Re: Talking just about Numerals here.

23
EUGIM wrote:-Okay man or baby if you are ...

1-Where you deduce it ?
2-I mean from where of Tarot de Marseille historical source ?
3-DENIERS for example are fire or what //why ?
1-From the Minchiate elemental sequence
2-This is the Unicorn Terrace, eugim re "Have some ideas you'd like to explore?
Engage in your favorite "Unicorn Hunt" in this unstuffy area for playful historical pondering" [from the index.php Page].
3-Why? Not that we need a reason in the Unicorn Terrace, but, since you asked politely, mostly intuitively based, but similar to the playing card cartomancy system used here: http://www.hedgewytchery.com/middling_memory.html ; and see also tarot de la rea, by Alain Bocher et al for sources.

Also, as I mentioned----it does not really matter which suit is applied to which elemental correspondence at all. I merely used "my" system as an example. I even referenced it as "partly" the Spanish Esoteric system of divination circa 1909 [see "Manuel Synthétique & Pratique du Tarot by Eudes Picard [where] Sceptres = fire; Coins = Earth; Cups = Air; Swords = Water" from http://www.tarotpassages.com/mkgtimeline.htm ]

R.A. Hendley wrote:Oooo. I love this Reece!!

Actually, I hate it! You've just opened up a whole new batch of stuff to contemplate instead of doing my house work. :lol: :lol: :lol:

What's your 'system' behind "water+earth=air", etc.? How are these derived?


RAH
Thank you, Reece :)

Unfortunately, I can't claim ownership. My departed friend Chris aka "puckinfl" used this system. In fact, it was part of the last conversation we had together before he died.
Last edited by firecatpickles on 12 Jul 2008, 17:31, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Talking just about Numerals here.

26
Squigglybeans wrote: Thank you, Reece :)

Unfortunately, I can't claim ownership. My departed friend Chris aka "puckinfl" used this system. In fact, it was part of the last conversation we had together before he died.


I'm just about to give the method a test drive on my ol' Grimaud. :D


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

Re: Talking just about Numerals here.

27
Please get it ironed out soon. I want to see what it all means.
It IS ironed out, in its' basic form.
See the colour code legend at the bottom. Notice that the odd numbers are in a 'generating' mode, and the even numbers are in a 'controlling' mode. I'm using the chinese 'elements' to denote the 'nature' of each number.

Bee

Re: Talking just about Numerals here.

28
Example (rather rushed... adapt to suit query):

The Ace clubs/batons is Wood, it is 'generating' Fire.
The association of Wood with the suit of clubs/batons is only tempory, just to help clarify how the numbers would function.
A main factor of Wood is that it is a renewing element. It's aim is to generate Fire = a vibrant, creative element etc.

The 2 clubs/batons: As with the Ace, generating Fire, but it's in a Controlling mode and so it seeks to control (or repress, dominate etc) the Element Earth. So any adjoining (or aspected) Earth cards would most likely be overidden by this 2.

6 Coins/diamonds: A fire card in Controlling mode. It is generating a measure of stability (Earth), but is Controlling the element Metal. Metal is generally considered to relate to the mind/thought. So this 6 Coins is something of a go-getter (fire), and depending on adjoining cards/numbers, it will either give no heed to thought/advice, or have a dominating reason for pushing ahead with it's own aims (overriding metal).

Bee

Re: Talking just about Numerals here.

29
On numbers:

It is my belief that the number sequence does not begin with two, nor does it omit the one. The word "ace" comes from old French, and there from the Latin "As" meaning 'unit'. Unit means one. The term finds its earlist useage in the 14th century

However the history of the zero may be important.

Its inclusion and/or exclusion says a lot about accepted mathematical and scientific thought at the time of the invention of Tarot, and even more about how it was included as time progressed.

There is no 0 on a ruler, nor is there a year 0. They are not Zeroth Sequences.

The history of the Glyph that we refer to as Zero, and the concept of the Zero and the place holder (that we use the glyph for) are three different things.

Early Babylonians used a place holder, but ‘zero’ was not used in calculations.

The Greeks did not adapt the Babylonian number system, and had no positional number system. Greek mathematical advances were essentially based on Euclid’s “Elements”…it’s all based on geometry. BTW – there is no 0 degree angle.

Greek astronomers used the glyph that we would recognize as zero in the recording of astronomical data. There are explanations that it stood for Ouden” or “Obol.” The usage did not stick around.

Ptolemy, in “Almagest” (130 AD) uses the Babylonian base sixty system and their ‘place-holder’ concept. Sorta Kinda. Ptolemy did not think of it as a number or a concept, but as a punctuation mark. Kind of like a period.

In India, the Hindu word for zero was ‘shunya’, or ‘sunya’ meaning ‘void’. This was translated into Arabic as ‘sifr’ (which then became the English word ‘Cypher’).

Mohammad ibn Mus al-Kwarizmi (ce 780-850) was a mathematician who introduced Hindu Arabic numerals, his book “Kitab al-jabr wa al-mugabalah” influenced these concepts when it was translated in the 12th Century.

In 1202, Leonardo of Pisa (known mostly as Leonardo Fibonacci) explained the concept of positional base notation, the point, negative numbers, and the zero, in his book, “Book of Abacus.”

However he speaks of the ‘sign’ zero rather than the number zero. And the ‘Fibonacci Sequence’ that kept scholars amused for hundreds of years is not a zeroth sequence – although one needs to grasp the concept of zero as a place holder and an abstract concept to fully grasp the enormity of the sequential implications. (they are still writing books on the Fibonacci Sequence, and the Golden Mean).

None of these concepts (or zero) were widely used, or accepted until the 17th Century, and even then experienced resistance (it is also the reason why we still write the number longhand on Checks – one thousand one hundred eleven dollars…).

The Glyph that we refer to as Zero, came from India (?) and in Arabic is called ‘galgal’, or “Wheel”.

So we have the following subjects on Zero.

Zero as a concept
Zero as a placeholder (4 Tarot Cards or 4 things is different then the abstract concept of ‘Four”).
Zero – the Glyph used to illustrate it.

01234 & 1234 are indeed, mathematically, conceptually, historically, very different things.

In the Judaic culture and tradition, Aleph does not ever equal 0. Aleph = 1