Tarot and the Da Vinci Code

[EricTheHermit]

Hi, Folks -

Have any of you read Dan Brown's controversial novel The Da Vinci Code? Brown based his book on historical research and theories about Jesus and Mary Magdalene being married and having a child who would start a royal bloodline in France.

A certain tarot plays a part in this research. In the 13th century, a painter by the name of Jacquemin Gringonneur designed three tarot decks for King Charles VI. Gringonneur, in at least one of these decks, used secret imagery to tell the story of Christ's marriage and bloodline, and the cover-up by the Vatican, including:

- The Hermit as St. Peter (with rock formations around him), holding not a lantern, but an hour glass shaped container which was the Holy Grail - the bloodline of Jesus and Magdalene.

- The Hanged Man as a tortured Templar Knight (the Church hung the Knights in the same way that this Hanged Man dangles) clutching two bags of treasure in his hands, the two treasures being the secret of Christ's escape from crucifixion and the secret of his marriage and bloodline. The Templar Knights were loyal soldiers who led the Church's holy wars, but they became too powerful and knew too much, so they had to be purged.

- The Swords and Cups meaning the marriage of Jesus and Magdalene.

- The Wands meaning the bloodline of David - Jesus and Magdalene's descendants.

- The Pentacles meaning the Goddess. In the Gnostic Gospels which were banned by the Church and buried for 1,600 years before being rediscovered, Jesus, who spent time in Egypt, is depicted as being initiated into a scholarly order (the Gnostic order) that studied and practiced Egyptian magick and the worship of the mother goddess Isis and her husband, the father god Osiris. He brought this knowledge with him to Jerusalem with the intention of bringing back the "sacred feminine" - the Goddess - to the misogynistic and monotheistic people of the Middle East.

Jacquemin Gringonneur's deck is mentioned in the documentary The Da Vinci Code Decoded. It's fascinating stuff! So are the Gnostic Gospels. You can find them online for free if you want to read them. Gnosticism was more a philosophy than a religion. The real Jesus, as described the Gnostic gospels, had no use for orthodoxial hierarchies of organized religion like the Catholic and Protestant Churches. That's why he tore apart the corrupted temples. He also believed in the duality of the Divine - that we are the children of a Goddess and a God. The Gnostic order had female members.

- Eric

[jmd]

One aspect that should be clear, and of course mentioned EricTheHermit, is that the book makes no other claims than being a work of fiction (albeit captivating), not a historical story.

[EricTheHermit]

I did say that the Da Vinci Code is a novel - a work of fiction - but it was inspired by real (and controversial) historical research by various historians and scholars into the origins of Christianity and Catholicism. The 13th century Jacquemin Gringonneur tarot was a real deck, and the Templar Knights were a real, secret society of mercenary soldiers in the Catholic Church's service until they were executed for heresy.

Did the Templar Knights really know secrets that the Church would kill to keep secret? Are the Gnostic Gospels a genuine record of Christ's life? Well, it's up to you whether or not you agree with the views of historians on these subjects. The theories put forth are hypotheses based on available evidence. Other historians may not agree with these hypotheses, but they are intriguing nonetheless.

Like the saying goes, you should always be open-minded - but not so open-minded that your brain falls out. :)

- Eric

[Rusty Neon]

From the TarotL Tarot History Information Sheet:

The "Charles VI" or "Gringonneur" tarot cards

Inaccurate: The tarot was invented to amuse Charles VI of France in 1392, as evidenced by a deck by Gringonneur in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France in Paris.

Current Historical Understanding: It is recorded that in 1392, Jacquemin Gringonneur was paid to paint three decks of cards for Charles VI. These were probably playing cards, not tarot. The deck in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France is a late-15th century hand-painted deck of the Northern Italian type (probably from Venice or Ferrara).

http://www.tarothermit.com/infosheet.htm

[EricTheHermit]

Margaret Starbird, author of The Woman with the Alabaster Jar : Mary Magdalen and the Holy Grail, says differently in her interview in the documentary The Davinci Code Decoded. During this segment, some images from the Gringonneur tarot are shown, and they are clearly tarot and illustrate the points she makes.

- Eric

[Rusty Neon]

Have any of you read Dan Brown's controversial novel The Da Vinci Code? Brown based his book on historical research and theories about Jesus and Mary Magdalene being married and having a child who would start a royal bloodline in France.


Theories abound but what historical research of Dan Brown's shows that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had a child?

Don't get me wrong. I enjoy the royal bloodline stories as much as anyone else.

I haven't read the book. I'm waiting for the movie. :)

[jmd]

As Rusty Neon pointed out with regards to the cards painted for Charles VI by Gringonneur, and though this latter undoubtedly, and as recorded by the notary, painted and was paid for a set of cards, there is unfortunately no evidence that this was a Tarot set.

Furthermore, it is now pretty well established that the deck previously mis-identified as that deck was a much later one, likely from northern Italy.

In other words, there were three decks that Gringonneur painted and was paid for. Where these are we do not, unfortunately, know. Some have pointed to another deck and mistakenly said: 'Here it is - and look, it's a kind of Tarot deck!' This does not, of course, make it one of the decks painted by him.

It may be that differing evidence comes to the fore at a later date to further correct this, and of course one needs to be open to various evidence. I also personally have no doubt that each and every image of the Tarot's Atouts were certainly around in the 12th (and earlier) centuries.

Also like many others here and in other places, I not only enjoy reading the various promulgated views of the family supposed to have descended from Jesus and Mary Magdelene, but also have certain opinions partly formed, of course, from the writings of the like of Starbird and others.

As to the Knight Templars, there is sufficient evidence of independence of mind, independence of secular power, and control of vast tracts or land, loans to various secular powers, etc, to have made both monarchy and church not only become quite wary of its influence and military power, but also downright clear that its demise was to their mutual benefit.

How the KTs have 'survived', transformed or been incorporated within various other bodies does not need to have been the way some have rather enjoyed weaving together into wonderful stories - and wonderful they are.

It can also be said, of course, that Umberto Eco's Name of the Rose, Foucault's Pendulum, and The Island of the Day Before were also each inspired by historical research. Fortunately, no-one has made claims that therefore the wonderfully weaved fictional stories from a basis of historical events: that it is the case that research leads to a fictional story does not in the least imply that the fictional story is based on a factual ground. Of course, this seems to be what has (strangely, to my mind) occured with this book: from story written as novel to an assumption of its description as factual account.

[EricTheHermit]

jmd -

If you enjoy reading the theories of Margaret Starbird and others, I highly recommend that you watch the documentary The Da Vinci Code Decoded. It's available on DVD only and runs about two and a half hours long. Starbird is one of the interviewees.

Another interviewee I was very impressed with is James M. Robinson, author of The Nag Hammadi Library In English. This book is Robinson's definitive translation of the Gnostic Gospels, which were discovered in 1945 after being buried for 1,600 years.

Robinson learned the Coptic language so he could do his own translation of the Gnostic Gospels, and his translation is considered by scholars to be the most accurate translation. Robinson came from a traditional Christian background, but after completing his work on the Gnostic Gospels, he became convinced that the Gnostics were the true record of Jesus the man, and that the Jesus of the New Testament was a myth conceived as a figurehead for an organized orthodox hierarchy that the real Jesus would have despised.

The Da Vinci Code Decoded is one of the most fascinating and intriguing documentaries I've ever seen.

- Eric

[kwaw]

Did the Templar Knights really know secrets that the Church would kill to keep secret? Are the Gnostic Gospels a genuine record of Christ's life? Well, it's up to you whether or not you agree with the views of historians on these subjects. The theories put forth are hypotheses based on available evidence. Other historians may not agree with these hypotheses, but they are intriguing nonetheless.

- Eric

As far as I know, no historian agrees with any of these hypotheses. The hypotheses put forward are not based upon available evidence, rather they are a highly imaginative formulation based upon a interpretation of a highly selected and thus limited picking of the body of evidence. From a historical point of view, they are pretty much crap, as a work of fiction however it is a pretty good and very readable example of the genre; I have no hesitation in recommending it to everyone as a work of fiction.

Kwaw

[Sophie]

I've not read the Da Vinci Code, and it's not high up on my to-read list - but I have read some of the so-called Gnsotic gospels available on the net, and Jean-Luc Leloup's translation and commentary of the Gospel of Mary (very beautiful book). They do intrigue me.

Does anyone know of any unbiased historical and/or theological study of these? I mean unbiased either way!! (I imagine the most unbiased would be atheists!)

[Mabuse]

Check out the back design of this deck!

http://www.playingcardsales.co.uk/cards/moreimages/13854_8_jdt_la_joconde.jpg

[EricTheHermit]

Mabuse -

Thanks for posting that link! What I find most interesting are the King and Queen cards. The King kind of looks like Jesus and he holds two wands. One is hoisted high, the other is pointed down. I wonder if those wands also symbolize the bloodline of David, one of them being the Church's lie about the bloodline ending with Jesus, and the other being the supressed truth of the bloodline continuing through Jesus and Magdalene's descendants.

Do you notice how the Queen is pointing to the medallion she wears? Could this be a portrait of Magdalene? Could she be saying, "I am the true rock, not Peter?"

The fact that the Mona Lisa was chosen for the backs of this deck made me not only wonder about hidden messages in the deck, but also remember the theories of hidden messages in Da Vinci's paintings, especially the Last Supper. Jesus sits next to a figure that is supposed to be John the Baptist, but is obviously a woman - Magdalene - who is practically holding Jesus' hand. Their bodies have perfect symmetrical angles which, combined, look like the letter M.

Next to the Magdalene figure is Peter, a scowl on his face. He appears to lean over and whisper to her, and his hand is positioned horizontally across her throat, as if he wanted to slash it.

It was common for many artists to include hidden messages in their paintings at that time, especially in religious-themed paintings. Back then, to voice any opinion that contradicts Chruch doctrine could get you arrested and executed for heresy. So, artists had to hide their views in their paintings. Fascinating and intriguing stuff!

- Eric

[f. silvestris]

Off the top of my head, and without checking, surely it is S. John of the Revelation, the best-loved disciple, next to Jesus in the Last Supper?

[EricTheHermit]

Oops, I think I mixed up St. John of Revelations (some historians say that he did not write Revelations, that it was some other man named John who wrote it) with John the Baptist, but the John figure in the painting has a very feminine appearance and certainly looks like a woman.

In the Gnostic Gospels, Magdalene is described as being the best-loved by Jesus, not St. John. The apostles all hated her, but Peter hated her the most. She was a wise and feisty woman who wouldn't take crap from them, and Jesus loved her for that.

In the Da Vinci Code Decoded documentary, one of the interviewees says that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John the apostles did not really write the gospels that bear their names. The real writers of those gospels based them on what each apostle was teaching after Jesus' death. That's why the gospels are so different. For example, when Jesus is crucified, only one gospel tells of two theives who were crucified alongside him; one asks Jesus to prove his divinity and free them all, the other repents his sins and Jesus grants him salvation. Also, the part where Jesus brings a dead little girl back to life appears in only one gospel.

- Eric

[Scion]

I've not read the Da Vinci Code, and it's not high up on my to-read list - but I have read some of the so-called Gnsotic gospels available on the net, and Jean-Luc Leloup's translation and commentary of the Gospel of Mary (very beautiful book). They do intrigue me.

Does anyone know of any unbiased historical and/or theological study of these? I mean unbiased either way!! (I imagine the most unbiased would be atheists!)
Sophie, we have to stop meeting like this! LOL

Actually I did a large part of my religion degree on gnostic Xianity. Although it's not perfect, the most credible and accessible entry text would be Dr. Elaine Pagels' The Gnostic Gospels, which is a pretty solid, unbiased overview of the texts and the themes explored/raised therein. (Although it may only focus on Valentinian Gnosticism... I have to check...) That said, I would not rush Brown's novel to the top of any of your stacks... n.b.: it's a beach book in mock-damask. Every time someone compares it to Eco I think a small part of me dies.

In the Da Vinci Code Decoded documentary, one of the interviewees says that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John the apostles did not really write the gospels that bear their names.
I've following this thread for a few days and didn't want to squelch anyone's enthusiasm; but reading the posts I thought maybe a couple of further reading recs might not be amiss.

The thing to remember about the Da Vinci Code Decoded is the reason the documentary was created: the timing, the target market, the shelf-life. And that it's based on a book by Martin Lunn which contains some extremely dubious scholarship. Don't get me wrong, I have a streak of the conspiracy theorist in me, but homework must be done even for TV documentaries. Lunn is dissecting Dan Brown's novel very much after the fact AND using many of the resources that Brown used to write the book. So there's a circular logic there, an ideological feedback loop if you will. Of course the scholars he cites are intrigued by the possible truths of the novel; the truths were lifted wholesale from their own work, substantive and otherwise. And the scholars Brown consulted run the gamut from conservatively unimpeachable (a few) to the wacky and non-credible (more than a few).

That is also not to say that it's not an interesting topic to discuss or an interesting challenge to dogma. The thing is, this stuff is my meat; I studied it at university, and I continue to throw textual logs on the flame every year. So I'm immediately wary of the mass-marketed, fast-food, People-magazine scholarship that dips into topics with glossy soundbites sans real grasp or credible references. Go for the full meal! I DO think there is real controversy in this subject and I can say without a doubt that Catholicism, Inc. has spent millenia manipulating and hiding events and facts.

If this book and the subsequent media maelstrom has really piqued people's interest, I hope they'll be spurred to dig deeper. Check out ANY of Dr. Pagels' books. Read Walter Burkert's Ancient Mystery Cults or Samuel Angus' book on early Xianity called Mystery-Religions. For primary textsof "pagan" and "monotheistic" origin, there's a nice collection called Ancient Mysteries: A Sourcebook, edited by Marvin Myer (I think). And definitely take a look at the Nag Hammadi texts for yourself, they are fascinating and wildly contradictory. For most of the early centiuries of Xianity, Gnosticism was its most popular mutation. In fact, until the Council of Nicea in 325, it was pretty much the only option. Gnosticism is a fascinating thread of thought in Xianity and Judaism that has many branches and sects if its own.

In religion (and history), nothing is simple. If you're genuinely interested or even just curious, flesh out your knowledge before you let other folks' opinions take hold in your imagination. Opinions and scholarship don't come out of a vacuum... like Tarot (or civilization for that matter) they build on what comes before. Demand excellence. Not to be overdramatic, but it's like eating: sure you can survive on junk food, but can you live? And why would you want to?

Tarot-wise, I can also recommend a SUPERB starting point. Robert Place's fantastic new book makes a very credible case for the Tarot's relation to Neoplatonic (i.e. Renaissance Gnostic) thought... definitely worth checking out by anyone interested in history or religion and its relation to Tarot. It's reviewed on Aeclectic here (http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/books/history-symbolism-divination/).

Anyways, now I realize that I've just had another one of my weird braindump manifestations and I hope I'm not being a buzzkill, but I just wanted to "speak my truth," even if it's only mine. :)

Peace Out

Scion

[Cerulean]

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=B0002ZDVFY/ref=nosim/aeclectic/

The reason that I am interested is that I hope Ms. Starbird gets to actually see and comment on the original Ferarrese decks that are available to view via art catalogues nowadays. There are some French King Arthurian romantic literature links that Stuart Kaplan and other historians have commented upon in the original Ferarra decks, which are more widely available now to the curious students, as I am.

If you saw the DVD, did the trump cards mentioned or shown also speak of the original family of Ferarra that sponsored the art of the deck, the D'Estensi (D'Este)?

Original Lovers Card in the so-called Charles VI/G

http://expositions.bnf.fr/renais/grand/038.htm

At the times of her original books, she only had included what looks like a colorized version that looked like a 1980's limited edition reprint available from a French graphic artist. Both Michael Innes and her books did not have the original aged cards, so I was disappointed in the analysis. There are color differences in her modernized reproductions and things such as the upper right hand corner of the modern reprint have been cleaned up--the cover of her book shows a pretty, fresher-looking image:

http://www.telisphere.com/~starbird/

If you are interested, I'll link to the discussion threads that speaks of Margaret Starbirds books and my original commentary.

The page below with commentary as I read the Women in the Alabastar Jar recently.

http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=28388&highlight=margaret+starbird

Regards,

Cerulean

P.S. My husband watched a special on an anniversary of Leonardo da Vinci last week with Stone Phillips as the narrator. It was very enjoyable, as he liked the book, found it entertaining. Both he and his sister (who passed the book on to him, free), were raised Catholic and respect their mother's very strong beliefs. They did not think she would enjoy it very much, as she likes her fiction rather tame...

[f. silvestris]

For anyone who wishes to read Gnostic texts, a useful online source is www.gnosis.org/library.html - I download texts from the site from time to time, but can't say that I've used any of the other resources they provide.

[le pendu]

Another great site:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/