View Single Post
Teheuti's Avatar
Teheuti  Teheuti is offline
Join Date: 24 Aug 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 5,539

Originally Posted by Christine View Post
Mary, not only is that seal on the Tavaglione 2 of Disks, but it's also on the Papus 2 of Disks.
Yes, I mention that in post 159 above. It's clear that Papus was working off the Etteilla deck for much of his Minor Arcana symbolism, but he was also adding plenty of elements of his own that are not found in Etteilla - just as C.C. Zain added his own correspondences and changes to the Falconnier-Wegener deck.

It's my theory that rather than there being one true Tarot system that was hidden from the masses but known to Boehme, Postel, de Gébelin, Etteilla, Papus, etc., that instead there was an evolution and branching of ideas, so that Papus took some elements from Etteilla and added material from Lévi and others. I see it as an accretion of ideas and images that were slowly added to or subtracted from earlier decks.

Why did Papus attribute these seals to Etteilla in his book on Etteilla's cards?
I missed the part where Papus says the seals came from Etteilla. Please quote this from Papus. In fact, Papus explains that he drew from several different sources for the information he put on the cards. The word 'D'Etteilla' at the top of each card refers to the number directly above it, as in "Etteilla's card number 76”

I have already discussed with Mary in private the fact that the Elus Cohens and Martinists had associated this group of angels with the Pips, long before Levi, Papus, and the rest of the latecomers.
You claim this but you haven't shown any direct evidence that supports your claim. If you had the evidence it would revolutionize Tarot history. It's a supposition, not a fact.

Mary has found one set of seals for these angels, though those are actually the "mirror image demons" with the same astrological degrees.
That is Ambelain's theory of the Blaise de Vigenere seals, which all writers before Ambelain listed simply as the seals of the Shem Angels. The Golden Dawn used a different set of seals. As you say, neither appears on either the Etteilla or Papus decks (nor any other deck until the late 20th century). The timeline along which ideas appeared is important!

Here's Ambelain's own explanation of these being demon seals: 
In this republication of the work published in1951, the author would draw the reader’s attention to the Seals incorrectly attributed to the 72 Divine Names. These Seals are in reality their opposites. Conclusive experiments occurring between 1955 and 1960 allowed us to establish their eminently malefic and excessively dangerous character: incidents of cancer, suicidal obsession, corporeal possession and infestation have been observed and are beyond possible argument. December 1989, R.A. 
Back to Christine:
Here's where you lose me, Mary: You say "The Papus-Goulinat 2 of Coins does seem to be the missing link between the Etteilla and Tavaglione, as it has the name Poiel on it in Hebrew, but it doesn't mean that Etteilla made the link to the Shem Angels." No, it means that Papus is directly saying that Etteilla made the link to the Shem Angels! Poiel is one of the Shem angels, you'll find him nowhere else!
You are assuming that everything in the Papus cards comes directly from Etteilla. I wish you had a copy of Papus' book in French, in which the material is organized entirely differently and where it is abundantly clear that the Etteilla material is only part of the book. For instance Papus explains that he got permission from his friend Saint-Yves to include his Archéomètre system on the Trumps. Without a doubt Papus was creating his own deck that combined elements of Etteilla, Christian and Lévi, and adding his own contributions!

Etteilla himself names out the Intelligences, then Papus puts them on the Pips.
Where does Etteilla name the Shem Angels? Intelligences was a term used for lots of things besides the Shem Ha'Mephorash, not all of which were Kabbalistic. In fact, the term 'Intelligences' is Neo-Platonic. We might as well say that Iamblichus was referring to the Tarot because he used the term "Arcana". Arcana was a word long in use before it was applied to the Tarot.

BTW, it is impossible to prove a negative, but it is possible to show whether or not Etteilla ever mentions any specific links between his cards and Kabbalah or the Shem Angels. Just because someone 120 years later does, is no proof that the earlier person did so.

ADDED - Even if Etteilla was making a reference to the 72 Intelligences of the Shem Ha'Mephorash in his text, there is no evidence that he assigned them to the 56, 40, or 36 small cards. See my later post where Papus explains where he got the seals that he used on the pips.
Top   #165