marseilles tarots

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 07 Mar 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Logiatrix	07 Mar 2002
i would like to know more about this deck. i have observed that there are different publications of these tarots, and i wish to know which is which, and which is preferable (and available). i know there are reviews, but i want to hear from a personal perspective(s). opinions, experiences? thanx oodles...

jmd	07 Mar 2002
You're certainly right, there are many versions of the Marseilles... some of which are in print. The version displayed by Aeclectic is the 1998 edition published by Camoin. This deck is very much based on one of the earliest Marseilles decks avaible, the 1761 Conver deck (Camoin is from the same family). Probably the most common Marseilles is the one published by Grimaud. The Grimaud differs from the Camoin and Conver mainly in the colours used, though some of the minor (and especially the ambiguous) details also differ. Currently, all of these are available (the Conver is available either as a Lo Scarabeo or a Heron publication... I think the latter is vastly superior). So... how would I rate each: The Conver is worth getting as it may or may not stay in print... it remains very much the standard from which other Marseilles decks will be assessed. As such, it forms the 'backbone' of the traditional decks <4> The Grimaud is the deck most commonly used in books which use the Marseilles for illustrative and suggested interpretative meanings... it is also the one which most people would have who use the Marseilles <3> The Camoin is, in my opinion, superior to either... even know some of the minor modifications made may be unwarranted <5> I have attached the Grimaud Magician, which you may wish to compare to the Camoin (viewable from the above link).

Ophiel	08 Mar 2002
I didn't see your post when I posted mine. I'm doing some serious research on the Marseilles decks and thought I'd throw in a few words. These decks were more a style. There are tons of printers. Each area's printer seemed to do their own deck, made from wood blocks, thus the variations. Kaplan's wonderful "Encyclopedia of the Tarot" goes into some detail. Volume II has a listing of the French card makers from this period, and it's long. Besides the decks currently available (as noted above), the Philippe Camoin card company of France recently released a newly restored deck that seems to have added elements suitable for the occultist, including elements of the Scared Geometry. You can find more on this by navigating through his website: http://cyberbag.internet-fr.net/camoingb/contenu.html Even decks not of French origins are considered "Marseilles" cards, including the Spanish deck and the 1JJ Swiss deck, both from U.S. Games. The Marseilles deck designs (Majors) were more or less copied for the Waite-Rider-Smith deck, and all that followed. You can see some of the differences between the Rider deck and the Golden Dawn deck (Robert Wang) as he restored a few of the designs to conform to the instructions given GD members, who all had to make their own cards. Pick up the Kaplan Encyclopedias and look up the Marseilles decks and you will begin to appreciate how many there were, though most are similar in design. BTW, the Two of Cups usually includes the name of the card maker, so check that out.

jmd	08 Mar 2002
Ophiel is correct when mentioning that there are many decks published elsewhere which are Marseilles type decks. The 1jj, however, is not a Marseilles. For that matter, neither is the very closely similar Schaffhouse (published as Tarot Classic by USGames). The Camoin deck linked through Aeclectic, and which I gave above, is the same deck mentioned in the above post. They also, incidentally, have a reproduction of the Conver deck on thick cardboard... which I would only get if you are serious about the deck. The Encyclopedia of Tarot by Kaplan is certainly in a category of its own... but it is not faultless. Certain of its statements regarding Kabbalistic associations, and certain other points, are questionable. I nonetheless have the three volumes and highly treasure them. Also, it is not the two of Cups on which is furnished the publisher/printer, but the two of Coins, along the ribbon which lemniscates around them.

Ophiel	08 Mar 2002
That's the last time I post a message at 4 in the morning! LOL. Actually, the 1JJ Swiss deck is not a Marseilles deck, but is fashioned in design after the Marseilles deck. That's what I meant.

Ophiel	08 Mar 2002
BTW, as Moderator pointed out, the Kaplan Encyclopedias are with faults. However, if you are doing any type of historical research, these books are indispensible and hopefully the errors will spur others on to do the work themselves.

jmd	09 Mar 2002
Ophiel, actually mistakes can lead to really good conversations... As an example, take mine: I said Quote: Also, it is not the two of Cups on which is furnished the publisher/printer, but the two of Coins, along the ribbon which lemniscates around them. What I should have said that is it not the two of Cups which usually depicts this (though it too is sometimes used), but rather, the two of Coins. I find this whole area, and the other thread related to this matter, absolutely awesome in its scope. Quote: Let's have a look at some really interesting comparisons (which I'll have to also post in the study group I started and have only quickly checked once since the Forum was updated). Take the Magician (again). The attachment contains pictures of the Magician from five important Marseilles type decks. Obviously, many details are fascinating. But one detail not picked up by later reproductions is that the 'bag' on the table is a bag only ambiguously. It also looks very much like an open book and bookmark (how I wish the Camoin deck had incorporated that ambiguity). As for the three 'cups' also found on the Magician's table, one looks like it could very well be an inkwell, and the other two leather pouches with draw-strings (again, the Camoin deck doesn't capture the ambiguity). Open the attachment which follows in my next post (I have to make ajustments for it to be accepted), and marvel for yourself!

Ophiel	09 Mar 2002
Thanks Moderator. I am studying these cards right now and as you can tell, am in the early stages of my work. Through my study of the Marseilles-style cards, I am trying to learn of possible links to systems of occult information. During this time it seems that card buyers depended more on their local printers for Tarot cards, and that the cards were subject to small differences. It is difficult to know which variations are intentional. The Camoin deck I have on order seems to include intentional variations that point to deeper occult information from the cards. However, as I was saying, it is a tough chore trying to determine authenticity. The movie "Brian" comes to mind, if you are familiar with that Monty Python classic. I don't want to be chasing around the wrong ideas with a shoe in my hand! Christine Payne-Towler published some articles online about the French school of cards, as I'm sure you know. Have you read her book? Any good? One point I read online was about the change in the cards in about 1660, with two card makers deviating from the imagery standards of the time. The two cards that were altered then are THE LOVERS and THE DEVIL. Vieville used the new LOVERS card (two paths; which I believe deviated from the marriage of the king and queen before) and Noblet went further, changing THE DEVIL from a medieval werewolf to the more common devil as seen in modern cards, with the man and the woman (possibly from the LOVERS) chained to him. Both these decks can be viewed in Kaplan's Vol 2, p. 309. The online article goes on to suggest these changes were due to the work of Kircher, which was apparently influential at that time. This online article notes how similiar the new DEVIL looks to imagery found in the Kircher materials on the Cabalah. It is a shame that more work has not been done on this period of cards. Last year I joined an online group, a rather large one at that, and was immediately attacked when I dare mention a speculative history/origin to the cards. It was an odd experience as the group, which included some very fine tarotists, were treating the cards totally like a Sunday afternoon parlour game rather than questioning possible deeper meanings. Very odd indeed. Very odd...one means of 'banning' me from discussing such topics was that such foolery was not included in the group's 'official history' of the cards and when I persisted, I was told to go back and read it. LOL. It would be very nice if this group develops an esoteric wing to the studies. I would enjoy that quite a bit. And we best get to work on an official history for the cards, so we can channel the discussions to fit our own visions!!!

jmd	11 Mar 2002
With regards to the Camoin deck, I made a four page list of what I personally consider 'unfortunate errors'. Some of these I mention in my revised review to the Camoin deck on Aeclectic (I haven't checked to see if Solandia has had time to post it yet... or whether she wants to!). Having said this, I still consider it the best deck currently available. When you say that card buyers were dependent on their local printers, there is no doubt that this is correct, in the same way that we depend on our publishers and what is currently available. Nonetheless, I also suspect that the publishers were also significantly influenced by what the 'local' demands or 'requirements' were, so that local groups using Tarot would be quite influential on the local printers. The esoteric and occult aspects of decks is certainly something I am interested in... but sometimes these words may mean different things to different people. As an example, I am not very familiar with Rev. Payne-Towler's works, and the book The Esoteric Stream (is that the correct title?) is somewhat overpriced for me to purchase without being able to preview it (the value of the Australian dollar since the irresponsible decision to float it has been disastrous for the general Australian public). I'll have to have another look at some of her web-available works... I haven't looked at them in a while. From memory, and having quickly re-checked one of her articles only recently, she makes very much use of what is coming to be known as 'revisionist' church history (influenced by, for example, such books as Gardner's Bloodline of the Holy Grail), and also makes comments which I thought had already been pretty much seriously investigated and rejected over a century ago (such as, for example, that Durer made a series of Major Arcana prints... the engraver was, apparently, not him). Nonetheless, much of what she has to say is, I think, very - or even extremely - important to our ongoing exegesis of Tarot... and I would be interested to read your views and contributions to what she has to say (as well as hyperlinks). Her regard for the recent Spanish El Gran Tarot Esoterica (of which there was a thread earlier in this Forum) is, in my opinion, overly high. It is a great deck, but to my mind falls far short of the tradition (even if Fourier would like to make it the main 'Spanish' esoteric deck). With regards to the 1660 'deviations', there appears to be, rather, locality 'standardisations'. The Flemish/Belgian decks coming to use certain depictions (the most obvious of which is the rider-&-horse on the Sun card), and Marseilles-type decks (amongst others... these two becoming the most common). I am drawn to the Marseilles precisely because of its intrinsic esoteric aspects. The Parisian Vieville is not, in my opinion, a very good rendition. That the woodcutter didn't even get some of the words the right way (witness the 'Sol Fama' on XIIII) either indicates that he may have other cards back-to-front (compare with Marseilles decks Vieville's Fool, Magician and Hanged Man as examples), or that he was being extremely ruseful and indicated through this 'Sol Fama' that one should reverse these cards (I personally doubt the latter). There is no doubt that Kircher was very influential, and his book was certainly published around the time mentioned (1652 in Rome). Whether he influenced card modifications, or whether he was using the same tradition of representation which the Marseilles area (hence southern France) already used, needs to be further researched. When you mention that you joined an on-line group, are you referring to TarotL or to alt.Tarot (which have a large overlap of 'membership')? I personally find the convenience of a Forum far more effective... I do not have the time to scan hundreds of posts. I have heard of similar complaints to yours, and I on rare occasions do check the posts there... when I have plenty of spare time. With regards to an 'esoteric wing', I think that you'll find that this does occur here and there within the Forums. Another thread, started by AmounRa a while back, and to which a number of us took great pleasure in contributing (Kiama, DeLani, AmounRa and others) had some elements of what you're interested in: Sanctum Sanctorum (unfortunately, it lost around 36 posts when the Forum Tarot Cards ceased to exist, and its posts were moved to Reading Tarot. Another thread of interest may be a thread (also in Reading Tarot) called What drives Tarot..., started by divinerguy, to which contributers included Pollux, Truthsayer, Marion, Major Tom, MeeWah and many others (I hope contributers not listed won't feel offended). I've finally attached the Noblet Magician. In my next post, I'll try to attach the other four.

jmd	11 Mar 2002
I'm going to have to do these singly... As I have already given two versions, attached is the Conver, on which the Camoin is principally (but not solely) based.

Ophiel	11 Mar 2002
Thanks JMD. I am actually on my way out the door to work right now and when I get home, I'll fire up my puter and check out those links you supplied. Yes, the group I encountered problems when I used the dirty "T" word (Templar) in connection to possible links between 'them' and the Tarot. I was stunned, such a large group with some authors sitting in, allowing the censorship. And I can't figure their angle, either. Perhaps they want to make the Tarot respectable by stripping away all that foul occultism/esoterica. Ironically, one of those who tried to flame-broil me is employed in the field of science, and I get his co-workers get a kick out of his interest in reading cards. The Payne-Towler essays are at this addie: http://www.tarot.com/about-tarot/?file=essays I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that her book is comprised at least in part with these articles. There is no room for sloppy research, though I do think that even sloppy work might open up new avenues of investigation. Thanks for posting those cards, too. I have no idea when Camoin will get my deck in the mail, or even if they have received the order yet! Peas Ophiel

jmd	12 Mar 2002
Thanks for the link to the Payne-Towler essays. I'm certain that many of us who haven't looked at her work, or who haven't looked at it for a while, will find it useful. I'll have a look at it tomorrow, when I have more time. With regards to Camoin, I have found them to be quite efficient in the past. So I would expect that your order be in the mail if your financial details have been processed. You say that "there is no room for sloppy research, though I do think that even sloppy work might open up new avenues of investigation"... I agree... with both apparent contradictory parts! Even if we were to have a totally uncontroversial history of Tarot's genesis (even to the extent of having a name associated with it), discussion would still be raging about possible influences on the deck (ie, its proto-history and iconographic influences). As imaginative iconographies, their inherent depth will continue, I would certainly like to think, to transcend any local, individual, 'school of thought' or regional exegesis. To add to the other Magicians, attached is the Saul/Paul Marteau Grimaud version.

Ophiel	12 Mar 2002
I was wondering if my apparent contradiction would get by you. It is an interesting phenomena that two, or any number of seemingly contradictory points can coexist, and all of them be totally true and totally false, depending on who is the source. I have been in touch with Christine but do not know her personally. I barely know her work, and only from what I've read online, which isn't referenced. She sent me a long list of books to read in my research for the Marseilles deck, though I can see that many of these books are coloring a bit out of the line. At this point, I am unable to determine which side of the fence she sits regarding this whole Holy Blood/Holy Grail scenario goes. Her list included books by decidedly anti-whatever this impulse is (Valentin Tomberg's "Meditations on the Tarot" and works by Rudolf Steiner and other of like mind) plus some authors who are decidedly pro the concept that Christ survived the crucifixion, married Mary Magdeline and whose children started some royal blood lines, or something along that line. I personally do not support this as a working theory of how things are, and in my own limitations, have decided there are two kinds of people in the world, those who are for it and those who are against it. But of course, there are also unlimited other possibilities, so I don't take myself too seriously on that point. Perhaps we could start a list of books that deal specifically with this deck, the Marseilles deck. I am surprised that nobody has published a more or less authoritative book on the variations and evolution of this style of cards. But then, in an earlier part of my life, I worked as a philatelic job lotter, writing descriptions of stamps and postal history to collectors around the world who would research and write entire books on the postal markings of one postal area! Such an exoteric treatment of the cards would be nice, a cataloguing of sorts. Kaplan more of less does this in his books, though he treats the style of cards in a haphazard way, including them here and there and in no particular order. No, I'm not a Virgo with a passion to describe every nuance in every version of these cards. Hardly. I think I fall more into that category of sloppy research I sited in an earlier posting, but of no fault of my own, as I remind you I am human, a part of me, the part that still seeks the Holy Grail, which, of course, is also part of me, though I haven't realized that yet. You said you are fluent in French. Have you run across any specialized treatment of the Marseilles deck in French? Perhaps, since the deck has a decidedly French association (with the name), I thought perhaps a Frenchman in touch with the group soul of the French people would relish in such a task. What categorizes a Marseilles style deck as just that, and just what constitutes a breach of definition? What I mean is, when did the cards actually evolve into something new, causing a redefinition of the style? Perhaps the occultists of mid 19th century France, when they started corresponding the deck to the system the Hebrew alphabet and other occult symbols? I am very new in my research of the Marseilles deck and if your finger can point where I might start my search, even though you are in Austrailia, I think I'll be able to see where you are pointing here in the U.S. The Internet is quite forgiving in that manner. I fear in my research that can so often be the case, that writers rely on earlier works that have not been substantiated, or are the result of the writer's desire to believe and extract certain points from his or her source materials. But then, perhaps that is too the fun of it all, just never knowing, and seeing it all as the truth and the lie. I"m thinking of the earlier writers on the Tarot, in the 1970s, which seems to be an active time for research. However, I imagine most of those writers were basing their thesis on the same materials viewed from different perspectives. Shall we start a list of reference works that deal with the Marseilles deck in some depth? Currently, I have only Kaplan's books and Christine's (though I haven't purchased it yet) that deal in any length with either the physical cards or the "French" school of Tarot. Let me know if you are interested in pursuing this line of research. Thanks. Ophiel This last Magician you downloaded is the version from 1930, no? Is it a recreation by the artist, a more or less synthesis of the earlier decks?

Logiatrix	12 Mar 2002
thanx! what a wealth of information... a study group o historical decks would be very nifty--is it gonna happen? i'd start it, but i know next to nothing about the subject, and wanna learn. again, thank you, jmd & ophiel!!

jmd	12 Mar 2002
With regards to a study group for early Marseilles type decks, I started a tread in the Study Group section a while back... but not even a single reply... I guess this discussion on the Marseilles deck is taking its place:) A list of books dealing with the Marseilles deck would be superb to have... and I would personally highly value such. I would personally like a copy of that list you obtained, Ophiel. For myself, I'll have to go through various books and see what I can retrieve. Apart from Kaplan's Encyclopedia of Tarot, I do not own any books which detail such development. I have been told that Dummet & al's A Wicked Pack of Cards has interesting and useful historical material, but that it is quite bias. Fred Gettings's Tarot: How to read the Future (originally published in 1973 under the far better title The Book of Tarot) has a number of quite interesting material (his book of the Secret Zodiac is masterly!). Unfortunately, he makes some quite important mistakes. For example, he has a photo of a sculptural bas-relief from a Cathedral which clearly depicts the Tower. He mentions that it is from the Reims Cathedral... it isn't (I 'wasted' great time a few years ago making a detour to Reims to check it out for myself, only to be disappointed. When I arrived back in Melbourne, checking other sources, I presume the photo shows a depiction from the Amiens Cathedral ... I'll have to check this when I am next in that area of the world). Ophiel, you mention that the list sent to you included Tomberg and Steiner. Tomberg's book is certainly sublime... and esoteric, but it doesn't deal with the Marseilles deck's historical development. With regards to Steiner, the only Tarot reference I'm aware of is a brief comment he made in a lecture on the http://wn.elib.com/Steiner/Lectures/19061217p01.html"] 17th December 1906. Steiner's exegesis of Light on the Path has also been related to the Tarot by some... If you have other references regarding Steiner and Tarot, it would be appreciated (incidentally, my version of the three of Coins for the Aeclectic tarot project emerges partly from much of Steiner's works). Perhaps what is required for this meticulous research is someone with very Virgoean qualities. For myself, I am far more interested in the various iconography to see what appears the 'most correct'... various decks indicate elements or depths otherwise occulted. From what I can surmise, the treatment of decks in French runs into similar 'problems' as the ones in English: they either treat the historical in what I consider a very superficial manner, or they assume a peculiar esoteric history which remains, however plausible, unsubstantiated historically. Having downloaded Payne-Towler 'The Continental Tarots' and Keizer's 'The Esoteric Origins of Tarot', the same can be said for these. As an example, the depiction on page three of 'The Continental Tarot', depicting what she calls Kirchner's Pan/Jupiter, does not, in my opinion, substantiate in the least her comments about the 'change' in the depictions of the Devil card. It is probably more likely that there were a variety of decks in Tarot's early history, many of which were not Tarot (unfortunately, the Encyclopedia calls many decks which I definitely regard as non-Tarot as though they were, eg, Etteilla decks). I personally see great merit in looking at possible influences on the depictions of Tarot cards. These may include Egyptian, Kabbalistic, Astrological, Moorish, Greek and myriad other influences... without necessarily indicating that Tarot 'came from there or that'. The esoteric tradition, as applied to Tarot, is partly an exegetic exercise in developing Imaginative hyper-alert Thinking. Your question "what categorizes a Marseilles style deck as just that, and just what constitutes a breach of definition?" is one with which I have at times struggled. Clearly, most decks are not Marseilles style. Clearly, also, many woodcut-style decks are also not Marseilles. In my view, decks which look similar to Marseilles decks but which have a couple for the Lovers are more Italian style decks, those depicting the Devil as 'rampant were-wolf' and the Sun as per the Waite are more Flemish style. The Marseilles will generally have curved crossed swords (when the number of swords depicted is even), the numbering on the Major arcana will be Roman additive style, and will otherwise generally look similar to either the Noblet or Conver decks. Possibly a great place to further this research is through a francophonic site (the Camoin site is very good, but it too makes a few mistakes. For example, it claims somewhere that Wirth was a member of Blavatski's Theosophical Society... as I couldn't find any indications of this anywhere else, a person who is a member of an Oswald Wirth Masonic lodge in Paris checked for me and responded that this was inaccurate... perhaps incorrectly, I tend to have more faith in the veracity of the latter). With regards to the Marteau/Grimaud Magician attached to my previous post, it is the 1930 production, which remains the most common Marseilles type deck.

Ophiel	13 Mar 2002
JMD- Regarding Steiner and the Tarot, as a friend of mine indicated recently, since Steiner seemed to join us with a higher level of spiritual refinement, he had no need of the Tarot cards for his spiritual development. Too bad he didn't have to run the pack! Anyway, a friend of mine, John Barnwell, has published two books that you might be interested in. John has been a student of Steiner's for decades and also maintained quite an interest in the cards. The result of this marriage was his book, "The Arcana of the Grail Angel." It is basically Rudolf Steiner as seen through the Major Arcana. I think this book was John's response to Tomberg's "Meditations on the Tarot." John's book is carried by both the Anthroposophical Press and Amazon.com. ISBN #0967150302. John also wrote a book connecting the majors with Maybel Collins' "Light on the Path" called "The Arcana of Light on the Path" (ISBN #0967150310) but I think the Grail Angel book is far superior. It is about 578 pages of text and has over forty charts and diagrams. The Light on the Path edition is more like Cliff Notes he wrote for friends at the Theosophical Society. I will post my complete list of books that Christine sent me, but I must warn you...there is probably not one title in the lot that deals exclusively with the Marseilles deck. I think she was trying to provide me with general background on the cards in general and esoterica.

Ophiel	13 Mar 2002
JMD - I agree with you (if this is even what you are saying), if C-P-T's entire swing to support the change in the imagery of the DEVIL in the Jean Noblet Marseilles tarot deck is based on her observation that one or some of Kircher's Pan/Jupiter imagery, then this is not what one would call 'good research.' It's easy to speculate. Perhaps some occult groups special ordered those changes, or that imagery was in vogue that year. It would be interesting to note if that change appeared elsewhere, in other art, perhaps even in literature of the day. Yes, POSSIBLE influences are interesting, and I think they need to be properly identified as just that. I have Dummet's book "A Wicked Pack of Cards," on my book list. It hasn't been easy to find. I did, however, obtain a copy last week of Gertrude Moakley's book in great condition for only $15 U.S. But that's about the Italian cards, and not too sympathic to the occult, from what I have read. Still, a good find. I noticed there is a new book out from last summer called "The Secret Tarot : Renaissance Symbols of Science, Magic and Myth Now Reveal the Future " by Jane Lyle that I will be viewing when my local mega bookstore gets it back in stock in a few days. I hope it has some history and illustrations. And I just realized...it is a deck! Hmmm... Thanks for the update on the Fred Getting book. I will order a copy if it's available. Thanks for the working definitions of what constitutes a deck as "Marseilles" (curved swords on even cards, Roman style numbering on the Majors, etc.) and I'm curious what dates you put on this style? I realize you may not have a set date, but I'm curious about tentative dating parameters. (If I had dating parameters earlier in my life, perhaps I could have avoided a few disastrous relationships!) I sense that these definitions we are discussing will be hot debate topic by some of the more informed, which is to be expected. I know of no references by Steiner, other than the one you linked. I will ask my friend John. He of all people will know. Thanks again.

Ophiel	13 Mar 2002
Here is the complete list of books recommended by Christine. I'm sure you were hoping for only books directly accessing information about the Marseilles deck, but as you'll see, this is more comprehensive than that. I would not be surprised to learn this list is the main reference materials for Christine's own book! In any event, you may at least find the list interesting. Cavendish, Richard: “The Tarot”. Gettings, Fred: ”The Book of Tarot” Wirth, Oswald: “Tarot of the Magicians” Christian, Paul: “The History of Magic” Tomberg, V.: “Meditations on the Tarot” Mouni Sadhu: “The Tarot” Maxwell, Joseph: “The Tarot”. Papus: “Tarot of the Bohemians” Levi, Eliphas: All the works Wirth, Oswald: "Introduction To The Study of The Tarot" Hall, Manly P.: "The Tarot: An Essay by Manly P. Hall". Douglas, Alfred: “The Tarot”. Knight, Gareth: “The Treasure House of Images” Haich, Elizabeth: “The Wisdom of the Tarot” Gad, Irene: “Tarot and Individuation” The Church of Light volume 6, _The Sacred Tarot_ is all made up of Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor lessons.(early Theosophical society stuff). Kaplan, Stuart: “Encyclopedia of Tarot”, Vols 1 and 2 Kaplan, Aryeh: “Sefir Yetzirah; Book of Creation” Starbird, Margaret various works Peeke, Margaret B.: “Numbers & Letters or the Thirty-Two Paths of Wisdom” (which I found at Kessinger Reprints. She was one of Papus' students.) Godwin, Jocelyn: “The Theosophical Enlightenment” for more background on the Godwin, Jocelyn: “The Beginnings of Theosophy in France” (39 pg booklet) Faivre, Antoine: “Access to Western Esotericism” Faivre, Antoine: “Modern Esoteric Spirituality” Secret Society threads Hall, Manly P.: “Freemasonry of the Ancient Egyptians”; Elizabeth Cooper-Oakley: “The Count of Saint-Germain” Saint-Germain: “The Most Holy Trinosophia of the Comte de St.-Germain” "classically Webster, Nesta H.: “Secret Societies & Subversive Movements” - negative treatment Howard, Michael: “The Occult Conspiracy: Secret Societies -- Their Influence and Power in World History” Wasserman, James: ”The Templars and the Assassins; The Militia of Heaven” For further insight into the magical worldview of the Renaissance Steiner, Rudolf: “Mystics After Modernism” Brann, Noel L.: “Trithemius and Magical Theology” Couliano, Ioan P.: “Eros and Magic in the Renaissance”. “Gnosis and Hermeticism from Antiquity to Modern Times”, edited by Roelof van den Broek, and and Wouter J. Hanegraaff. Faivre, Antoine: “Theosophy, Imagination, Tradition: Studies in Western Esotericism” Cassirer, Ernst: “The Individual and the Cosmos in Renaissance Philosophy” Walker, D. P.: “Spiritual and Demonic Magic from Ficino to Campanella”. (Walker was Frances Yates' academic advisor. This is newly reprinted.) Ophiel

jmd	14 Mar 2002
Interesting three posts by Ophiel! I have recently ordered your friend's book The Arcana of Light on the Path. From what I know of it, it unfortunately (in my opinion) uses the Waite deck for illustrative purposes. Given that the correlation he makes is with Steiner's work, I find that odd. A Visconti-Sforza or early woodcut would have been more appropriate... anyway, I'm looking forward to it. Being involved in both the field of Tarot and Steiner's works, it will be interesting to see what someone else with similar interests does with the material. If you think his earlier book is superior, I'll order it in the next few months. With regards to dating the Marseilles deck, I do think that this is one of those historical problems which have yet to be accurately determined. I do think there is some circumstantial evidence that these images predate the earliest extant cards. Apart from the example from Gettings's book which I mentioned above, there are other iconographic representations which date from late mediaeval times, and which then make their appearance in the cards. The question then becomes not when the images arose, but when these images were grouped into a deck of cards. In my opinion, I think we'll find that Marseilles images first emerge together in the late 12th century... but ask me for historical evidence, and I'll have to be evasive. So when do I date the Marseilles? I'll make the same unsubstantiated claim as others have, trying to push back the historically determinable date a few centuries. Your booklist is quite interesting, and I think quite important. Most of them I have... and think highly of. Important omissions include: Kaplan's Tarot Classic (though much of the information is repeated in the Encyclopedia), Kaplan's third volume of the Encyclopedia of Tarot , I'm also surprised that Case's The Tarot and some of his other books are not included. A really fascinating little book, which is not explicitly connected to the Tarot, is JJG Alexander's Italian Renaissance Illuminations (p36) which takes a page from a small manuscript located in the Biblioteca Estense in Modena (De Sphera, Biblioteca Estense ref. A.2.14 (lat.209)). It contains a number of diagrammes related to astrology, supposedly made for the young Count Sforza (of the famed Visconti-Sforza Tarot fame). The central-top depiction from the page on Mercury is virtually exactly the same as what appears as the Magician in the Visconti-Sforza deck... again not Marseilles. As far as I am aware, this is not mentioned anywhere else I'm aware of (if it's in the Encyclopedia, I haven't seen it... which is possible given its organisation and my usage of the books). To continue the series on the Marseilles, here is II the Popess from the Camoin deck:

Ophiel	14 Mar 2002
Hey, what's that egg doing next to the Poppess' elbow on the left side of the card? Was it raw, hard boiled, or three minute? Or was it rotten? Just kidding. I know those eggs keep appearing in the Camoin deck. Mine hasn't arrived yet. Please don't judge John's work by the book you ordered. It was written for a Theosophical group he talks to and is mostly Theosophical in orientation. His book on the Arcana of the Grail Angel is the one overflowing in Steiner. Yes, I had a surprising number of those books myself, and I agree with you, and was surprised that Case's book wasn't included. I'm not sure why John chose the Waite deck (he did) and it might have been in reaction to Tomberg's work, "Meditations on the Tarot." I'll ask him tomorrow. He informed me he'll be giving a talk at the Theosophical Society and I'd like to offer my support to his efforts. Speaking of Tomberg's book, in that list of books I posted yesterday, she included a note that the Mouni Sadhu "The Tarot" was the COMPANION book to Tomberg's. I didn't understand that connection and wrote her, but she hasn't responded yet. John said he was unfamiliar with other Steiner references to the Tarot. I recall in one of his books (don't recall which at the moment) he talked a bit about the Jewish kabbalah and I will double check that for links between the Hebrew alphabet and the cards (if I can remember which book it was!) Those links were made in the mid-19th century (Hebrew alphabet and Tarot arcana) so perhaps Steiner mentioned something. Not sure. I need to spend some serious time with the first two volumes of Kaplan's encyclopedia and try to weed out any information I can about the Marseilles deck. Perhaps I can use his list of French card maker names and search each name for links online. JMD - are you familiar with online searching of databases, museums, etc.? Perhaps we can get some information online that way, without having to fly to Europe (definitely not in my budget this year.) The Dutch actually have some interesting occult interest and I have a friend who claims to have been 'initiated' into a modern Dutch system with many doctors, lawyers, and artists (lots of modern symbolist-style artists.) Oddly, he also uses the Waite deck, and PREFERS it to the Marseilles. Have you found any French sites devoted to the Marseilles deck? Thanks for posting and I'll forge ahead in my research. Ophiel

Ophiel	14 Mar 2002
This morning over coffee at my favorite coffee shop, I studied some of the many pages of Tarot cards in the Kaplan II encyclopedia, trying to make some sense out of all the varieties of Marseilles-style cards. After a large coffee and half way through a medium latte with an extra shot of espresso (I'm only telling you this so you will have a basic understanding of the state of my nervous system during this discovery...) I started to notice something in the different decks that I found a bit odd. I want to share that observation with you now, and am wondering why I haven't run into this one before. Left hand in French is 'gauche.' In English, as an adjective, it means "lacking in ease and grace of manner, awkward and tactless." (Oxford American Dictionary.) The Webster's New World College Dictionary goes into a bit more detail on this, listing the word's origin as Middle French 'gauchir,' to become crooked, warped. The "Left-hand path" in occult studies is the one associated with High Magick, sometimes delving into the dark realms. In India, I have heard it is a social custom to eat using the right hand, and that the left hand is reserved for bathroom duties. Criminals sometimes have their right hands cut off which makes them social outcasts, since social customs ban them from eating with their bathroom hand in public. I'm not sure it's still like that, but I'm not bringing all this up in connection with current events. I'm in the Kaplan Encyclopedia II, pages 308 - 309. Caffeine is coarsing through my veins. The cards are not quite jumping off the page, but they do have a certain electricity about them. On the left, or rather gauche side of the book, is the Jacques Vieville (JV) Tarot, and on the righ-handt, or 'droite' side, is the Jean Noblet (JN) Tarot. "Droite," by the way, is listed in that same Webster's College Dictionary as 'a legal right, that which one has a legal claim.' The word source seems to be Middle English < Old French < Middle Latin, and means 'directum, right, justice.' These two card makers were in the earlier stage of the Marseilles-style history, around 1660. Matters Occult are often delicate/sublime and often slip by without notice, unless one is set to see. Alchemists talk in the Language of the Birds, and often the slightest variation in something can make a big difference in its intended meaning. If you have seen the recent film, "The Ninth Gate," and remember the importance of variation, you will know what I mean. Read Fulcanelli's "The Dwellings of the Philosophers." Back to those almost moving, shimmering cards. I'm looking at the page and suddenly something strikes me as very odd...many of the similiar images on either side of the page are reversed. Vieville's Magician is holding the wand in his right hand, pointing to the table objects with his left. The Noblet Magician is reversed, holding the wand in the left hand, pointing with the right. JV's Empress has the septre in her right hand, JN's in the left. The two Justice cards are reversed, sword and scale held in opposite hands, the Hermit is facing the right side of the card in JV's, and left side in JN's Tarot. Even the Hanged Man has variation...in the JV card, his left leg is crossed behind a stiff right leg, and on JN's card, this is reversed. Even the Lovers card has differences, with the JV angel's right hand is extended lower, whereas on the JN card, it's reversed. But not all card comparisons are reversed. Death, for one, is pretty identical. Looking at more examples of the various Marseilles decks, I found some cards similiar to either deck. I'd like to compile a longer list comparing the various Marseilles-style cards and see what I come up with, but definitely more decks are positioned like the Noblet cards. Is this accidental? Is it as simple as the card maker's hand preference, that being left-handed made creating the images in the opposite direction easier? Or is it more sublime, are there esoteric reasons for these switches? There are other discrepencies in the cards, like misspelled words. It seems a bit odd that a professional printer would misspell simple words, doesn't it? So, was my observation based on an obvious overdose of caffeine this morning (I had two cups of coffee before I left the house in the morning), or are other factors active here?

jmd	15 Mar 2002
What a week! With regards to the inversals you mention, these were the ones I pointed out in an earlier post in this thread... but I really wasn't very clear. I do think it is very interesting that such 'apparent' lack of care is to be found on his deck... and yet... Two interesting and connected Francophonic sites which I occasionally visit are: This Swiss site, and this English version. I'm quite interested in your mention of the Language of the Birds, as the only other mention I recall of this in in a post I made last year... With regards to Mouni Saddhu, his system of work is definitely not along the lines of Steiner. Mouni Saddhu (Dimitr Sudowski) was based in Melbourne (he died in 1968), and I have known people who worked with him (one of whom was a close affiliate, and in whose house much of the work was conducted... and for whom I was the officiating celebrant at his Masonic funeral). I have also worked a little with some of his Theurgy, and can only find comments which link him with Steiner either quite far-fetched or so indirect as to be pretty much worthless... I'm of course willing to be corrected on this, but again, even given his other books (on Meditation, for example), and comparing them to Steiner's quite transforming works, I find the claimed connection ungrounded. Carton, by the way, who wrote La Science Occulte et Les Sciences Occultes, was a friend of my grandfather's, and with whom he worked. Also, Estampes, just south of Paris and one of the early known places for cardmakers, is near (walking distance) where they resided... Unfortunately, my grandfather's esoteric library has 'disappeared' following his death... You mentioned that you know someone initiated in a Dutch 'lodge', and they prefer the Waite deck. I'm not surprised, as the Waite heavily draws from the Flemish-type woodcuts (which I do not think should be called Marseilles). I would be interested to know what kind of Society or lodge your friend became associated with, and what their usage of Tarot is.

Ophiel	22 Mar 2002
JMD...it's 3 am here and I got in trouble for sloppy thinking last time I posted so early, so I'll be brief now, make a few comments, then come back when I'm of fresh mind. I heard (from Christine) that Mouni Sadhu came from the same esoteric center as Tomberg, which is why she referred to MS' book as a companion to Tomberg's. As for my friend, I am not sure if he wants the name of his group revealed, but I will say that the members were of the professional ranks in a small, well-to-do town in the Netherlands. Dutch Symbolist painters were in the group. He hasn't revealed yet what it is they really did with the cards, but as I spoke with him, it is clear his conception of 'cabala' is very different than mine. We were discussing the Tree idea and said it was more like each cards was a room he'd visit, with THE CHARIOT as taxi service. Later Ophiel

jmd	22 Mar 2002
It is true that they both come from Eastern European backgrounds, as does, for that matter, Ouspenski. Also, they were both of the same generation, and both were interested in various esoteric matter. Also, both were deeply interested, and worked, with esoteric Christianity... and I can see from that how it may be assumed that they must have both 'come from the same esoteric centre'. Another common 'thread' is their interests in esoteric forms arising out of India... Yet, what emerges from each is quite different. Of course, both are solidly grounded in the western esoteric tradition(s). Tomberg emerges as a deeply Christian anthroposophically influenced hermeticist, whilst Mouni Sadhu emerges as a deeply Christian theurgist. If one looks at their card descriptions, it is also clear that both are working from different orientations (this is obvious in the Sadhu book, as the cards have there been re-drawn with Sadhu's influence, whereas Tomberg's book clearly utilise the Marseilles - this despite the book's illustration with the Wirth deck in the French edition). I have also just found out the price for John's Arcana of the Grail Angel in Australia... $98! books are here progressively becoming as hard to obtain as the Grail itself. I'll later post some variations on the Popess.

jmd	22 Mar 2002
A book which appears to possibly be of great interest to us, but which I do not have, might be: Tarot, jeu et magie, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris 1984. Here are the 1701 Dodal version of the High Priestess. Note especially the title for the Dodal version: La.Pances Note also that her right foot appears to be resting upon a 'spindle-wheel' shape which may very well have become (or even represent) a downward lunar crescent (this is lost in the updated version of the card, which is why I posted this more difficult to see, but fuller, version).

Ophiel	22 Mar 2002
JMD...no, regarding Mouni Sadhu and Tomberg, from what I read, they were both in the same lodge in St. Petersburg in the early 1900s. Mouni Sadhu published first and Tomberg wanted another voice to speak from that tradition. As for the choice of cards, are you certain that the version of the cards (which deck) used in the original French edition of Tomberg's book were specified by Tomberg himself? Tomberg died in 1973. These ideas about the link between Tomberg and Mouni Sadhu were developed in the TarotL group. I don't know if any printed references were used or not in this information, though I certainly hope so!

Ophiel	22 Mar 2002
JMD...I like the Dodal deck and I think the one link you posted to www.letarot.com was selling that deck. I want one! I thought $98 was a bit high for Barnwell's Grail book and when I converted it, Aussie -> U.S. it came to about $48 (U.S.) That is still high. Back to the Cards, I am frustrated in my research of the Marseilles deck. But then, I started off in the same state. There is not a great deal of information on the open information highways, at least the information that can be easily retrieved in the easiest of searches. I am reading a book right now on how to get in deeper. There must be some museums and archives online with more information about the topics we desire (i.e. the physical cards, and the people who used them.) As for the French sites, I'd really give translation a try (and finally learn how the French language works) if I knew there was something worthy on a site. However, online information can be good or bad, all depending, just like it is in English. There are a group of Tarotists in the U.S. who are holding a certain corner of the Tarot community at bay. It's a very frustrating situation because their presence makes dialogue in the larger community nearly impossible. These are the historians who will attack any posts that do not conform with their 'official' history of the cards. Unfortunately, it is only a few doing this, but the attacks are so nasty (and can become personal), most people don't bother getting involved. I'll see if I can find that book you mentioned, "Tarot, jeu et magie." OM

jmd	23 Mar 2002
Given that Tomberg was born in 1900, any Lodge he became a member of must have been in the not-too-early 1900s. I am also confident that they each had access to some documents or literature which many others did not... unless they read Russian. Certainly, Mouni Sadhu also did publish first. But it must also be remembered that Tomberg wished for his book (completed in 1967) to only be posthumously and anonymously published (and here we are, discussing his anonymity!). It is also an interesting rarety that his book was published in translation before being published in French. For myself, I wonder if part of the reason he only wanted published after his death is that he kept on making modifications. One of the later chapters certainly is very close to one of the chapters of his incomplete but masterful Covenant of the Heart. With regards to the French edition, I suspect that the decision to illustrate it with the Wirth deck was made by the editor or publisher, for I have not seen any evidence that Tomberg would have preferred that. On the contrary, there is sufficient evidence within the book to suggest that he used a Grimaud Marseilles deck. If you have kept the discussion in TarotL regarding this issue, I would certainly be interested in having a look at it. I suppose you are already extracting its essence... but I must admit, I remain extremely skeptical. I also find the statement that "Tomberg wanted another voice to speak from that (ie St Petersberg) tradition" contrary to Tomberg's own statements, that he chose the French (he also wrote in German, Russian and English... especially the first) because of the tradition he wanted to 'associate' himself with. With books in French, I usually check the fnac, but did not find Tarot, jeu et magie available there. As the the Dodal deck... it is definitely one of those decks I hope makes it to the regular publishers for popular distribution; And with regards to John Barwell's Grail book, I guess I'll have to forgo supporting some of my local shops, and obtain it from the US by mail... it must work out cheaper, but will have to wait for a month.

jmd	23 Mar 2002
For comparative purposes, here is the re-constituted Dodal Popess: Moving on, I thought these two Dodal Popes may be interesting (the first is the original, the second the restored version) Two interesting aspects of this version are the top of the staff, and that the hands of the 'suplicants' are reasonably clear. There is also a very interesting late mediaeval or early renaissance depiction of God-the-Father similarly depicted to the Pope, with the tablets of the Covenant behind him. The 'supplicants are clearly, in that depiction, a Rabbi and a Christian priest. I'll see if I can find it again and post its bibliographical details. The date would of course be quite interesting in its link to Marseilles type iconography. Another book of possible interest (which I noted from the Camoin site), is Alain-Jacques Bougearel's Origines et histoire du Tarot Toulouse, France, Editions Envol, 1997.

Ophiel	24 Mar 2002
My Marseilles research is faultering/sputtering. I need a new source of information before I can forge ahead, though I would say this is my initiatory period of familiarizing myself with the period and makers. I do not have a great deal of material available here, and have not been able to track down the books we have been discussing. You must have some idea of which books I already own from my discussions here. MOUNI SADHU/TOMBERG The TarotL thread about Tomberg/Mouni Sadhu was a bust. I am not very active in that group and found no "Tomberg" discussions. The information I gave you about their connection, I got directly from CTP. I did find this little tidbit on an Anthroposophical site about these two: "Question: Do you know the name of the group where Valentin Tomberg studied the Cabala and the Tarot? Robert: No, the only other reference I found to this group is in a book called the Tarot by Mouni Sadhu, where he says he was able to get hold of a transcript and noted from the group of Gregory Ottonovitch Mebes for this course, and that Mouni Sadhu gives the impression that much of that course he is giving again on the Tarot. But he doesn't say what the name of the group is." You can view the complete document at: http://www.vermontel.com/~vtsophia/powintr2.htm You said Mouni Sadhu lived in Melbourne. Did he reveal his background? Perhaps if we learn his early affiliations, we can connect him with Tomberg that way. Just an idea regarding the Barnwell book, it is available through the Anthroposophical Society. Perhaps a local chapter can get it for you? Just another angle to try. MARSEILLES Do you think we need to create a strategy for researching the Marseilles style cards? You are certainly further down the road than I am. What do you think a good approach would be? I need a better background to general history during this period, and then I'd like to learn more about the secret societies active during this time. I'm still extracting info from Kaplan II book that will more or less be my starting point, listing all the card makers from his list and then I'll start noting as best I can what changes I can find from maker to maker, Arcana only at this point. I will also start compiling any information I can find about the various makers, though I suspect I'll only find the big names (Dodal, Conver, Noblet, etc.), the decks that are currently the focus of study by others. Last night I was reading Elizabeth Haich's "Wisdom of the Tarot," and she was noting how the symbols of the cards pre-existed recorded history, that the energy behind the cards can be found in symbolism throughout history. Camboin had something up on his site about a newsstory, a discovery of a four Winged Sphinx and a cyclops, 1st Century. I need to spend some time in the older stuff. CONVERS RESTORED Do you know what it was the Camoin guys were up to with the 'restored' deck? They spoke quite a bit about computers and was wondering if they did that only to superimpose cards to search for sacred geometrical relationships, or if they actually added anything new to the cards? OM

Ophiel	24 Mar 2002
Back to defining the territory... We were discussing what constitutes a "Marseilles" style deck earlier, and you noted the curved swords on the even numbered sword cards and Roman numeral system of numbering the Arcana. Often THE BATELEUR was not numbered and DEATH was not titled in the cards. Regardless, I have read that the French and Swiss makers were considered in the Marseilles style cards but am curious if you would consider any of the other countries, like Belgium, Germany, etc. Kaplan divides the card makers by country and I am wondering what sort of territorial boundaries the historians use for official Marseilles style. Do they follow geography or style of the card? OM

jmd	24 Mar 2002
Regarding the vtsophia link you gave, I had already seen it... but it is one which was certainly worth posting, so thankyou. Mouni Sadhu taught Slavic languages at the University of Melbourne in the early 1960s. I must admit that I do not have further information than that regarding his esoteric background. Of three people that I know who knew and worked with him, one has passed away (the person I mentioned earlier), Eva (who also drew the cards which Mouni Sadhu published in his book) I haven't seen for around seven years, ... but the third person I may be able to contact, for we both on occasions attend the same SRIA College. It should also be remembered that Sadhu was not of Russian background, but, if I remember correctly, of Polish ancestry. ________________ With regards to the Barnwell book and an Anthroposophical group, we are lucky that here in Melbourne there are three retailers who maintain a reasonable stock of his books. I also have access to one of the better libraries of Steiner material... for Australia. Getting hold of the book therefore will not be a difficulty... it is rather the price (since floating the dollar, it has approximately halved its value relative to the US dollar, but inflation has 'only' risen about 5% in the same period. Our income, relative to imported goods, has therefore dramatically lowered, making the price of books quite unreasonable). ___________________ With regards to further researches for the Marseilles deck, subscribing the the forum connected to the Camoin site may be an option... which I haven't checked (there may be an English-speaking group). I would think that making efforts to obtain the two books I mentioned would probably be essential. Another connection and possibly a good contact group would be through Masonic lodges in France (especially those under the Grande Loge de France). Failing that, I'm frankly not too sure. Mark Filipas has also written some material which has historical references, but I do not know how useful you would find this. He has also been, at times, a contributor to TarotL and alt.Tarot. Depending on how serious you are about doing the research, and how 'academic' you wish to be, contacting the various major printing houses may very well provide you with really worthwhile materials and/or advice. Apart from the obvious ones (Camoin, Heron, Grimaud, USGames, Fournier, and AGMuller), it may also be worth considering contacting the art departments of the universities in Lyon, Paris and the South of France... and while you're at it, you might as well get some financial backing and book some flights to the area (I'll provide you with my Qantas Frequent Flyer number when you get to that stage, in case you find working by yourself too demanding!). ____________ With regards to the restored Camoin deck, it seems to me that they did truly re-create a new deck. They certainly 'discovered' certain 'hidden' details (the eggs... and I especially like the one on the shield of the Emperor), but I think that many details or colourings they changed (the snake at the bottom of Temperance, though ambiguously there in a couple of decks (I can't remember which ones), was certainly 'added'... as was the door on the Tower,... and the collection on the Magician's table was changed. Some of the colouring was taken from the Conver deck, but also the Grimaud deck, possibly due to Jodorowski's Grimaud deck influence and long association and hence possible bias (I'm reading between the lines of his text when I assert this, and could well be incorrect... I am also using the term 'bias' without negative connotation). In those senses, I do think they certainly 'added' things to the deck. _____________ Qith regards to your last post, I personally find that most authors, including Kaplan in his Encyclopedia, tend to use the label 'Marseilles' for all decks which tend to look as though they were woodcuts. Kaplan himself, however, differenciates between the Portuguese, Piedmontese/Vienese, Marseilles 'proper', Schaffhouse/Swiss, and Flemish 'versions' of the 'Marseilles'. I personally would prefer to call these by the names used in that very list (by the way, I am doing this from memory, but I'm pretty sure it's correct, or not too far off the mark). In direct answer to your question, I do not know what divisions the 'proper' historians use. It does seem, however, that the style is pre-eminently important with those of us who 'play' with its history. The Iconography, being esoterically far more important, determines its grouping. Its historically earliest location gets then associated with the deck in question... at any rate, that is how I would do it!

jmd	30 Mar 2002
During some spare time, I attempted to make some sense out of the plausible meeting of Tomberg and Sadhu, and hence referred back to their own writings. Before outlining my thoughts, I thought I would give the reader my conclusions: I do not think they ever met, nor do I think that they worked from the same material... though they both had been given access to Prof. Mebes Tarot work from St Petersburg... and each around the same time (Sadhu in 1919, Tomberg in 1920) _______ Having said that, on the other hand, let me give a few more details. First on Tomberg. In 1917, it seems that his mother was killed during the uprising, and that, with his family, left St Petersburg for Estonia (possibly the closest country west of the city, and on the Baltic sea). We also know that he later went to Holland, which he left around 1938, and from there went to Germany, where he completed a PhD in Jurisprudence. After WWII, he went to live in the UK, where he 'listened' to Russian broadcasts... ie, working in intelligence. He died in Majorca in 1973. In Meditations on the Tarot (Cf p590), the author mentions that in 1920 he befriended some ex-patriots from St Petersburg who had been part of the Mebes group. Through mutual trust, they communicated to him the substance of their work. He also claims that the teachings and experiences of this group live only as a general impulse he received in his youth, and that, except for the 21st letter (on the Fool), he has not used that work. He also claims that, with regards to that group's inversed views on the relationship between the Minor and Major Arcana... I shall quote rather than here paraphrase (p 654): 'Now, after more than 45 years of effort and study have elapsed, I must tell you, dear Unknown Friend, that the above thesis does not do justice to the Arcana of the Tarot...' _______ With regards to Mouni Sadhu, he claims that he bought a copy of a book from a Russian refugee in 1919 (The Tarotp12), and he says that '...as far as I know, that eminent work is not available...' (p13). It should be noted that in the context it seems clear that he was not aware of its Polish publication of 1921 (mentioned on p515 of vol II of Kaplan's Encyclopedia of Tarot: G.O.M. Tajemma Wiedza Duchowa, Poland) He also makes it clear that his own book, though from working from Mebes's notes, arose from the knowledge which grew from spending 7 years of intensive study with the group (in Melbourne) (Cf p13). _______ There was one puzzling comment which I thought may have somehow linked the two: On p158 of Med. on the Tarot, Tomberg mentions that around 1929 he met a man of mature age who taught English in the capital city of a Baltic country, and that this man went to India... and died shortly after of an epidemic. We also know that Sadhu spent some time in India before coming to Australia. If there is there a connection, it remains to be found!

Ophiel	03 Apr 2002
Sorry for my absence from this fascinating discussion...I have been searching for ancient and lost civilizations. I didn't find them using Tarot cards, though (lol.) I was discussing with a friend the origins of the cards (speculative, of course) and he seems to think the cards somehow evolved directly from the Templars, who were said to carry little books that were supposed to be very powerful, but were never discussed. Each page in the book became a Tarot card, he believes. It's an interesting idea, since I do like to follow the more esoteric threads. It looks like our Marseilles discussion is breaking out at the seams into other areas. I would like to follow this one (Tomberg/Sadhu) but think perhaps we should break it out of the Marseilles discussion? What do you think...can we maintain two at the same time? I feel I can handle that...and I will continue to search for any connections between these two people. Since Steiner was an initiate already, he had no need perhaps of the cards, but I have felt that is one barren spot in his whole school of thought, the lack of Tarot cards. Fortunately, Tomberg (who had obvious links to Steiner-ism) and people like my friend, John Barnwell, have not let Steiner's lack of interest in the cards stop them from blending both his thought and the cards, on their own.

jmd	23 Apr 2002
I must have missed your response. I was looking at this now older thread, and I realised that you had made a response to my last one! Since your last post, I have obtained a copy of Barnwell's The Arcana of the Grail Angel, and am currently reading through it (I'm currently on p114). I'm making some notes as I go along, and at this stage, it is certainly a book I would recommend to Anthroposophists who also share an interest in Tarot... but I have already picked up some possible clear 'mistakes' (apart from typographical ones... ie, regular mis-use of the apostrophe). A 'minor' one is that (p74) Barnwell mentions that the Pharaonic crown had two Uraeus... the early crown had one Uraeus serpent, and a Vulture, depicting upper and lower Egypt. A far more important mistake includes his association of the twelve senses with the twelve signs of the zodiac. Though the list he gives is consistent with some views, it is not with Steiner's. Also, diagramme XXI claims that these arise from Steiner's lecture series Human and Cosmic Thought. In that lecture cycle, Steiner does not in fact mention the senses. Steiner's correlations of the twelve senses are: Libra - Touch Scorpio - Life Sagit. - Movement Capri. - Balance Aquarius - Smell Pisces - Taste -------- Virgo - Sight Leo - Warmth Cancer - Hearing Gemini - Word/Language Taurus - Thought Aries - Ego By just listing these, I am of course presuming much... if anyone is interested in finding out what these actually mean, I suggest reading Steiner. With regards to the book, it's a pity that such a clear mistake is made, as it claims to present Steiner's views... if he is mistaken on these, with which I am sufficiently familiar to recognise instantly, are there possibly other areas where the claim to Anthroposophical thought has been somewhat modified to suit the thesis? If, on that matter, Barnwell thinks that Steiner's claims are worth taking, then why does he use the Waite ordering of the Major Arcana... and depiction (for at least the Fool's description!)? I would certainly be interested to hear what you or Barnwell have to say on this.

Ophiel	06 May 2002
Sorry...as I said, I have been away on another project. I cannot speak for Barnwell, and think you might want to take that up with him. Unfortunately, I do not think he wants me giving out his email addie, and I know he won't be too receptive to you if you waltz in telling him he's wrong. John is a very good person...and he's a Leo. I personally do not know enough about what you are speaking to respond myself. I hadn't read your last posts and I can see how you might think I'd be offended, since John is a personal friend of mine. I suppose one always runs the risk of getting picked apart whenever that person commits something to ink. LOL. I see it all the time in groups, not so much here, but in some other occult groups I read. If you would like, I will contact John and ask him to if he wants me to give you his email addie. However, you'll have to tell me how you want me to introduce you, why you want to write, etc. Let me know. Back to Marseilles for me.

jmd	07 May 2002
Great to read you again, Ophiel. I frankly did not mean my critical comments on Barnwell's book to be taken harshly, nor for these to be viewed as picking the book apart... I do have to take more care in my responses to a work which is, in my opinion, one of the better books I have come across. I suppose that the chart with reference to the 12 senses has really struck a mark on me, both as someone interested in the works of R. Steiner and with its possible correlation with the signs of the zodiac and its possible links to Tarot. Also, I guess I was personally disappointed that Barnwell used the Waite-Smith order of the Major Arcana and, when he describes a card, clearly refers to that same deck... I would have thought that an Anthroposophist would have preferred either a Marseilles or a Visconti-Sforza deck... but I was obviously incorrect on that account. I'm still reading through it slowly... currently on p 218. I would be interested in reading John Barnwell's responses, but this may really be the subject of another thread... maybe a discussion of his book if others have read it.

Ophiel	07 May 2002
Greetings. My Camoin deck just arrived, finally. It took six weeks. I haven't spent any time with it yet, but my first impression is quite favorable. Some of the coloration is a bit odd! I'm wondering if Camoin just has no fashion sense, or these colors are somehow symbolic of 'other things.' You have this deck, is that correct, DMJ? Have you purchased any of the accompanying books from Camoin? I recall that you are fluent in French. I will have more time to pour over the cards this weekend, but do want to give them a formal greeting before then. DMJ, tell me what you think of the coloration!

jmd	09 May 2002
Good to see you finally have the deck. I was trying to remember what my impressions were when I first received it. In a nutshell, I was expremelly pleased. For me, it was the first re-design of the Marseilles which was still true to the tradition, and, in my opinion, far better than the Marteau/Grimaud deck (I already had the Conver reproduction produced by Heron, which in my opinion was the best I then owned). I also wrote a review for Aeclectic, which essentially summarises my views on it. But you also ask specifically what my view of the colouration is. I generally found it bold and clean. As I mentioned in a post above, I thought that they at times were still influenced by the Grimaud deck (despite what Jodorowsky says in the booklet accompanying the deck, p18, which suggests that he had to give up his preference for the Marteau colouring of 40 years). They certainly claim that the colours used all have symbolic meaning. I personally find that some aspects are also a little odd. For example, I find that V the Pope's two hands should either be gloved or not, rather than one gloved and the other not... but that is probably my own preference. Though I have also read, at some stage, most of what they had online, I have not purchased any of their books (I did purchase the limited edition Conver Tarot on thick cardboard... which I'm very happy with). I would really be interested in reading your views on this deck following your familiarisation with it. Personally I highly recommend this deck to anyone interested in Tarot!

Diana	09 May 2002
edited

jmd	09 May 2002
The colouring on the Camoin deck is not really new. Personally, I was influenced by the Grimaud deck for many years until I found the Conver published by Heron near Bordeau. The colours on that deck, after I started to study them, made far more sense to me. I was therefore extremely pleased to note that Camoin was principally influenced by this. I can only recommend a Conver deck for you to see where the Camoin gets its colouring. Both Heron and Lo Scarabeo publish it at present (I prefer the former).

Rusty Neon	07 Jul 2003
If you want to get a TdM deck with Marteau colouring, there is one other Marteau deck available besides the ones published by Grimaud. That is the Marteau TdM deck published by Dusserre. It's a photoreproduction of a circa 1930 Grimaud TdM specimen housed at the National Library museum in Paris. In fact, the Dusserre is closer than is the Grimaud to the colouring of card areas in the Marteau TdM plates in Marteau's _Tarot de Marseille_ book. The dark blue of the Grimaud has gotten very dark in recent years' editions, in fact so dark that detail is lost. You will find that the Dusserre dark blues are dark blue but not as dark as the Grimaud. The museum stamps make it easier to discern pip card reversals. The only quibble I have is that the photography could have been crisper and clearer for some of the cards. For local flavour, if you do end up getting a Grimaud I'd suggest that, rather than getting one with English or bilingual card titles, you get one with unilingual French titles, which fortunately still comes with a bilingual English and French LWB.

The marseilles tarots thread was originally posted on 07 Mar 2002 in the Tarot Decks board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Tarot Decks, or read more archived threads.