Oracle or Tarot?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 22 Aug 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Wynter_Wytch	22 Aug 2004
I'm a complete and utter newbie, so I will admit it before this question gives me away. But, I am very curious as to the difference(s) between tarots and oracles. I know there are generally a smaller number of cards in an oracle, but how else is it different? What sorts of questions do you use an oracle to answer? What sorts of questions are best asked in tarot? Any and all help appreciated. Wynter

MeeWah	22 Aug 2004
A Tarot deck is also an oracle. A Tarot deck is usually composed of 22 Major Arcana & 56 minor arcana which includes 14 court cards. Some Tarot decks are only Major Arcana. Others may have an additional number of Major Arcana from one or more cards in addition to the 22 or bear different titles. For example: The Triple Goddess Tarot is of 26 Major Arcana of which its basic 22 cards may be used without the additional 4. There are also 7 Chakra cards which may be used together with the other cards or independently. Some would not see this as a Tarot deck based on its differences from the traditional style of Tarot deck. There are different views on those decks that vary from the traditional number of cards & representations--that they are not truly Tarot, but more of oracle decks. The questions asked of a Tarot deck can also be asked of an oracle deck. Insight may differ somewhat in aspect or level according to a particular deck &/or how the images on a Tarot deck may strike at the moment. This also holds true for an oracle deck & may also depend upon the type of oracle deck.

Wynter_Wytch	22 Aug 2004
Okay, I'm still confused. If a tarot deck is also an oracle deck, is an oracle deck a tarot deck? What makes a tarot deck tarot? Why isn't it also called oracle? What is the definining characteristic of an oracle? What is the defining characteristic of a tarot? Wynter

Ace	23 Aug 2004
An oracle is any device that allows you to access the Universe and get information into your brain that doesn't come in via the other 5 senses. Tarot (in any form) is an oracle, but not all oracles are tarot. Any thing can be used as an oracle. I have used chocolate (I scry'd on chocolate bars! and did M&M readings) and candy hearts (they can be a HOOT!). People use playing cards, crayons, coins, bibles and other books. It doesn't matter. If is works for you, use it!

anubis	23 Aug 2004
hmmm.. i still prefer tarot over oracles... but i may buy a oracle deck to try out

WolfSpirit	23 Aug 2004
I have used oracle decks (but never divination that did not involve cards, like Ace has done). Although I mostly use tarot, I find the use of non-tarot decks refreshing. Even with different tarot decks I sometimes come up with the same fixed meaning for a card, because that is already in my head. Non-tarot oracle decks challenge me to use my imagination and intuition much more, as there are no fixed meanings. They often come with a book with meanings too, but I use that "freely" and come up with my own meanings as well.

Wynter_Wytch	23 Aug 2004
If you just stumble across a deck, how can you tell if it is a tarot deck or an oracle deck?

littlehermit	23 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Wynter_Wytch If you just stumble across a deck, how can you tell if it is a tarot deck or an oracle deck? How many cards does it have? It should say on the box. If it's not 22 or 78, chances are it's not tarot. For that matter, the box itself should say whether the deck is tarot (the word will feature in the title) or oracle/knowledge cards/healing cards/medicine cards/what have you. If it's not in the box, count the cards. A tarot deck will have 22 major arcana, and 56 minor arcana (divided into 4 suits, each of 10 numbered cards plus 4 court cards). There may be one or two special cards thrown in, but by and large this order will be preserved.

Red Emma	23 Aug 2004
I'm really glad you asked this question, Wynter Wytch. In the past I've always made sure that decks I bought had all 78 cards. I'm not particularly insightful/psychic and didn't want to deal with the non-tarot decks. Whenever I read for myself or the occasional grandchild, I make sure all kinds of LWB's are within easy reach. Then the triple goddess deck came to my attention. I looked it up on Amazon and fell in love with the images and art work. Didn't think to make sure it was a tarot deck. Then it came, and it's sitting on the dining room buffet, still in its wrapper. I haven't a clue about what to do with it. Thanks, guys. I'm probably going to have my horizons expanded...willing or not.

Wynter_Wytch	23 Aug 2004
Is 78 or 22 cards a guideline, or is it a rule? I have seen several decks with more than 78 cards, but they call themselves a tarot; one even has 97 cards. I have also heard that it is possible to read tarot form a regular deck of 52 playing cards. Is there some other defining criteria for classifying tarot as tarot and oracle as oracle? Wynter

littlehermit	23 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Wynter_Wytch Is 78 or 22 cards a guideline, or is it a rule? I have seen several decks with more than 78 cards, but they call themselves a tarot; one even has 97 cards. I have also heard that it is possible to read tarot form a regular deck of 52 playing cards. Is there some other defining criteria for classifying tarot as tarot and oracle as oracle? Wynter There are those who will tell you it is a guideline, and there are those who will tell you it is an inviolable rule. Sometimes the line can be blurred between tarot and oracle. Personally, I would insist on 22+56, with maybe an extra card or two thrown in for spice or significator. It is possible to read playing cards like a Tarot deck with the Major Arcana and Page cards gone, but I'd prefer not to get distracted from a card game. ;) Besides which, it doesn't make playing cards a tarot deck. The numbers of and names on the cards, and to a lesser extent the images on them, are about as close to a defining criteria as you are going to get. Keep reading, and you'll probably be able to sort it out for yourself.

Wynter_Wytch	23 Aug 2004
I think I understand what you are saying. Tarot is anything that has the standard major arcana and the 4 numbered suits that roughly correspond to wands, cups, pentacles and swords. It may have more but it can have no less. Everything else is called an oracle. And some people call the 22 major arcana tarot by themselves. Do I have a rough grasp of the situation? Wynter

MeeWah	23 Aug 2004
Wynter: That is it, in a nutshell. A deck of only the 22 Major Arcana is still a Tarot deck. There are many such decks, but far out-numbered by those of 78 cards of both the Major Arcana (22 cards) & Minor Arcana (56).

Wynter_Wytch	23 Aug 2004
I did good. :D

Rusty Neon	23 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Wynter_Wytch I did good. :D Yep. Now you can explain this to some on this list who insist that the Rider-Waite Tarot deck is not a true tarot deck.

Wynter_Wytch	23 Aug 2004
Okay, let's hear the alernate points of view before I go patting myself on the back too much. Why do some people consider the RW deck not a tarot deck? Wynter

Cerulean	24 Aug 2004
that Sir Rusty was half smiling in a gentle way...? Wynter Witch suggests: "Tarot is anything that has the standard major arcana and the 4 numbered suits that roughly correspond to wands, cups, pentacles and swords. It may have more but it can have no less. Everything else is called an oracle. " Cerulean suggests: I think that is clear enough when one is just beginning tarot. But there are a few more details that I would add if talking in general about Rider-Waite-Smith (Smith after Pamela Colman Smith, the art designer of the deck) designs for tarot. I began studying 'modern' tarot with appreciation with lovely variations. I would include these details in describing a Rider-Waite-Smith (RWS) or close design 'clone' of the RWS deck: 1. Scenes or pictures on all 78 cards..I believe there is a human element (including heart, hand, etc., ) on all RWS cards except the flying wands in the eight of wands. 2. In the 22 major trumps, most likely Strength is card 8 and Justice is card 11. In older styles of decks before 1909, the deck designs developed could also be related to gaming, cultural or different local and historical influences. 3. There is usually in RWS decks, among the 56 remaining minor cards, 4 court cards for each of the four suits or 16 total court cards. The last 40 cards are number cards with corresponding suit symbols that usually are pictured on the card. I may be mistaken in my description and will gladly change it...hope it is helpful if I am trying to describe what a RWS style deck is before any of us are trying to define what it might not be. I put in the date of 1909 as when the first published Rider Waite Smith deck seems to have been available. And I hope this helps people! Regards, Cerulean

Original Destiny	24 Aug 2004
One entry found for oracle. Main Entry: or·a·cle Pronunciation: 'or-&-k&l, 'är- Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin oraculum, from orare to speak -- more at ORATION 1 a : a person (as a priestess of ancient Greece) through whom a deity is believed to speak b : a shrine in which a deity reveals hidden knowledge or the divine purpose through such a person c : an answer or decision given by an oracle 2 a : a person giving wise or authoritative decisions or opinions b : an authoritative or wise expression or answer Merriam-Webster online dictionary What an interesting posting! I guess one could look at this from a diferent angle, an angle of "can a deck be called an oracle?". according to the meaning of the word Oracle it primarily means a person or a place from which hidden knowledge is revealed. A deck of cards therefore cannot technically be be called an oracle for the cards themselves dont reveal hidden knowledge or divine purpose, for the knowledge etc is revealed by the person reading them. For a deck to be an Oracle it would have to speak for itself. Also if hidden knowledge is revealed it doesnt have to be to a priest or a skilled practitioner, it can be revealed to anyone and can be understood by them

Wynter_Wytch	24 Aug 2004
Thank you Cerulean. Methinks Sir Rusty is teasing me. Not nice to tease newbies; we are confused enough as it is. :) Also, we will stay here for a while, learn, and eventually get even with you. :D Interesting analysis, Destiny. However, this definition, "b : an authoritative or wise expression or answer" (I think) can be loosely construed as applying to the cards themselves. This definition does not speak of a person only to the answer. If you believe that the cards provide the answer and the reader only interprets what information the cards reveal, then the cards are the oracle and the reader the interpreter. Since the reader imbues the meanings to a large extent, I believe you are far more accurate in your assertion, and, at best, both the reader and the cards could be construed as oracles. Wynter

blackroseivy	24 Aug 2004
I am reading all of this with great interest - however, one thing I didn't see addressed: the Minchiate deck. This is classified as a Tarot, yet it has 90-something cards & varies in a lot of particulars. There's it's progenitor, too - the Mantegna deck. I asked the question before: Are these true tarots, or a variant that should be called something else?

Rusty Neon	24 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Wynter_Wytch Why do some people consider the RW deck not a tarot deck? Although I do, some people don't consider the RW deck to be a true tarot deck because (1) the RW's major arcana have iconographical differences from the major arcana of the Tarot de Marseille, (2) the Strength and Justice cards of the RW deck have numberings different from the numberings of the Strength and Justice cards of the Tarot de Marseille, and (3) the 'small cards' (Two to Ten) of each suit of the minor arcana of the RW deck have pictorial images to illustrate predetermined divinatory meanings, while the corresponding cards of the Marseille deck are non-pictorial. Interestingly, under the first two of these rationale, modern-day tarot decks for the playing of the French card game of tarot and even historic tarot decks like the Visconti and the Viéville would not be considered to be true tarot decks! http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/cary-yale-visconti/ http://www.tarotpassages.com/vieville.htm French gaming tarot, e.g.: http://www.themysticeye.com/pics/maxims.htm [edited to correct typos]

Wynter_Wytch	25 Aug 2004
Is this Marseilles tarot the agreed upon touchstone by which all other tarot are measured? 1) What is the significance of the varied icons? I thought that was the whole point of publishing numerous tarot decks, because those that work for some don't work for all. Aren't the differences done intentionally to offer different options, different voices that speak to the reader? 2) Why would the numbering of those two cards be so important? Why do the numbers matter if both cards are still present? 3) I saw a Feline Baroque deck that used images of cats to illustrate all of the cards. Does anthropomorphising non-human animals make it more like the Marseilles or the RWS (thank you for the correction Cerulean)? Wouldn't the mere presence of humans on the pip cards discount hundreds of decks from the category tarot under this definition? Sigh...you've gone and confused me again. Wynter

magpie9	26 Aug 2004
ON TAROT HISTORY [quote]Originally posted by Wynter_Wytch [b]Is this Marseilles tarot the agreed upon touchstone by which all other tarot are measured? You are asking some very interesting questions here; none of them have simple or easy answers. You will find that a lot of people are very passionate about these aspects of tarot, so discussion of them sometimes becomes heated. :) Some people do feel that the Marseilles is indeed the "One True Tarot", many others disagree because it started out life 600 or so years ago as a trick taking gambling game, The Majors were the trumps. It originated in Italy, and was very very popular for 100 or more years. I understand that "bridge" is a decendent of it. So, while the Marseilles was there early on, it wasn't meant to be a path to the wisdom of the ages, or a divination method. Actually, it wasn't there first, there were a lot of decks before it, most if not all very different from the Marseille, and to a great degree, extremely individual. The Marseille was was the first that held to a general pattern, instead of just whatever anybody wanted to put in the deck. Standardization set in around 1500. Things really changed when we hit the late 18th century. This is where the cards began to pick up esoteric and divitory significance. They were provided with a place of origin (Egypt) A god who commissioned the cards in all their secret knowledge (Thoth) and how they came to Europe (the gypsies, who had never been to egypt) they had thier first book written about them in 1781 by Antione Count de Gebelin. Among other things Tony was friends with Benjamin Franklin, and I like to think of them sitting around doing readings for each other....but I digress. In 1783 a dude who went by "Ettilla" -his actual name spelled backwards- wrote a tarot book, and guess what, a new deck of cards. These cards are still around. Have I mentioned that every one who did anything with the cards, wrote a book, proposed a theory et al, for the next 100 years or so got to re-name, re-number-re-order the cards to suit their version of the Great Truth? Alophone Louis Constant, born in 1810, who wrote as Elipas Levi, was the first one to connect the tarot with the Hebrew alphabet and thus, Kaballah. This gives us even more deep esoteric key to the wisdom of the ages magical kabbalistic tree of life and numerolical hoo-haas than it had accumulated in its whole little life before. He insisted on going "back" to the "original" tarot, which he thought was , guess what, the Marseilles. And of course, he had to "rectify" the numbering and the ordering of the deck. The Marseille had defiantly hit the big-time. Its' numbering, etc., suddenly became VERY important, 'cause you don't want to do numerology with the WRONG Numbers, do you? :( However, different people had different ideas about what to rectify where and there was contention around it, and there still is to this day. :O (TIP to the Wise: Don't get involved with Kaballah and/or Numerology, and you won't have these problems. You can just have a good time and read the deck.) Fast forward now, to the hind end of the 18th century. March 1st, 1888, to be exact. The Golden Dawn was one of many many esoteric societies around that time. what made it different is that it got into tarot, bigtime, and of course, every one involved was moved to change their names and write tarot books and create tarot cards. Well, maybe not All of them, but lots of them. Out of this group came the two major tarot families that almost all of today’s tarots are descended from. the RWS came out first,(around 1909?) and was shocking because Waite, the creator, felt free to change the numbering of Strength to 8 and Justice to 11. And, to top it off, the artist, Pamela Coleman Smith, drew pictures on all the minor cards that related to the meanings! AND they were of Human Beings doing things!! OMG!! The minors had always been pips until then. Alistair Crowley's deck finally got published quite a few years later. Personally, I think it took so long to come out because he was making his artist, Lady Frieda Harris, repaint and repaint and repaint some more, until each card was exactly what he wanted. He restored strength and justice to their "rightful" numbers, and created Moody Minors. They weren't plain pips, but there was nothing human about them. They melted and squirmed and dripped and slumped and spouted all over each other, with nary a human in sight, which kept it "traditional". That was the Thoth deck. Still is. :D A few other decks came out of the Golden Dawn, and in general, they look a lot like the RWS, only with pips, and different numerology in the minors.(of course different, why agree on anything at this point?) I'm not sure, but I think there are 4 different variations of tarot numerology running around loose in tarot decks these days. Do keep in mind that you do NOT have to fool with numerology, Kaballah, astrology, etc, etc, etc., in order to read tarot. It's a choice. Actually, I consider most of it a choice. there is so much out there in the world of tarot, in the renaissance we are living in, that we get to choose, and nobody has to be wrong, or right, unless they really really need to be. On the question of Tarot vs Oracle, my simple test, after how many cards, suit, similarity to existing acknowledged tarots, etc., is 2 questions: 1) Is it the clear intention of the deck creator that this is meant to be a tarot? 2) do I have to learn some whole new system to use this deck? I feel that the new system thing makes it either variant numerology (shudder) or an Oracle. I do not go by if it is named Tarot or not, there are quite a few obvious oracles out there named tarot, probably for marketing reasons. Most of factual information in this post comes from Cynthia Giles book” The Tarot: History, Mystery and Lore", and some from her book, "The Tarot: Methods, Mastery and more" if you are interested in a detailed well written and researched take on tarot and it's evolution and use, these are 2 very good books to start with. Part of their charm is that she's not trying to sell any one view of all this stuff. I hope you find this useful, and that dissenting parties to my short take on tarot history don't slaughter me!! And yes, this really is the short form. :) * magpie exits stage right, ducking rotten cabbage*

Cerulean	26 Aug 2004
and I am not certain, but I think Wynter Wytch was asking from a modern perspective of someone new wanting to read tarot. If I take a modern perspective on the questions, for a new reader who is learning: 1) Yes, modern decks do offer a great variety and so do reproductions of historical tarots. Your tastes will guide you in such selections. 2) The numbering--Magpie9 is right in suggesting for modern decks, if you do not use astrology or kabbalah (sometimes called Qabalah or Cabalah), and both cards are present, the numbering would be to the taste of the artist or author. I tend to read from odd or historical decks and if I had my preference, Justice is eight and Strength is 11 because my associations with Thoth and Milanese and Marseilles patterns fall into that category. However I can also read RWS decks and sometimes it does matter because of how the deck meanings are structured. 3) Animal decks --- it's hard for me to answer in general. If you named a deck and I looked at samples, I can likely tell you then what kind of symbology and structure it will fall under if I were reviewing the deck for other readers. Again, I really think Magpie9 was kind to try to answer you. If you do read Cynthia Giles book, as suggested, the explanation will seem more meaningful. This is my take right now, in answering a new reader with modern decks. We all have different takes on historical topics and tarot--my opinions in the history forum can be very different from others. Best wishes, Cerulean Mari

Ace	26 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Wynter_Wytch I saw a Feline Baroque deck that used images of cats to illustrate all of the cards. Does anthropomorphising non-human animals make it more like the Marseilles or the RWS (thank you for the correction Cerulean)? Wouldn't the mere presence of humans on the pip cards discount hundreds of decks from the category tarot under this definition? Sigh...you've gone and confused me again. Wynter Don't get your knickers in a twist, Wynter. Just play with the cards and have fun! As you read about tarot, more and more of this will be clear to you-and you may find it important or you may decide it is totally meaningless. As for the Bohemian Cats tarot, it is a tarot deck but for me, beautiful as it is, I don't think I could read with it. But it still is a beautiful Tarot (and yes, it is a tarot deck!)

Wynter_Wytch	26 Aug 2004
Wow, Magpie. This is the first chance I have had since this morning to look at the AT Forum. It must have taken you that long to type that reply. Thank you very much. I had no idea there was so much history behind tarot. I guess I assumed it was a sort of parlor game that Waite made up out of historical legends and other games. I don't really know much at all beyond the fact that tarot was a spur of the moment thing I decided to do. A friend of mine talked me into signing up for tarot classes with her, and I started researching decks and asking people to see their cards. The more I looked, the more excited about tarot I became. That pretty much sums up what I know about tarot right there, other than some decks feel wrong and creepy and others I like. The problem with answering my questions, you know, means that there will be more questions. If the 8 and the 11 are juxtaposed, and pre-supposing that you do believe in numerology, how does this affect the reading and the significance of the cards? How is Kaballah and astrology worked into the cards? How does it affect the readings? Does it give an alternate interpretation, or does it provide shading and nuance to augment the card reading? Why, specifically, is there objection to human faces on the minor arcana? Surely the change helps the reader to intuit the meaning of the card, right? That seems all to the good as opposed to sterile pips. Is it an objection based solely on the fact that it is a new idea or do the faces somehow "corrupt" the reading? And thank you so much for this: On the question of Tarot vs Oracle, my simple test, after how many cards, suit, similarity to existing acknowledged tarots, etc., is 2 questions: 1) Is it the clear intention of the deck creator that this is meant to be a tarot? 2) do I have to learn some whole new system to use this deck? That makes a lot of sense to me. I can relate to both the concepts of intent and paradigm modeling. :) Lastly, should I start my readings into tarot with the Giles book, or is there something easier that a beginner should start with? I can't start reading yet, though. My tarot instructor, Willow, does not want us to be "overwhelmed" by the "wealth of information, much of it conflicting" that is available to us. So, by the time she clears us all to start reading, the local library should have it in if I do my interlibrary loan request now. :) Extra special thanks to you Magpie for the very detailed history lesson. I will, I am sure, be able to grasp tarot better knowing something of the colorful and rich history it has. It makes me smile to think the cards I am learning may have won and lost fortunes. And thank you, Cerulean, for the modern tarot instruction. Wynter

Wynter_Wytch	26 Aug 2004
Your cautions are well-taken, Ace. I may be plunging headlong into esoteric questions that I don't yet have the basic knowledge to understand. I will play with my tarot cards for a while and try to take the acquisition of knowledge a bit more slowly. :) Wynter

Ace	26 Aug 2004
Good idea, Wynter! and thanks for a FUN and interesting Thread! After I posted, I thought of questions I wanted to ask you: what deck are you starting with? We also never answered one of your original question: what kinds of questions does Tarot answer vs what questions does an oracle answer? I find that I can do simple general palm reading, but for a specific question, I need the tarot cards. I can only do a few minutes before I run out of things to say in a palm reading, but I can go on for 30 mins or more with tarot. I know a palmist who says she can spend 30 minutes or more on a palm, but she can't find more than a few minutes to spend on cards! So I think it all is a matter of taste, inclination, and maybe talent, or maybe just how your mind works or maybe just what you started with or maybe what you were drawn to or ...... But all "oracles" and tarot, IMHO can answer most questions. You might find some oracles (not tarot) limited in the questions it will answer clearly: I prefer love questions for candy hearts, but work it out by trying and experimenting. See what works for you! And come back to us whenever you panic.

Ivy	23 Sep 2004
Hello Wynter, I read playing cards as a method of divination, but it's not the same as reading the tarot. A standard tarot deck includes a major arcana of some sort. Divining with a standard 52 playing card deck is similar to consulting the tarot without the major arcana. In addition to the wonderful folks and information here, you might want to check out tarotpassages.com too. They have reviews of tarot decks, non-tarot & oracle decks and that helped me distinguish the difference between all three types. Best Wishes, Ivy

The Oracle or Tarot? thread was originally posted on 22 Aug 2004 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.