Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#21
mac22 wrote: 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
I agree Mac- but I guess that is not what I meant.
I meant in a round -about way- if the images were co-opted from somewhere, no matter what stream of thought they combined or considered, we have not been able to find that group together(except in Tarot)- similar but not the same.
Now if you were a printer- the model came from somewhere- the commission came from someone, who was most likely Catholic or possibly a reformist. The nearest I have been able to find is the diagram of Scrovegni Chapel- with its Vices Virtues and layout of the Chapel. This looks to me like the most homologous group that incorporates the three groups of seven images + Judgment. Well although the paintings of the Vices say Vices- they are more like synonymic of Virtues- rather than the traditional Vices(like Greed, Sloth etc) So you have Faith and Unfaithful - Strength and Inconstancy for example.
The other angle is that the printmaster had a design for the game then went and got disparate images from all over the place and combined them in the order required. To me, at least this seems the most unlikely scenario.
Maybe rather than the Church directly they came from the design folios of Tableau organisers for parades, celebrations and triumphs as others have spoken about? Pageants seem to have an order about them too- the ones in Italy seem the nearest to a group of images.
Although I sound as if I have made up my mind- I have not- this is just an exploration that seems to have some logic to me. Today we take the sequence and we apply all sorts of things to it- like say The Haindl Tarot with it's world view- 500 years ago the world view was Catholic. What set of images inspired the Printmaster?
~Lorredan~
The Universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.
Eden Phillpotts

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#22
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

Re: Tarot and The Church

#23
Phew! I am not sure what is going on here with my postings- the board keeps cutting out and I have to re login- and I am not sure where I am......
My last post? was alluding to the thread... Musing on the sequence of 22- sorry if it looks out of place- but it has some relevance to the Church :roll: ~Lorredan~
The Universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.
Eden Phillpotts

Re: Who's in the Chariot?

#24
Lorredan wrote:
mac22 wrote: 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
I agree Mac- but I guess that is not what I meant.
I meant in a round -about way- if the images were co-opted from somewhere, no matter what stream of thought they combined or considered, we have not been able to find that group together(except in Tarot)- similar but not the same.
~Lorredan~
I believe the source for the Tarot images from the earliest decks we have -- came from common images known to the illiterate masses. The images came from the myths, oral stories, poems, ballads, art, Pagan, Gnostic, Greek & Egyptian esoteric knowledge, as well as from Alchemy, Rosicrucians, craft guilds etc.

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

Re: Tarot and The Church

#25
Lorredan wrote:This thread is split from this discussion on the Chariot:
viewtopic.php?f=12&p=288

I personally find it hard to understand why people do not understand that at the time of Tarot's birth, the people who played games were Catholic. Not Neo platonic, Humanists or even Scholastics- just plain old salt of the earth Catholics- there was no division between State and Church- religious and secular.
I don't disagree with the sentiment at all. I would point out that "Catholic" has meant different things over history. As far as I am concerned the Roman Catholic Church defined itself, as a religious denomination different from other Christians, at the Council of Trent (and the First Vatican Council). Before then, there was just the Church, which described itself as Catholic. After, there was the Catholic Church.

More important to me is to affirm the notion that the common people, gamblers, printers, and paper-makers, could create something of lasting value and genuine insight, and make it out of images that were floating around in the popular culture, street-level religion, and folklore of their time. They did not necessarily have to converse with angels or hobnob with Hermes Trismegistus. One of the premises of contemporary Tarot divination is that there is a secret connectedness to things, which makes apparently random phenomena only apparently random. It seems to me that if you accept this premise, it is possible for the Tarot to have been created by people who did not necessarily understand in depth the full details of the system they created, and who lacked intentionality with respect to the meanings that later people have found in it.
Le beau valet de coeur et la dame de pique
Causent sinistrement de leurs amours défunts.

- Baudelaire

Re: Tarot and The Church

#26
Hi all of you here...
Just for me Tarot source could be find at Neoplatonism too far as the Alexandria School time.
And after we have the awesome work of translation done by Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499) of many Platonic jewels.
That of course Lorredan don t deny the Catholic source origin,but for me is related just only until the 3 century.
For just an example Lorredan I mean Origenes as one of the first father of the Church.
So I want to make a distinction between the card players and those who created it.
Origenes was deep inside on crossed links between both lines of thought.
For me is just the distance of deep thought between the gospel of Matthew and the other of John.

Eugim
The Universe is like a Mamushka.

Re: Tarot and The Church

#27
EUGIM wrote: For me is just the distance of deep thought between the gospel of Matthew and the other of John.
And I like Mark!

John is beautiful, no doubt, and incredibly thoughtful; but just give me the bare bones, thanks.

Before I stumbled into the world of tarot, I used to spend time reading about the "Historical Jesus". To be honest, I have very mixed feelings about Christianity as a religion, but I love reading about it as a historical development.

While there are aspects of the religion I find very beautiful (I like catholic mass for instance), overall I'm not that interested in it. Others love the religion, and don't really care to study the development of the church. We sometimes find ourselves looking at the same thing from two completely different viewpoints, one is religious, one is historical. Can you guess where I'm going with this?

We know that in all likelihood Mark was the first gospel written, Matthew and Luke are built upon Mark. John is probably the latest gospel, and the tone and stories are very different, it was developed for a very different audience. We've pretty much moved from a very human Jesus to an infinite entity.

Now if I wanted to explore Christianity from a spiritual aspect, I'd look to John. If I wanted to look to the history and development, I'd look to Mark. Of course, this isn't to say that Mark isn't Spiritual, or that History can't be learned from John; but they each have their own "flavor", and "usefulness" depending on the desired goal.

So.. give me Mark. Let me get as close to the oldest evidence as possible. Let's talk "Q" and "Signs", let's take the gospels and other documents and compare them structurally and see how and where they are related, and maybe figure out why. Let's look at them in the context of their place and time. Let's strip away the layers of "religion" and try to get down to the bones.

Of course, this is just the way that I approach it, and it's based on my interests and goals. Others may be much more interested in the religious aspect, and really just view the historical explorations as interesting, but not nearly as meaningful as the spiritual experience. Certainly, the two are not exclusive, and a complete picture requires at least an understanding and appreciation of both. I guess in my heart though, my passion is for the history.

I wonder how I would approach tarot? :roll:
The Tarot will lose all its vitality for one who allows himself to be side-tracked by its pedantry. - Aleister Crowley

Re: Tarot and The Church

#28
This post is not directed to any poster in particular.

To be honest, I see no problem on the fact that the tarot responds to an amalgam of traditions which were integrated into Christianity. But I perceive in most tarot enthusiasts a general reluctance to take the Christian component into account, a rejoice in any detail that could negate that hypothesis. And this is what I find silly.

I was raised as catholic and for me an understanding of its symbolism is some sort of a second nature; but I must confess that I feel a deep contempt for catholicism, Christianity, and organized religion in general. I find no rejoice in a idea of god, in fact, I find the god-as-father a very poor metaphor. People is entitled to choose the metaphors they want to live by, but I don’t respect those take their metaphors literally, and use them as excuse to judge, or attack, others. Those are my true feelings, and I hope you are willing to respect them. I find Christ precept: “love other as yourself” useful, but I would find it useful even if it would have been said by a regular carpenter. I don’t need for Jesus to be the son of a god to find his ideas valuable. His advise is very good, so simple yet so powerful that we prefer to derail our attention into nonsensical arguments as if Mary was a virgin, or if god can be three people and one people at once, instead of simply putting the advise into practice.

But even if I simply detest religions, I cannot ignore the fact that tarot’s imagery responds to a religious universe. I see no path towards historical truth, nor understanding, on trying to avoid such connection. Every time I comment this on the forums, I am reminded we all know the tarot comes from a Christian background. I simply feel this isn’t true. I feel that most people in todays tarot’s world is wishing for that bit of information that will prove RAH’s vampire’s theory true :D.

Best,

EE
What’s honeymoon salad? Lettuce alone
Don’t look now, mayonnaise is dressing!

Re: Tarot and The Church

#29
Robert,I understand you very well.
I mentioned John gospel for the within concepts belief in it.It was written in Greek on the line of thought of the Alexandria School.
One just need a glance of the Corpus Hermeticum (II-III century) to see the link between them (with regard to John I mean)
Just see the parallel about "In the beginning was the Word ..." with Poimandres.
This gospel is dated as far as 120 after Jesus death (as in the case of the others 3 but no too far in time)
They are for me allegorical histories of Jesus message,so must say that I don t believe in Jesus as an historic person.
I think there were nt (and also now ) matter of the highest quality to him for incarnate.The energy of his Spirit make it (just for me ) impossible.
And of course more impossible Jesus incarnating Christ
Too allegorical are for me as the Bhagavad Gita.
As far as I know there isn t a single historic evidence of the incarnated existence of Jesus on earth,aside what Flavio Josefo or Tacito said (both by the way very discussed as genuine).

On the other side there is a strong link between Alexandria Neoplatonism and Tarot,and going far that is for me the tarot source.
I believe Christianism is within Tarot origin,but I see it with regard to the first three centuries,for example comes to my mind Origenes.
That why I mentioned Marsilio Ficino as a man who compilated and translated many neoplatonic texts.
From Neoplatonism came Western Alchemy and tarot just for me is a sequence of the Opus Alchemicum which take place inside us and on the Universe as body of God.(The Universe is like a Mamushka )

PS: In the meantime I came here to edit and found Enriquez post.So I m agree with you Enrique it s a clear Christian Source on Tarot origin but as I said related to the Christianism of the first three centuries or if you prefer prior to the first Nicea Council.


Eugim
The Universe is like a Mamushka.

Re: Tarot and The Church

#30
Hi Michael...
It s for me an honour that you be here.I know your awesome and out of sight site and I allways "have a walk" there for learn or to disagree.
Aside the amazing Corpus you done I also realised your "strong,hard way " when you make your reviews of others sources of Tarot not close to your point of view.
I know that you allways tend to base on historical facts and I m grateful for this,but it s seems to me that also rejects others sources about Tarot with on a somewhat disparaging mode.
For instance I believe you can t deny Christian source about Tarot that I think relate to primitive Christian Church until Nicea Council.
As you know the first Fathers of the Church were agree with the Neoplatonism of the Alexandria School on a broad sense because they assimilated concepts and then adapted to the Christian belief.
Comes to my mind the Gospel of John and Poimandres for example as a link between them.
Also you know that St Thomas de Aquino was a disciple of Alberto Magno an eminent hermetic philosopher.
So I think there were truly a syncretism contemporary with the beginning of the Christian Church then linked by Marsilio Ficino (But for me not by Pico della Mirandola who began a Caravan of misunderstood ending in Eliphas Levi)
For me Western Alchemy as a result of a meeting between Alexandria School and Christian belief developed an inner path of transmutation make by the Soul,and this is deep on Christian belief.
(Many Fathers of the Church read Zozimo of Panopolis with his inner approach of Alchemy as a way to transmutation of the matter).

Well after all I don t think that you believe also that the Alexandria Library was a hodge-podge...

With regard to Le Pendu post and your replay I feel you ve been too sarcastic,so speaking on a kindly way you ve been here "Michael Hurt "

PS : I know you will do a "surgical work" with my posts (Beginning with this) and I don t mind.But just make your work and let others point of view get into the thread,don t decreed your vision about Tarot Michael.aside your tons of an Encyclopedic respected Mind.

My best regards,

Eugim
The Universe is like a Mamushka.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron