this really interesting.

I've spent the last five years exploring tarot history with many of you, often almost everyday we've crossed paths and exchanged thoughts. Together we've considered Templars, and Cathars, and Gnostics, and NeoPlatonists, and Mystery Schools, and Exiled Jews, and Gypsies, and Druids, and just about every other possible... (oh hell, I don't know what word I want.. "fringe"? "alternative"?)... group that can be imagined as the possible creators of tarot. (Not to mention the Atlantian Dolphin Mermaid Goddesses!)

Yet, I always come back to the Catholicism in the Tarot... and it proves to be both the most convincing, and yet still conflicting... both at the same time! I look at cards like Judgement and ask "How can this not be a Christian creation?" How can we explain away the iconography of an angel calling the dead from their graves with a blow of his trumpet? We've also got the Pope in there, and the Devil, and several common virtues. In the Tarot de Marseille, we even have the four evangelists on The World. Some of the iconography is "mid-way" understandable: The Emperor and Empress, Star-Moon-Sun, Love, Time, Death... not what I would imagine as particularly "catechismic", but easy enough to understand in the general scheme. Even some cards like the Wheel of Fortune and the Fool are understandable enough as cautions against a life without God and The Church to guide you.

But then we run into The Popess, The Hanged Man, and The Magician; and I have to wonder "What on Earth are these doing here?" Are these common Catholic symbols? Are they in groups of cosmic organization like the Mantegna? I find myself having to "excuse" their inclusion to keep the subject properly on Catholicism.

It's easy enough for me to look at The Popess, and imagine that she is some mislabeled version of "Faith", or a pair with The Empress representing "Church and State personified"; but I do have to wonder how she worked herself into this set? I have a hard time imagining the Magician's place in a 15th Century Catholic's perception, but I can't help but feel that he doesn't fit in with the common group. Same with the Hanged Man; I suppose he was common enough in the secular world, but why not Judas? And where is Jesus? And Mary? And so much of the other common language of religion at the time?

I'm left conflicted. I can't escape the obvious connection to the Bible and the Catholic Church, but I can't explain Tarot is those terms either.

Catholic influenced .... Yes, but there were many other ideas & concepts floating around during the time the Tarot was being formed Pagan & various Gnostic notions.... Alchemy was also trickling in that underground stream, even Newton was running Alchemy experiments and he was only one in a long line of people.

The longer I study the Tarot the MORE I realize that it came from a fusion of ideas, notions & concepts NOT any single group, philosophy, concept or mystery tradition.

Mac22
A day when you learn something..no matter how small...is a day not wasted

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#18
Hi Mac!
This is probably not the thread for this- but...
What do you think came first?
1.The notion of the game- then get the images for it
or
2.Had the images - then made the game?
Here is what I mean.
I had heard of a card game when I was small (er) called Old Maid- someone at school told me about it- so much to my family's anger I got a heap of photos from the bookshelf box and cut them up and made myself a deck. It was very accurate once I compared my deck with my friend's deck. At the same time, I devised a game of cards and nicked everyones holy pictures from their Mass Missals after I thought about what I needed.
Two very different procedures (and two very huge punishments) to go about devising a game.
If I could decide what happened with Tarot- then all would become clearer about the streams of ideas and philosophy that is the 22 Cards (or 20/18 etc). If it is 1. Then the images could have come from all over the place. If it is 2. Then there is something that had the images as a group- not necessarily in sequence or titled- but all together.
Well that is how it seems to me. There was already 52 cards as a base.
~Lorredan~
The Universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.
Eden Phillpotts

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#19
Lorredan wrote:Hi Mac!
This is probably not the thread for this- but...
What do you think came first?
1.The notion of the game- then get the images for it
or
2.Had the images - then made the game?
Here is what I mean.
I had heard of a card game when I was small (er) called Old Maid- someone at school told me about it- so much to my family's anger I got a heap of photos from the bookshelf box and cut them up and made myself a deck. It was very accurate once I compared my deck with my friend's deck. At the same time, I devised a game of cards and nicked everyones holy pictures from their Mass Missals after I thought about what I needed.
Two very different procedures (and two very huge punishments) to go about devising a game.
If I could decide what happened with Tarot- then all would become clearer about the streams of ideas and philosophy that is the 22 Cards (or 20/18 etc). If it is 1. Then the images could have come from all over the place. If it is 2. Then there is something that had the images as a group- not necessarily in sequence or titled- but all together.
Well that is how it seems to me. There was already 52 cards as a base.
~Lorredan~
I have a slightly different slant/take/idea/theory.... At the time of the formation of the Tarot the vast majority were illiterate.... however they had excellent memories for stories, symbols & images --- So the fact that the Tarot was a book of symbols, images & pictures which could be used in more than one way seems a natural outgrowth of the people & the times.

The fact that the Tarot can tell Spiritual truths while at another level be an entertaining pastime as a game of cards merely shows our ancestors were not nearly as "ignorant" or unsophisticated as sometimes portrayed. They were good at finding ways of filling needs [of passing on ancient wisdom given to them] while at the same time being "good" Catholics.

The Church was also GOOD at co-opting earlier sites, symbols & concepts to suit the needs of the "new faith" e.g. 3hares, greenman, dying & rising gods, the Good Shepard, Madonna & child, the fish symbol[Vesica Pisces], the cross[ankh, tau, Greek] , the sacred meal etc.

Mac22
A day when you learn something..no matter how small...is a day not wasted

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#20
mac22 wrote:
Lorredan wrote:Hi Mac!
This is probably not the thread for this- but...
What do you think came first?
1.The notion of the game- then get the images for it
or
2.Had the images - then made the game?
Here is what I mean.
I had heard of a card game when I was small (er) called Old Maid- someone at school told me about it- so much to my family's anger I got a heap of photos from the bookshelf box and cut them up and made myself a deck. It was very accurate once I compared my deck with my friend's deck. At the same time, I devised a game of cards and nicked everyones holy pictures from their Mass Missals after I thought about what I needed.
Two very different procedures (and two very huge punishments) to go about devising a game.
If I could decide what happened with Tarot- then all would become clearer about the streams of ideas and philosophy that is the 22 Cards (or 20/18 etc). If it is 1. Then the images could have come from all over the place. If it is 2. Then there is something that had the images as a group- not necessarily in sequence or titled- but all together.
Well that is how it seems to me. There was already 52 cards as a base.
~Lorredan~
I have a slightly different slant/take/idea/theory.... At the time of the formation of the Tarot the vast majority were illiterate.... however they had excellent memories for stories, symbols & images --- So the fact that the Tarot was a book of symbols, images & pictures which could be used in more than one way seems a natural outgrowth of the people & the times.

The fact that the Tarot can tell Spiritual truths while at another level be an entertaining pastime as a game of cards merely shows our ancestors were not nearly as "ignorant" or unsophisticated as sometimes portrayed. They were good at finding ways of filling needs [of passing on ancient wisdom given to them] while at the same time being "good" Catholics.

The Church was also GOOD at co-opting earlier sites, symbols & concepts to suit the needs of the "new faith" e.g. 3hares, greenman, dying & rising gods, the Good Shepard, Madonna & child, the fish symbol[Vesica Pisces], the cross[ankh, tau, Greek] , the sacred meal etc.

Mac22
The Universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.
Eden Phillpotts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron