"Ecce homo" images seem to be the inspiration for this figure, but there are differences - there are no streaks of blood on him (that can be seen anymore, at least) and he appears more truly triumphant than triumphant in humility of the standard Ecce homo tradition. Also in the main tradition, Jesus is bearing a cane stalk, which was used to beat him and was his "sceptre" in the Ecce Homo reversal of the triumph. But in the Béziers figure, the sceptre he bears is sprouting leaves.

Hi, all,

R.A. Hendley wrote:Could the carving on the far right be 'The Ship of Salvation' that is Christ? Doesn't really explain the 'charity' though, does it?

The ship is the "Bark of Peter", aka, the Church.

The two guys appear to be stranded on an island, Hope-ing to be picked up, pointing and praying to where the star (Stella Maris) would be expected, where instead we find the word CHARITAS.

mjh

mjhurst wrote: The two guys appear to be stranded on an island, Hope-ing to be picked up, pointing and praying to where the star (Stella Maris) would be expected, where instead we find the word CHARITAS.

mjh

Yes, that makes sense. There are a few stories like that in churches around here, recounting miraculous rescues from a raging sea (since we are on the coast).

Hi Michael,

I've been looking for cognates for a little while on other tabernacles in the south of France, but so far no luck finding one with such a simple, stark Christ, and certainly not in the Ecce Homo style.

This one -
http://enseignedegersaint.typepad.fr/pr ... rnacle.jpg

shows "a detail of the door of a XVIII th century tabernacle showing Louis XIV as " l'enfant roi" that is tay a boy holding in his hand the earth"
http://enseignedegersaint.typepad.fr/pr ... index.html

which is in the same carving style as ours.

But Louis on the door? The presumption!

This tabernacle, from Monaco (?) looks promising, but I can't get much detail -
http://www.monaco-victoria.com/pic_up/0000.jpg

This one too, in Bergouey (near Mont de Marsan on the Atlantic side) -
http://eglises-landes.cef.fr/eglises/mo ... rnacle.JPG

The page describes the Christ as an "Ecce Homo" -
"Le tabernacle, posé sur un autel simplement galbé, est tout à fait classique par sa conception et il peut dater du début du xviiie siècle : un coffret eucharistique, évasé sur les côtés et à la porte ornée d'un Ecce Homo,"

(The tabernacle, resting on a simply curved altar, is entirely classical in conception and can be dated to the beginning of the 18th century: a eucharistic coffret, flared on the sides and the door decorated with an Ecce Homo)

http://eglises-landes.cef.fr/eglises/mo ... rgouey.htm

MODERATOR NOTE:
The next few posts were split from a different thread and joined to this one because the main topic was the representation of Christ on the Tarot de Marseille.

---------------

Ross G. R. Caldwell wrote:According to Michael's reading of the Tarot de Marseille, the Star announces the Advent of Christ.

That is a common reading isn't it? I didn't realise it originated with MJH?

In fact, Jesus seems to appear on the World card in the earliest TdMs - Sforza Castle, Noblet. He also seems to be represented in the Vieville.

The figure of Jesus would make sense, but I am not convinced that is what the figure in the earliest Tarot de Marseille style cards does represent, an image of Jesus sans halo and wearing a girdle of leaves would be a clincher...

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.

In the Vieville it is possible too that the artist in that case has misunderstood and put in what he would have expected: it seems to me that an obscure or misunderstood image is more liable to 'correction' according to a copyists expectations, than a universal and well known image to deterioration.

robert wrote: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.

Again with the 'I don't understand it so it must a copyists error' And this from a class A with distinction student !(congratulations btw). I do find your tendency to dismiss anything that does not fit your paradigm as a copyist error and Ross's to dismiss such stuff as decoration, to dismiss what is there in favour of what you would prefer to be there, particular weak points of your arguments.

If it is meant to be a representation of Christ, which makes sense of much of the iconography and context, then the presence of leaves I think probably a fully intentional allusion to Christ as New Adam; if we follow traditional proof texts of Christ as New Adam we are led to the letters of Paul; to Ephesians, where we also find the sleightster / juggler (kubeios) as a type of Old Adam. So I find it supportive of my interpretation of the Juggler in the Tarot de Marseille sequence to be take as a type of Old Adam; to Phillipines, where Christ is fashioned as a Man, humbles himself as a servant, and in death is exalted as Lord God (kurios)- so the sequence is bookended by the kubeios and the kurios (the name of G-d used specifically of Christ as exalted above all, as risen Lord and as judge). From Earthly Man to Heavenly Man.


SteveM

1 Corinthians 15:40 also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial one, and the of the terrestrial another.
1 Corinthians 15:41 one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for star differeth from star in glory.
1 Corinthians 15:42 So also the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
1 Corinthians 15:43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
1 Corinthians 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
1 Corinthians 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam a quickening spirit.
1 Corinthians 15:46 Howbeit that not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1 Corinthians 15:47 The first man of the earth, earthy: the second man the Lord from heaven.
1 Corinthians 15:48 As the earthy, such they also that are earthy: and as the heavenly, such they also that are heavenly.
1 Corinthians 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

Hi Steve, Robert -

Can we move the discussion of the Tarot de Marseille to another thread?

SteveM wrote: Again with the 'I don't understand it so it must a copyists error' And this from a class A with distinction student !(congratulations btw). I do find your tendency to dismiss anything that does not fit your paradigm as a copyist error

"Copyist's errors" are demonstrable, and Robert offered one - the Bull loses his halo. There are countless others that I'm sure Robert could rattle off. The alternative, that there was a message in every line of every woodcut, is absurd.

I can show you some in the BT (or A in general) as well. They are similar to what Biblical text critics observe, when a copyist makes a lectio difficilior correspond to a dominant interpretation or tradition, or adds or "clarifies" something potentially offensive to Orthodoxy.

and Ross's to dismiss such stuff as decoration, to dismiss what is there in favour of what you would prefer to be there, particular weak points of your arguments.

Dismissing the pictures below the Star, Moon etc. as decoration is a possibility - if you disagree, it is up to you to make a coherent story out them in sequence and see if anybody finds it convincing. Making a story is easy - selling it is hard.

I have a good one for the Tarot de Marseille in this part that does NOT dismiss them as decoration, but that is not a discussion for this thread.

If it is meant to be a representation of Christ, which makes sense of much of the iconography and context, then the presence of leaves I think probably a fully intentional allusion to Christ as New Adam; if we follow traditional proof texts of Christ as New Adam we are led to the letters of Paul; to Ephesians, where we also find the sleightster / juggler (kubeios) as a type of Old Adam. So I find it supportive of my interpretation of the Juggler in the Tarot de Marseille sequence to be take as a type of Old Adam; to Phillipines, where Christ is fashioned as a Man, humbles himself as a servant, and in death is exalted as Lord God (kurios)- so the sequence is bookended by the kubeios and the kurios (the name of G-d used specifically of Christ as exalted above all, as risen Lord and as judge). From Earthly Man to Heavenly Man.

Well that's an interesting start - what have you got for the other 20 cards?

I have long noted the 1 Corinthians passages as proof-texts for the sequence - but I can find nothing in these passages that explain the vignettes below the Tarot de Marseille Star, Moon, Sun, World.

Not a discussion for here, please.