As noted several posts back, I've moved this discussion about Christ on the Tarot de Marseille World Card to this thread as it seemed the most appropriate place to continue the discussion.
I didn't realise that I used "copyist error" that often, and certainly hadn't connected the usage to trying to prove points that I favour. In the case of the Halo on the Tarot de Marseille... certainly we can see the Bull has lost the halo on the Tarot de Marseille II? Steve, you are a master of finding textural references, and I swear to God after five years of experience with this I wouldn't be surprised to have you find some reference to "And the bull shall have no glory when...", but I guess I'm just always oriented to the art on the cards themselves rather than to external references. To me, I see the Vieville, I see the Noblet, I see the Dodal, and I see the Conver... and I can see a haloed Christ figure surrounded by the four Evangelists turning into a dancer (fortune?) surrounded by four creatures, three with halos. This in the course of about 100 years. Considering that the Noblet is from 1650 and we assume that the Tarot de Marseille was created at least by 1500 that's another 150 years before we even have the figures we have now for similar changes to have occurred.
When I look at those four cards, I'm pretty convinced that it is Christ on the cards and that he changes. I thought it was Christ originally because I find the four evangelists and the haloed figure on the Vieville pretty convincing. I don't know why it isn't more clearly Christ, but I can see him changing even in the small sample of cards within a short period of time. I am not sure if it is intentional or not. I don't know why it happened. But I'm pretty sure it did happen.
When Ross posted the Béziers Jesus, that seemed a major addition to this as, up until then the argument was generally "It can't be Christ because Christ in Glory is never pictured nearly naked", well... here.. Ross found an example, and a wonderful
example at that.
I think that the case is pretty convincing.
Here's what I said in my post:
robert wrote:I'd like to see him in leaves too if it can be found, but I feel that with the Vieville we have a good version with the halo, and we know that halos can disappear because we can see it happen on the Bull evangelist on the World between Tarot de Marseille I and Tarot de Marseille II.
Even the leaves don't bother me much, I think the girdle on the image that Ross found is a damn good match, and it is possible that even the "earliest Tarot de Marseille decks" that we have are already late enough that that detail was not understood and was seen as leaves rather than a girdle. I think it's pretty convincing with the four evangelists, the halo on the Vieville, and the image that Ross found to feel pretty confident that it was probably Christ on the earliest Tarot de Marseille World.
So, yeah, show me a Christ in leaves and I'll be even more delighted, no problem, I really don't care. YOU care because you think this is Christ as New Adam, I have no investment one way or the other. If you can find some images of Christ as new Adam that are as convincing as the one that Ross has posted of Christ on the tabernacle, I'll be happy to say "Yup, Christ as Second Adam". At this point, I'm just happy to see more and more evidence that this is Christ that we are seeing on the early cards.
So for me, that Halo isn't an issue. I DO think that the Bull lost a halo between the Dodal type I and the Conver type II, not the other way around. And I think it VERY likely, more so now with this additional figure, that what we see on the Vieville is the best representation of what was also on the early Tarot de Marseille, a robed figure of Christ surrounded by the four evangelists.