The Tarot de Paris (The Parisian Tarot)

[Marcei]

Hi Robert,

LaPapesse: I, too, have always liked this Papessa very much. Her crown is wonderful, and surprising to me, for I tend to expect a double-crown on La Papessa. I very much like her hair and find it quite interesting that her hair is uncovered. She wears no veil! The book is a really strong point of interest here: it is closed and she appears to me to be holding it with disdain, yet she is really NOT holding it! Perhaps this is another way to say that she does not hold it in high regard. Perhaps she eschews the Patriarchy, holding them, their teachings and their low regard for women in contempt! She does, however, still have the key, silver(symbol of the moon) to represent feminine truths as opposed to the gold one (color of the sun), representing the masculine teachings, held by Le Pape. In later decks both keys are held by the Pope figure which, to me, symbolizes the complete oppression of women, and the usurpation of their power and dignity. I agree that it is probably a cushion with tassels at her feet for I really can't make out a spinning wheel.

Wish Jean Claude would do a clear, clean restoration of this deck so we could see the lines more clearly and appreciate the wonderful detail this deck incorporates. With all the decks we'd like restored we could keep him busy for a very long time!

Incidentally, I have always wondered why at least some of the card makers did not use a pin or fence registration system and apply color with their stencils first. If the lines could have been printed over the colors, we would see the wonderful detail that is so sadly obscured. Comments anyone?

[SteveM]

Maybe our artist was a collector of old gems, or had otherwise seen some, on which he may have seen a sphinx throne:




Here are some more:

http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/Gems/Scarabs/Images/Robs%20Images%20X2/17.x13m.jpg
http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/Gems/Scarabs/Images/Robs%20Images%2019/17.02m.jpg
http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/Gems/Scarabs/Images/Robs%20Images%2019/17.08m.jpg
http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/Gems/Scarabs/Images/Images%20Extra%204/17.22m.jpg
http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/Gems/Scarabs/Images/Images%20Extra%205/17.X07m.jpg
http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/Gems/Scarabs/Images/Robs%20Images%20X2/17.x15m.jpg
http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/Gems/Scarabs/Images/Robs%20Images%20X2/17.x17m.jpg

[Marcei]

Great images, Steve! I like your idea of the artist as possibly a collector of antiquities; that would explain the rich detail of his images right down to the little lion-supported cartouches. I'll bet he was an interesting guy , clever, unconventionally inventive, a bit eccentric, maybe a sort of rural DaVinci!

[robert]

I suspect the explanation I mentioned earlier in the thread, that the "Chair of St Peter", or some other chair associated with the Pope, was known to be decorated with figures. I expect that a chair such as this would probably have been the inspiration:



Or such as this from a 16th century image I linked to earlier in the thread:



This is an even better match, supposedly a "Chair 12th C. Artist Unknown Basilica di Santa Maria, Trastevere, Rome":

[OnePotato]

Maybe it's a chair like this old Greek antiquity, formerly in the Vatican, now in the Louvre:
(The Vatican connection is particularly nice, no?)

sphinxchair1.JPG (23.94 KiB) Viewed 647 times

Here is where I found the photos:
http://lazygalquilting.blogspot.com/200 ... phinx.html

[robert]

Maybe it's a chair like this old Greek antiquity, formerly in the Vatican, now in the Louvre:
(The Vatican connection is particularly nice, no?)

sphinxchair1.JPG

Both the Vatican and the Louvre connection. I wonder when it went to the Louvre?

Thanks OnePotato for the find.

[Ross G. R. Caldwell]

Maybe it's a chair like this old Greek antiquity, formerly in the Vatican, now in the Louvre:
(The Vatican connection is particularly nice, no?)

sphinxchair1.JPG

Excellent find OP!

Both the Vatican and the Louvre connection. I wonder when it went to the Louvre?

Thanks OnePotato for the find.

I'd guess under Napoleon, but that's just a guess.

[SteveM]

Sphinx throne +Vatican = great find! I wonder what its providence is?

I can't find an image on line, but there is a statue by Donatello while in Padua c. 1446-50 of The Madonna with Child on a throne flanked by two Sphinxes with a relief of Adam and Eve on the thrones back.

In this instance they are generally interpreted by scholars as allegories of knowledge; but in connection with its associations with ignorance and folly could also be taken in their relationship with Adam and Eve as related to the Fall (or otherwise in relation to the fruit of the tree of knowledge, the 'eating' of which led to the fall).

[SteveM]

In this instance they are generally interpreted by scholars as allegories of knowledge; but in connection with its associations with ignorance and folly could also be taken in their relationship with Adam and Eve as related to the Fall (or otherwise in relation to the fruit of the tree of knowledge, the 'eating' of which led to the fall).

quote:
"...Oedipus appears in the play’s opening as the good man and the good citizen. He is shocked beyond horror—terrorized—to discover that all these virtues are mere appearances, that at the center of his existence is a violation of the order of the universe. He is not in control of what he does, even as he thinks of himself as virtuous. He is not in control because that which he thinks he knows, he does not know. The problem is one of knowledge, but the problem is incurable. Thus his wife, Jocasta, tells him: “Why should man fear since chance is all in all / for him, and he can clearly foreknow nothing? / Best to live lightly, as one can, unthinkingly.” He is not himself a riddle to be solved like the problem of the sphinx. Again Jocasta: “God keep you from the knowledge of who you are!”

"...Oedipus would move from a polluted figure to an evil actor were he to take up what he has done as his own actions, were he to assert a power to overcome death, were he to assert that he is the cause of his own existence and deny the principles of order within which he finds himself. In short, were Oedipus to affirm the person that he is, we would confront evil.32 To make any of these affirmations, however, Oedipus would have to understand himself as fundamentally free. He would have to understand his identity as the product of his own free will. He would have to define himself through his relationship to his will rather than to the gods. That person he would become is at the heart of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Indeed, we are that person.

"...Sophocles leaves us no dream of a perfect world, a world in which the problem of Oedipus is solved. Pollution is a fact about the world, not a problem of human agency to be solved through knowledge or cleverness. Oedipus is doomed to wander from place to place, always reminding men of the terrifying truth of their own condition before the gods. The Oedipus myth has a shape much like that of Cain. We cannot know why Cain is disfavored or why Abel is favored. Like Cain, Oedipus is marked by his pollution, which arises from killing a family member. Each wanders the earth. For both, the divine sanction also has a sacred power: the power to found and protect a city. Oedipus and Cain always draw the attention of the gods—for good and bad.

"...There is, however, a closely related reading that is more compelling. This reading aligns the play with Plato’s inquiry into political psychology in the Republic. The narrative line of the play begins with the prophesy to Laius, the ruler of Thebes and Oedipus’s father. He is warned of the future behavior of his son. He tries to prevent this behavior, but he fails. He cannot prevent the appearance of a son who will slay him, claim political authority, and take possession of his family. That such a son will arise is not a product of chance—secular or sacred—but a necessary consequence of the structural conditions of power in the city. The possibility of parricide haunts every royal family. It is unavoidable as long as authority exists in city and family. Now, the play is not about Oedipus but about the structural conditions of politics, and how the structure of political authority shapes the psychology of those who are ruled. Oedipus as a unique person, characterized by his disfavor with the gods, disappears from view in the political-psychological account. The subject of this account is not the failure of reason but the workings of intergenerational ambition and jealousy: the son will assert himself in order to seize authority."

end quote from http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s8301.html

[SteveM]

The narrative line of the play begins with the prophesy to Laius, the ruler of Thebes and Oedipus’s father. He is warned of the future behavior of his son. He tries to prevent this behavior, but he fails. He cannot prevent the appearance of a son who will slay him, claim political authority, and take possession of his family. That such a son will arise is not a product of chance—secular or sacred—but a necessary consequence of the structural conditions of power in the city. The possibility of parricide haunts every royal family. It is unavoidable as long as authority exists in city and family. Now, the play is not about Oedipus but about the structural conditions of politics, and how the structure of political authority shapes the psychology of those who are ruled. Oedipus as a unique person, characterized by his disfavor with the gods, disappears from view in the political-psychological account. The subject of this account is not the failure of reason but the workings of intergenerational ambition and jealousy: the son will assert himself in order to seize authority."[/i]

The father who seeks to prevent his own prophesised downfall we may also see in the subjects of Saturn and Jupiter, as subjects of Ovid moralised according the 'allegory of the poets' in the renaisance (based on 12th century exemplars). The castration of Saturn by Jupiter (in tradition of the Roman de Rose has it) brings Love (Venus) into the world - this prefigures the establishment of the New Covenant over the Old, of "Love" over "Law".

Jupiter is significator of Christianity; Saturn of Judaism. Saturn (Judaism, law, old covenant) is 'castrated' by Jupiter (Christianity, love, new covenant). The wandering Jew, like the fool of the tarot, is 'here, there and everywhere', as the Italian proverb has it.

"Pollution is a fact about the world, not a problem of human agency to be solved through knowledge or cleverness. Oedipus is doomed to wander from place to place, always reminding men of the terrifying truth of their own condition before the gods.

[/quote]

Oedipus/cain is also conflated with Judas from the middle ages; with his 'hanging' from a tree typologically linked with betrayal and the fall (XII - Pendu) that 'brought death into the world'.

For both, the divine sanction also has a sacred power: the power to found and protect a city. Oedipus and Cain always draw the attention of the gods—for good and bad.

A city of Man or a City of God (XXI)? Citizenship of either depends, as Augustine has it, on the nature of two loves (VI).