Etteilla Timeline and Etteilla card Variants - background

[MikeH]

I found something else in Etteilla’s 2nd cahier that clarifies something that Decker et al left somewhat murky, namely, the so-called "signs of death," the extra numbers on cards 13-17. Etteilla writes about them in the Supplement, written 1786. But since it seems to refer back to one of the ways of grouping the cards, the one “in five books,” I will translate that section first, and the part with the heading “in six books” as well, because it is short and also says something about these cards 13-17 as a group. These two sections are the continuation of what I started translating in my previous post.

I will not deal yet with the final way of grouping the cards, “in seven Books,” because it is rather long and does not seem to relate very directly to the material in the Supplement.

So here is first my transcription of the French, pp. 136-140 of the 2nd Cahier, followed by my translations of these passages, the sections entitled “in five parts” and “in six parts.” Then I will go on to the Supplement, which is what I am really interested in.

En cinq Livres.
(1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12) le signe de l'unité, 1. Les cinq derniers nombres = 50, représentant parfaitement le grand & divin nom de l'Éternel en hébreu. (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) les oeuvres de Dieu. (13, 14, 15, 16, 17,) tout ce qui est à l'homme & dépend de l'homme, par order, permission & bonté divine, dans le cercle de l'homme, ce nombre ayant en lui le 10 du multiplié 5, & le 12 de l'assemblage des nombres vulgaires. (18, 19, 20, 21, 0) la foiblesse de l'Homme vue comme foiblesse. (22 jusqu’à 77) la foiblesse de l'Homme vue comme orgueil.

En six Livres.
(1, 8,) Dieu, son repos en lui. (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,) les six jours de la création. (9, 10, 11, 12,) le sceau de l’harmonie dans la Nature sensible. (13, 14, 15, 16, 17,) Nature physique. (18, 19, 20, 21, 0,) défectuosité apparente dans les mouvemens généraux, & défectuosité réelle des mouvements particuliers. (22 jusqu’à 77,) vertus & vices confondus par l’ignorance des Hommes, & les huit fois sept chemins différens qui leur son offerts pour arriver au faux bonheur.

And my literal translation:

In five books.
(1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12) the sign of unity, 1. The five later numbers = 50, representing perfectly the great and divine name of the Eternal in Hebrew. (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) the works of God. (13, 14, 15, 16, 17) all that which belongs to Man and depends on Man, by divine order, permission, and grace, in the circle of Man, this number having in it the 10 of the multiplied 5 and the 12 of the assemblage of the vulgar numbers. (18, 19, 20, 21, 0) the weakness of Man seen as weakness. (22 to 77), the weakness of Man seen as pride.

In six Books.
(1, 8,). God, his repose in himself. (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,), the six days of creation. (9, 10, 11, 12,) the mark of harmony in sense-related Nature. (13, 14, 15, 16, 17,) physical Nature. (18, 19, 20, 21, 0,) apparent defect in general movements, and real defect in particular movements. (22 to 77,) virtues and vices confounded by Men’s ignorance and the eight times seven different roads that are offered to them for arriving at false happiness.

These two groupings are fairly similar. All the section “in six books” has done is to take the numbers pertaining to the male (1) and female (8) questioner out of the group they were in before. 1 and 8 pertain to God. 9-12, the four virtues, pertain to the archetypal world of ideals, which are in the same third of the Universe as God. 2-7, form a unit as the six days of creation, the “works of God.” 13 to 17 also form a unit. I have no idea what "the 10 of the multiplied 5" and "the 12 of the assemblage of the vulgar numbers" mean. He perhaps explained it earlier, but if so I cannot find it.

The rest of the characterization of cards 13-17 is “all that which belongs to Man and pertains to Man, by divine order, permission, and grace” and “physical nature.” Here the problem I have in understanding, is that cards 18-21 also could be described in the same way. In fact, when describing the cards “in two books,” he described all of 1-21 in terms of “divine order, permission and grace.”

What he has done now, it seems to me, is to separate out 5 of the group (13-21 plus 0) as fitting another set of descriptions, “weakness of Man viewed as weakness,” further refined to “apparent defect in general movement and real defect in particular movements.” What this last designates. I think, are the areas of life which seem to be defects in the creation, and so indicative of a defective creator, but in fact are defects in man’s particular choices. These areas of life are marriage (13), temptation (14), sickness (15), judgements (by others and by God, 16), and death (17); they are universal and God-given. But betrayal (18), misery (19), fortune (20), dissension (21), and folly (0) are products of human weakness recognized as such. They are further distinguished from the suit cards, which offer the roads of virtue and vice to false happiness, really expressions of human weakness manifesting as pride.

Bearing all this in mind, let us turn to the Supplement, 2nd Cahier pp. 161-162, the comment to p. 12, “The Number Two.” I have no idea what this comment has to do with p. 12 or the number 2. It seems to me to have more to do with the astrological correspondences of the 4th Cahier, and the seven ways of dividing the cards at the end of the 2nd Cahier, pp. 134-142. Here is the French, followed by my translation.

p. 12, Le Nombre 2. Onze feuillets ont plusieurs nombres, & avec les 10 derniers feuillets (tous nombres cabalistiques portant des signes & planetes) on trouve de ce côté 21 feiillets distincts, comme aussi 21 premiers feuillets distincts; & pour concevoir ceci, il faut se reporter sur les pages 95& 96 du troisième cahier. Deux objets à entendre

1. Quoiqu'il y ait des planettes de marquées, comme le soleil & la lune, les deux grande luminaires, sur les premiers feuillets, il n'en est pas moins vrai que les planettes sont vues, dans l'étude de ce livre appartenir aux 10 derniers feuillets, comme les 12 signes aux 12 premiers feuillets.

2. Que les doubles nombres du troisieme livre 13, 14; 14, 15; 15, 16; 16, 17; 17, 13, are afin d'indiquer, suivant le livre de Thot, la chaîne de la naissance à la mort, la liaison qui existe entre l'aspiration & l'expiration de tous les êtres, etc.

And my literal translation:

P. 12, the number 2. Eleven pages [i.e. cards] have several numbers, and with the last 10 pages (all cabalistic numbers bearing signs and planets) we find in this way 21 distinct pages, as also the first 21 are distinct; and to conceive this, it is necessary to refer to pages 95 and 96 of the third cahier. Two objects to be understood.

1.Although there are planets of note, such as the sun and the moon, the two big lights, on the first pages, it is nonetheless true that the planets are seen, in this book's study, as belonging to the 10 last pages, just as the 12 signs [of the zodiac] are in the first 12 pages.

2.The double numbers of the third book 13, 14; 14, 15; 15, 16; 16, 17; 17, 13, are to indicate, according to the book of Thot, the chain from birth to death, the connection which exists between the aspiration [or inhalation] and the expiration [or exhalation of all beings, etc.

My comments: In the first paragraph, the "pages" with several numbers are 2-8 (which have the day of creation as well as the card number) and 2-5, which also have an element number on them. These, 7 + 4, equal 11. Adding the last 10, which have the planets and 3 other astrological signs on them, we get 21. In the same way, the first 21 cards are special, in that they are above the rest. Etteilla is not so much concerned with the number 21 as he is with the number 7, which he says governs the tarot, in 7 and its multiples. Another example of 7 in the tarot that he gives is that there are 77 numbered cards.

In the second paragraph, Etteilla is saying that the planets are seen in the 10 pip cards of the suit of coins, which are the last 10 cards. And the signs of the zodiac are seen in the first 12. This doctrine is one he already introduced in the 4th Cahier and its Supplement, which came out the year before this Supplement. Seeing the cards as a progressive degeneration from God (the principle also used by de Mellet), coins and money are the lowest, the most contributory to false happiness. To them are assigned the “little gods” of Egypt, as Decker et al quote him somewhere.

The third paragraph, on p. 162, is the most interesting, because it involves a formulation we haven’t seen elsewhere. First, Etteilla calls cards 13-17 the "third book" of the great book of Thot. This phrase, applied to cards 13-17, is one we have seen: in the fifth way of dividing the cards, cards 13-17 are the third of five groups. In that context, then, Etteilla is trying to explain why there are extra numbers on the cards. He describes them as indicating "the chain from birth to death."

When you look at the keywords for these cards, you see that number 13, marriage, leads to children. 13 appears at the beginning and the end of the sequence. In between are the God-given realities of life in the physical world to which we are subject ("Judgment" can be either divine or human).

13, 14: Marriage, Major Force (Temptation).
14, 15: Major Force, Sickness.
15, 16: Sickness, Judgment.
16, 17: Judgment, Mortality.
17, 13: Mortality, Marriage.

In the beginning of the sequence, besides children, the responsibilities of marriage lead to domination by materialistic concerns that do violence to the spirit; at least that is what Etteilla found in his own case, until he freed himself of both his family and material wealth (Decker et al p. 78). On top of that we have sickness. And then comes Judgment, by our fellows and God, and Death. Then Marriage, by one’s children, starts the cycle all over again. Marriage seems to be the one God-given thing on this list that is unqualifiedly good, despite its bad consequences for the individuals involved, because it allows humanity a triumph over death in the physical domain.

We might say, in other words, for the last pair, 17/13, that awareness of mortality leads to new life by way of marriage, which in producing children defeats death in the physical world. In Etteilla's personal life, marriage to his "Xanthippe" (see 1676 entry in my timeline) was a calamity, except for bringing him his son. Then we can say something more-I don't know if I am straying from Etteilla's thought, but I don't think so: it was during his marriage that he says he first understood the tarot. Thus he experienced “Major Force” in the sense of being gripped by Spirit, as described in the word-list for that keyword, and in his own case in the quote I gave in my timeline entry for 1767. In publishing his books, he has now gone a step further and put this inspiration into physical form for others to see and continue. So the "chain from birth to death" is really a circle, in two ways: there are two kinds of children, physical and one's acts of inspired service to humanity, the universe, and God. Or, to put the matter in terms of Etteilla's last phrase, "la liaison qui existe entre l'aspiration & l'expiration de tous les êtres," there are two kinds of "aspiration"--a child's first breath and a person's inspired hopes and actions.

In conclusion: This third paragraph on p. 160, besides showing more of Etteilla's philosophy, also shows that the double numbering of cards 13-17 was in fact part of Etteilla's plan as early as 1786. And it shows that their association with death didn't start with the Dictionnaire Synonymique of de La Sallette, which is where Decker et al picked up the trail (p. 93). And they are not simply "signs of death" ("signes de mort") as they are characterized there according to Decker et al; they signify "the chain from birth to death" in relation to--if I may draw from the other passage--"all that belongs to Man and depends on Man...in the circle of Man."

[MikeH]

I am going to conclude my presentation of Etteilla's seven ways of grouping the 78 cards of the tarot, pp. 131-142 of the 2nd Cahier. We are on pp. 140-142. First I will give the French, then my translation. There are three footnotes. You can distinguish them from other numbers in parentheses in that there is no comma after the number for footnotes. I have put a few explanatory comments with the texts, in square brackets, but most of my comments come after the translation. Here is Etteilla:

[p. 140] En Sept Livres. (1)

[Note en bas de p. 140](1) Lisez la vingt-quatrieme section, chapitre premier, du Pymandre, ou la Pensee de Mercure Trismégiste, qui lui dicte sept échelons, & le huitieme touchant, rentrant, comme étant le premier formant 1 & 8, [continué p. 141] Esprit que vous sentirez en ayant le premier & le huitieme feuillet sous les yeux. Il dit donc à la premiere ceinture croit & décroit en lui, c'est-à dire, coule d'un bord à l'autre éternellement; à la diexieme, est entreprise des maux; à la troisieme, est tromperie; à la quatrieme, ambition; à la cinquieme, prophane; à la sixieme, méchanceté; à la septieme; mensonge, ignorance; & rentre à l'unité 1, qui est force, louange en l'unité, ce qui avant caractérise parfaitement les Vertus opposées au septenaire 1; donc l'opposition est 0, les ténebres.

[p. 140] L'unité au centre. (1,) Dieu lui-même. (8,) mou-[p. 141]vement & repos (1), ou la perfection, qui n'est qu'en Dieu. (9, 10, 11, 12,) tout ce qui est Dieu, lui-même, Justice, Tempérance, Force & Prudence (2). (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,) préscience divine de l'Éternité se communiquant par ses oeuvres, qui mis à leur vrai nombre 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, = 21 = 12 = 3, ensemble 36, elle s'étend sur les Hommes par 1 + 6, 2 + 5, 3 + 4, qui [p. 142] donne des nombres infiniment juste. 16, 25, 34 = 75, 3 au-dessus des intelligences 75, (1 vient 37, nombre par lequel dans cet esprit les Cabalistes n'osent nombrer, voyant ce nombre ainsi 1 entier + 37 + 8, & soustrayant 1 de 8, reste 45 & 3 + 7 = 10. (13, 14, 15, 16, 17,) vertus de l"Homme par 31, 41, 51, 61, 71, en tant que corps, vie & ame. (18, 19, 20, 20, 0,) innocence troublée, pas incertains, inquiétude. (22 jusqu'à 77,) Nature remédiant perpétuellement & en tous lieux à l'ignorance de l'Homme, & ensevelissant tout dans le tems.

[Note en bas de p. 141](1) En l'Homme fut le repos, ensuite la mouvement, & enfin le repos.
(2) Aucuns Philosophes n'ont atteint le but sans avoir l'interprétation de ces quatre hiéroglyphes en tout leur sens, qui sont chacun 7.

And my translation:

[p. 140.] In seven Books. (1)

[footnote p. 140](1) Read the twenty-fourth section, first chapter, of the Pymander, or Thought of Mercury Trismégistus, who speaks of seven levels, and the eighth moving, returning, as being the first forming one 1 and 8, [cont'd p. 141] a Spirit that you will sense by having the first and the eighth page [card] under your eyes. He thus says the first circle is that of increase and decrease, that is to say, sliding from one side to the other eternally; in the second, troubles are undertaken; in the third is deceit; in the fourth, ambition; in the fifth, profanation; in the sixth, wickedness; in the seventh; lie, ignorance; and return to the unit 1, which is strength, praise in the unit, that which before characterizes perfectly the Virtues opposed to the septenary 1; thus the opposition is 0, darkness.

[p. 140] Unity at the center. (1,) God himself, alone, by himself and in himself. (8,), move-[p. 141]ment and rest (1), or the perfection, which is only in God. (9, 10, 11, 12) all which is God himself, Justice, Temperance, Strength and Prudence (2). (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,) divine prescience of Eternity communicating itself by its works, which put in their true number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, = 21 = 12 = 3, together 36, it extends over Men by 1 + 6, 2 + 5, 3 + 4, which [p. 142] gives infinitely correct numbers. 16, 25, 34 = 75, 3 over the intelligences, 75 (2 next to 37, number by which in this spirit the Cabalists do not dare to count, seeing this number thus 1 integer + 37 + 8, and subtracting 1 from the 8, leaves 45 and 3 + 7 = 10. (13, 14, 15, 16, 17,) virtues of Man by 31, 41, 51, 61, 71, as body, life and soul. (18, 19, 20, 20, 0,) disturbed innocence, uncertain steps, anxiety. (22 to 77,) Nature remedying perpetually and everywhere the ignorance of Man, and burying everything in time.

[footnotes p. 141](1) In Man was rest, followed by movement, and finally rest.
(2) No Philosophers reached the goal without the performance of these four hieroglyphs in all their senses, which are each 7.

My comments. The part of the Pymander or Poimandres that he is referring to is sections 61-69 in Eberhard's 1650 translation (http://www.levity.com/alchemy/ch2.html). The author is describing the ascent of the soul, passing upwards through the realms of each of the seven planets, starting with the Moon. At each stage it unloads a different vice, and thus lightened it ascends upwards. The first zone might be the waxing and waning of fortune, compared to the action of the moon. Then comes Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, followed by the Fixed Stars in the eighth. Here is the Poimandres:

61. And to the first Zone it giveth the power it had of increasing and diminishing.

62. "To the second, the machination or plotting of evils, and one effectual deceit or craft.

63. "To the third, the idle deceit of Concupiscence.

64. "To the fourth, the desire of Rule, and unsatiable Ambition.

65. "To the fifth, profane Boldness, and headlong rashness of Confidence.

66. "To the sixth, Evil and ineffectual occasions of Riches.

67. "And to the seventh Zone, subtle Falsehood always lying in wait.

68. "And then being made naked of all the Operations of Harmony it cometh to the eighth Nature, having its proper power, and singeth praises to the Father with the things that are, and all they that are present rejoice, and congratulate the coming of it; and being made like to them with whom it converseth, it heareth also the Powers that are above the eighth Nature, singing praise to God in a certain voice that is peculiar to them.

69. "And then in order they return unto the Father, and themselves deliver themselves to the powers, and becoming powers they are in God.

In giving us the reference to this part of the Poimandres (or "Pymandre"), Etteilla is comparing the tarot sequence, now conceived in seven steps, with this sequence in the Poimandres. However he is going down rather than up, from God's total order down to chaos at the bottom-but also contained, in Etteilla's cards 1 and 8, at the top as well.

First, no. 1 is God, simple unity.

Second is movement and rest, no. 8, also in God, as well as, footnote (2) tells us, in Man. The extreme of movement is chaos, the reversed of card 1.

Third are the four cardinal virtues. These have to be mastered by anyone seeking to go higher. As perfect forms, these are still in God. Preumably by the 7 senses of each virtue, he means one for each of the seven levels.

Fourth is the prescience, of God as revealed in the world he created in 6 days. We are now in God's perfect expression of himself in the sensible world. These 6 numbers, added together, to which are added the number reversed and the sum of the digits, yields 36. With adding the pairs formed from the 6 days, we get 3 more than the 72 angels of the Cabalists, beyond which they do not dare to count more of them. I do not know the significance of 45, or 10 in this context.

Fifth is "the virtues of Man" in "body, soul, and spirit." Also significant are the numbers you get when you transpose the digits: 31, 41, 51, 61, and 71. I am completely mystified as to what these remarks have to do with cards 13-17.

Sixth, we have "disturbed innocence, uncertain steps, anxiety." Yes, this description fits cards 18-21 plus 0, cards of betrayal, misery, fortune, dissension, and folly.

Seventh, "Nature remedying perpetually and everywhere the ignorance of Man, and burying everything in time." The suit cards pertain to life's activities in the world. Nature lets us know of our ignorance by our failures, to that extent remedying it if we attend to what it says.

[MikeH]

I have been puzzling over the question of whether there really was an “Alexis” who talked to Atteilla for a week and left him notes which Etteilla still had even at the time he was writing the Cahiers. He said that this Alexis divided the 78 cards into four groups. So I have been looking at passages in the 2nd Cahier where the 78 cards are divided into four groups, There are actually two of them, one that I have quoted already and another that I have not yet posted a translation of. This last one, which I haven’t posted, is the more suggestive.

Here is my translation. I have put the original French in brackets after some paragraphs, when I was in some doubt about my translation:

[p. 124]We are going to represent this sublime Work under four Ages, as having followed the general plan of four Books.

Age of Gold.

The first Book perfectly represents the Age of Gold, composed of twelve pages, from 1 to 12;[p. 125] it is absolutely only a conversation of the Divinity, of its essence and of its works, and under the point of view that touches us: it is Man in the terrestrial Paradise, full of knowledge and of human wisdom.

Age of Silver.

Man begins to decline; it is no longer the first conversation with his Creator; in this Book, composed of five pages, from 13 to 17, the creature desires that which is impossible for him to possess. Man leaves the center of Virtue, this wise simplicity that unites him with the principle; he dares to throw his eyes to the tenth heaven in order to penetrate it (1); pride with which he was not agitated in the first Book.

[Footnote] (1) Homer calls the Sky vault of bronze.

A virtuous innocence united us to the principle, to the divine Engine; we were not him; we had no [p. 126] ambition to fathom the reason: in wanting to search for it, we were lost. Was it necessary to know why we were happy? Did it not suffice that the happiness was just and real?

Age of Bronze

We have then sinned? Yes. And who would not believe it, in reflecting that all is well, and that in this all is well we live in sorrows, diseases and bitterness, infirmities of which we cannot throw back the cause on wise Nature, but on our ignorance alone.

[Nous avons donc péché? Oui. Et qui ne le croiroit pas, en réfléchissant que tout est bien, & que dans ce tout est bien nous vivons dans les chagrins, les maladies & l'amertume, infirmités dont nous ne pouvons pas rejetter la cause sur la sage Nature, mais sur notre seule ignorance.]

In this second distraction, can we be far from the Age of Iron? No. Folly took our hands to enter into the third Book. It was proper to conduct us to the fourth, of which she is the Ambassador, as she is the Sovereign of the Third, composed of five pages, [p. 127] from [p. 127] 18 to 21, and the zero 0, where she walks without boundaries or limits. (1)

[Footnote] (1) I have spoken elsewhere of the places where she walks.

Age of Iron.

Here we are where our distractions led us and where our weaknesses keep us; can there be a more cruel position for perfect Beings, overwhelmed with sorrows, miseries, maladies acute or chronic, and always in fear of death, worse than death itself?

Some set against others, denaturing our food, tearing away our hands, with the view only of getting us drunk, incensed against ourselves, believing in everything and soon in nothing, without respect for truth, renouncing the respectable laws of Nature, cursing our existence, or, by [p. 128] a sufficiently excessive feeling, ranking it with God, the Creator of the Universe.

[Acharnés les uns contre les autres, dénaturant nos alimens, nous les arrachant des mains, dans la vue de nous en souler seuls; acharnés contre nous-mêmes, croyant à tout & bientôt à rien, sans respect poiur la vérité, abjurant les respectables loix de la Nature, maudissant notre existence, ou, par [p. 128] un sentiment suffi outré, lui donnant rang parmi le Dieu, Créateur de l'Univers.]

The Sages called the “Age of Iron” the moment of the passage of vengeance; an Age that will only be destroyed by decomposition into water, air and fire; earth will lose its number, its form and its properties; it will be dissolved by air, fire and water, and will lose its principles which will dissolve the Elements, which themselves will enter into a unity (1). The Rich miser, the nasty Poor man, the [p. 129] mediocrity, finally all Men, will be on the same bench in front of the Throne of the big IOU [“IOU” in original]; because nobody from the creation to the destruction will be exempt from it (1).

[Footnote p. 128] (1) This moment of great tribulation, following the first Egyptians, is not the last of the physical Worlds which must, before their dissolution, re-enter and remain an innumerable time in their first perfection; it is necessary to understand that [with] regard to Men who become again just, following the intentions of the Eternal, and we will have no more forecasts regarding the end of Mendes. [Ce moment de la grand tribulation, suivant les premiers Egyptiens, n’est pas le dernier des Mondes physiques qui doivent, avant leur dissolution, rentrer & rester un tems innombrable dans leur premiere perfection; il faut entendre cela égard aux Hommes qui redeviendront justes, suivant les intentions de l’Eternal, & nous n'aurons plus de fois pronostics sur la fin des Mendes.]

[Footnote p. 129] (1) See what I have said elsewhere, in warning that before the dissolution all Men will be in the knowledge and wisdom of the Eternal.

In this fourth Book, the Sages have spared nothing in making us envisage all that is against God, Men, and oneself; they offer us the tableau of human life, such as it came to be in the Age of Iron, that is to say, some sparks of primitive virtue, debris of the precious germ that the Creator has given us at birth. Some acts of humanity, drawn from the sensibility of our heart, which cannot be deaf to the cries of Nature, and finally some generous pardons; but then what a hideous tableau! A thousand gluttonous evils, the ones occasioned by the others, consequences of our [p. 130] ignorance, which conducts and manages our thoughts and our actions with a too researched art, when wise Nature, even in our most sensual pleasures, indicates to us a road so beautiful and simple that it leads to perfection; but there had to be a new People of Sages in order to tolerate our weaknesses and our evils, to soften and annihilate them.

[Dans ce quatre Livre, les Sages n’ont épargné pour nous faire envisager tout ce-qui est contre Dieu, les Hommmes, & soi-même; ils nous offrent le tableau de la vie humaine, telle qu’elle devoit être dans l’Age de fer, c’est-à-dire, quelques étincelles de la primitive virtu, débris du précieux germe que le Créateur nous a donné en naissant. Quelques acts d'humanité, puisés dans la sensibilité de notre coeur, qui ne peut point être sourd aux cris de la Nature, & enfin quelques généreux pardons; mais ensuite quel hideux tableau! mille maux voraces, occasionnés les uns par les autres, suite de notre [p. 130] ignorance, qui conduit & dirige nos pensées & nos actions avec un art trop recherché, lorsque la sage Nature, même dans nos plaisirs les plus sensuels, nous indique une route aussi belle & aussi simple qu’elle tend à la perfection; mais il faudroit un nouveau People de Sages poiur tolérer nos foiblesses & nos maux, adoucir ceux-ci & les anéantir.]

Now I want to comment on this section, with an eye to whether it is based on some notes written by someone more erudite than Etteilla many years before.

First, this division into “four books” is sufficiently general that it doesn’t link up with particular cards by name, except that the first 12 cards should be positive ones, corresponding to archetypes in the divine realm, such as the virtues. As such, the order of the trumps in the tarot used by Alexis in 1757 would not have to be the same as Etteilla’s of 1785. It could have been some traditional Italian order, slightly modified. According to Ross Caldwell, the early Piedmontese tarot was similar to the early Bolognese tarot (as given at http://l-pollett.tripod.com/cards26.htm), a sequence that Ross thinks is in fact the original form of the tarot (search “Piedmont” at http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=334). In that sequence, the three virtues are all in the first half of the deck, along with 9 other cards susceptible of positive archetypal characterization. First is the Conjurer, who, with his four objects representing the four suits and the four elements, can be interpreted as the Creator. Then come the four “papi”-–four wise figures not otherwise specified, corresponding to the Emperor, Empress, Popess, and Pope in the usual sequence. Then come Love, the Chariot, and Fortune, all easily interpreted as referring to conditions in the divine realm (divine love, divine reason, divine glory). 12th is the Old Man, who for Etteilla’s teacher would correspond to Hermes Trismegistus or some other wise man. Then come some negative cards. At the end of the sequence is the Fool.

Another thing that leads me to think that Etteilla had a teacher is that although most of the content in the passage can be attributed to Hermetic sources, a couple of things cannot. These to me suggest someone of greater erudition than Etteilla.

The first thing that sticks out as different from the usual literature is Etteilla’s account of the fall as arising when “the creature desires that which is impossible for him to possess.” That is not part of the Judeo-Christian Fall: Adam and Eve want knowledge of good and evil, such as the gods have, and that is what they get, at the expense of separation from God. That is why they suddenly feel shame and cover heir bodies. In the Hermetic version of the Fall, Antrhopos becomes enamored of his reflection in the water, and tries to embrace it; when he does so, he is locked in the grip of Physis, i.e. Nature. The sin here is that of Narcissus, excessive self-love, again not of desiring the impossible.

In previous literature, the only place I find a Fall due to desiring the impossible is in a Gnostic heresy described by Irenaeus in Against All Heresies (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103.htm), a book which in Latin had appeared numerous times in the 17th and 17th centuries. In Book I, Chapter 2, section 1, speaking of the Aeon, or emanation of God, named Sophia, Irenaeus paraphrases the Gnostic “disciples of Valentinus” (this phrase in Ch. 1 title) as follows:

...she [Sophia] wished, according to them, to comprehend his [the Father’s] greatness. When she could not attain her end, inasmuch as she aimed at an impossibility,.. there was danger lest she should at last have been absorbed by his sweetness, and resolved into his absolute essence, unless she had met with that Power which supports all things, and preserves them outside of the unspeakable greatness.

The restraining power is called Horos, Greek for “Limit” (Barnstone, The Other Bible, p.612), which stops Sophia and casts her Desire away from her and into the void.

The casting out is comparable to the expulsion from Eden, because the “desire of Sophia” is now an entity on her own, a kind of lower Sophia, now plunged into the darkness; her grief, fear, ignorance, and memory of the divine world, in Irenaeus’s paraphrase, then take on separate existence as the four elements of the cosmos.

Like the Hermetic myth, this is an allegory for the condition of the soul, of how it became trapped in matter. But unlike the Poimandres’ account, the fall into matter is the result of desiring what is impossible.

A second place in the Etteilla passage for which I find no Christian or Hermetic precedent is the odd word “IOU,” spelled that way in the original, in the phrase “Throne of the big IOU.” Where does that come from? I have only one idea. In the same Against All Heresies, Irenaeus’s paraphrase of the “disciples of Irenaeus” says (Chapter IV, Sect. 1) that when the Desire of Sophia tries to ascend upward a second time, now trying to follow the eternal Christ, Limit again stops her, now uttering the word “IAO.” That word also appears in a couple of the Gnostic texts found in 1945 at Nag Hammadi; it seems to be some sort mystery word from the upper realm to the lower. Could Etteilla’s “IOU” be a memory of “IAO”, spoken to Etteilla a long time before? I have no other explanation.

It is not likely that Etteilla even in 1785 would have known paraphrases of heretics as they appeared in the writings of Church Fathers. These paraphrases were not general knowledge, for fear someone might find them attractive despite the “refutations.” If Etteilla knew about them, someone more erudite than he would have informed him privately. I can’t find any publications referring to them, or using the particular material I have mentioned, before German scholars of the late 19th century.

If Etteilla’s source knew that work by Irenaeus, based on a tract by “the disciples of Valentinus,” then something else follows. All the material in the Etteilla passage can be traced to Egypt. Clement of Alexandria mentioned Valentinus often, as a heretic familiar to him and hence in Egypt, where Clement lived. And otherwise the perspective of the passage is typically Hermetic, i.e. in the tradition of the Poimandres and the rest of the Corpus Hermeticum. There the fall from the archetypal world into matter produces ignorance, error, sin, and misery. The Hermetic writings were also from Egypt.

Admittedly, Trismegistus is not Thoth, and Alexandria not a city of the first Egyptians. But Etteilla was trying to package his goods in language that was both fashionable (hence profitable) and acceptable to the royal censors. As Decker et al point out (Wicked Pack of Cards p. 84 and footnote 40, p. 273), one of these censors was named Court de Gebelin, according to the title page of volume 8 of Monde Primitif.

[MikeH]

in my previous post I speculated that the source of Etteilla's word for the Supreme Being "IOU" was the "Iao" in Irenaeus's "Against All Heresies," a work he was not likely to have known, and that therefore he probably did have an erudite teacher. Digging further, I see that the word "Joa," for the Egyptian "great legislator," is used in the "Crata Repoa" of 1770, a German work well known in French occult circles (http://www.scribd.com/doc/12852641/Crata-Repoa). Probably a French translation already existed of this short work at the time Etteilla was writing. The "Crata Repoa" in turn cites Diodorus Siculus, Book One, De Egyptiis Legum Latoribus, i.e. sections 69ff. Here is Diodorus I.94 with the relevant part in bold (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/.../1D*.html#69):

...After the establishment of settled life in Egypt in early times, which took place, according to the mythical account, in the period of the gods and heroes, the first, they say, to persuade the multitudes to use written laws was Mneves, 43 a man not only great of soul but also in his life the most public-spirited of all lawgivers whose names are recorded. According to the tradition he claimed that Hermes had given the laws to him, with the assurance that they would be the cause of great blessings, just as among the Greeks, they say, Minos did in Crete and Lycurgus among the Lacedaemonians, the former saying that he received his laws from Zeus and the latter his from Apollo. 2 Also among several other peoples tradition says that this kind of a device was used and was the cause of much good to such as p321believed it. Thus it is recorded that among the Arians Zathraustes44 claimed that the Good Spirit gave him his laws, among the people known as the Getae who represent themselves to be immortal Zalmoxis45 asserted the same of their common goddess Hestia, and among the Jews Moyses referred his laws to the god who is invoked as Iao.46...

Footnote 46 by the modern editor says:

46 This pronunciation seems to reflect a Hebrew form Yahu; cp. Psalms 68.4: "His name is Jah."

The part I have put in bold type in Diodorus would have been well known even without the Crata Repoa's citation, since it contains a pagan historical reference to Moses. Given that the Crata Repoa itself reverses the o and a in "Iao," a further misspelling by Etteilla is not inconceivable (spelling "I" as "J" is of course not an error; in the 18th century, the two were the same letter). Etteilla would have known either "Joa" or "Iao" from his own reading, with no particular erudition required.

This refutation of what I said earlier is not conclusive, however, because there is one other apparent borrowing from Irenaeus not accounted for, the idea of original sin as attempting the impossible. I am still looking for a less recondite source in 18th century France than Irenaeus for this idea.

[MikeH]

I changed my timeline in line with Coradil's suggestions, deleting 1748 and adding one for 1840. Also I have been reading more Etteilla and more about Cagliostro. As a result, I have made a few changes in previous posts.

In my post for card 8, I added a reference to another section of the Poimandres, which now seems to me more appropriate than the one I gave originally.

In my post for card 12 (http://www.tarotforum.net/showpost.p...&postcount=109) I added a quote from the 2nd Cahier, p. 21, where Etteilla explains why he interprets the Marseille Hanged Man as Prudence, and from p. 26 his justification for the order of 9-12, the virtues.

in my post for card 15, I was wrong in identifying Trimercury with Trismegistus: he is actually, according to Etteilla in a table at the end of the 2nd Cahier, Trismegistus's grandfather. I have edited the post accordingly.

On Cagliostro: It seems that Giuseppi Balsamo, who was probably the same as Cagliostro, traveled from England to Calais on 15 Sept. 1772 (McCalman p. 32); then he appears in court records in Paris during 1772 and 1773. Also, Cagliostro introduced his Egyptian Rite in Mittau 1779 (McCalman p. 54, Gervaso p. 82, no comparable description earlier). I have edited my timeline for 1772 and 1779 accordingly. Also relevant is that in 1772 Balsamo was experimenting with the book by Alexis Piemontese, Etteilla's Alexis's alleged grandfather; and a possible influence on Cagliostro's rite is Dom Pernety, an alchemical writer referred to by Etteilla in the 2nd Cahier. I have put these parallels in the timeline entries.

In the context of "Illuminist" writings of the time (including especially Pasqually), and also Cagliosgtro's rite (translated in Faulks and Cooper, The Masonic Magician) I may be starting to understand better why Etteilla rearranged the tarot trumps in the way he did. The general project is that of reversing the Fall by means other than the sacraments of the Church, through initiatory experiences. In relation to the tarot, the point is to proceed in reverse order, from the higher numbered cards to the lower numbered ones. One dividing line is card 17, Mortality, the achievement of mystical death and so passing beyond the misery of this life. After that comes Judgment, the aid of a Magician, the descent to Hell, and the mystic Marriage. Marriage is a descent into materiality and lust on the way down, but an image of divine union on the way up. Then one is in the Terrestrial Paradise, maintained there by strict practice of the four virtues. Then comes the reversal of the seven days of Creation, which includes the initiatory trials by earth, air, water, and fire, trials well known at that time (e.g. the novel Sethos, in Google Books; also the "Crata Repoa" and Mozart's "Magic Flute"). The order of the trials is influenced by alchemy. In alchemy, as one of Cagliosto's admirers put it:

The matter does not spend long on the fire before it demonstrates a considerable change. Isaac the Hollandois says that it becomes all black in a little time; then there is no color in the world through which it does not pass before being red. Ripleus [i.e. George Ripley, 15th century English alchemist] says that after having seen an infinity of different colors in the [primary] matter one sees it become white like the snow, then afterward a beautiful citrine, and finally it becomes the color of the red poppy. (De la Borde, Lettres sur la Suisse, 1783, partially translated in McCalman p. 98; original in Google Books, p. 24f.)

Similarly the tarot ascends first to black (quadripeds and Earth), then the sequence of colors (the seven planets in the sky, or Air), then white (the moon and Water), and finally red (the sun and Fire). In that way the tarot outlines the steps of spiritual healing and so is "spiritual medicine" (Etteilla's phrase in the 2nd Cahier), comparable in its sphere to the elixir of alchemy.

[Teheuti]

Mike,
I can't tell you how much I appreciate all the work you are doing with this deck. For the first time the choices made in creating the cards are becoming more understandable. The material on Prudence/the Hanged Man is making me rethink my relationship to that card in other decks. I recently had the Hanged Man reversed and can see how prudence, as you've translated the card meanings, could apply. Putting it in the political context of the time also helps in understanding the political implications. The phrase that one "has to tip-toe around a situation" seems to apply — not like in the RWS 7 of Swords — but by being circumspect in unsettling or dangerous situations (where snakes are present). Wonderful, wonderful work. Thank you for sharing this with us.

[MikeH]

Thanks, Mary. And you had a good thought about what Etteilla and de Gebelin did with the Hanged Man. If the deck didn't already have a Prudence in the sense of "caution," the times demanded that there be one. Attaching that meaning to the reversed Hanged Man is a an option that visually almost works, and one that could well fit a reading.

[MikeH]

I wrote that for Etteilla

...the tarot outlines the steps of spiritual healing and so is "spiritual medicine" (Etteilla's phrase in the 2nd Cahier), comparable in its sphere to the elixir of alchemy.

In French the phrase I translated as "spiritual medicine" is “medécine de l’esprit.” The problem is that in French the word “esprit” is broader than the English word “spirit”; it can also be translated as “mind.”

The same is true in German. “Geist” means more than “spirit”; Hegel’s “Phaenomenologie des Geistes” for example is translated as both “Phenomenology of Spirit” and “Phenomenology of Mind” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phe...logy_of_Spirit).

In Etteilla’s case, the phrase “medécine de l’esprit” occurs on p. 182, in the Supplement to the 2nd Cahier. It is in Etteilla’s later thoughts addressed to p. 68 of the 2nd Cahier, where he called himself “Médecin de l’esprits,” physician of spirits—or physician of minds. Which is better, in English? Well, on p. 68 the full clause is

Médecin purement des esprits, ainsi que je le démontre dans le Fragment qui termine le troisieme Cahier de cet Ouvrage, je ne pourrois offrir que des cures toutes intellectuelles, l'esprit n'en ayant pas besoin d'autres;...

Or in English:

Physician purely of spirits [or minds], as I demonstrate in the Fragment which ends the third book of this Work, I could offer only intellectual cures, the spirit [or mind] having no need of others.

The word “intellectuelles” suggests that “mind” is the more appropriate translation. However it is not “mind” in the sense of “the exercise of the rational faculty,” as for example by scientists or lawyers, but a broader sense (Hermetic, but for all I know also that in ordinary French), in which the Hermetic deity himself is called “nous,” Greek for “mind.” The human mind acquires the higher knowledge of the divine mind not by reasoning alone, but by all the mental faculties. Jung’s classification of mental faculties or “functions” gives us some idea: the faculties of the mind include thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuition.

In 18th century French, even the word we translate as “to think,” “penser,” is broader than the English word “think,” which corresponds to the Jungian function of thinking. When Descartes (17th century, but the same) said, “Cogito ergo sum,” he was thinking “Je pense, ainsi je suis”; “penser” includes not just the rational faculty, but all the other Jungian functions, especially what we would term “experiencing.” It is not “I reason, therefore I am,” because an evil demon might be fooling him into thinking he is reasoning, when he only imagines that he does so, like a mad person who doesn’t know his thinking is off. It is more “I experience, therefore I am”—even an evil demon could not create the illusion that he is experiencing something, because the illusion itself is an experience. As Descartes says (http://www.wright.edu/cola/descartes/meditation2.html),

But what, then, am I? A thinking thing, it has been said. But what is a thinking thing? It is a thing that doubts, understands, [conceives], affirms, denies, wills, refuses; that imagines also, and perceives.

Another word that does not translate easily from 18th Century French into modern English is “Science,” which includes more than what we would consider “science”: it includes all that is capable of being accessed by the mind; “knowledge” is closer, or perhaps “the process of obtaining knowledge.” So when you see “knowledge” in my translations, probably the French word is “science”; another word that could be translated as “knowledge” is “connaissance”; that word I translate as “acquaintance.”

I would appreciate comments by others on these issues, especially those more familiar with French and other Western European languages than I.

I find it interesting that in the 2nd Cahier Etteilla rarely uses the word “divination” and never speaks of “predicting” the future by means of the “Book of Thot.” Its function is “médecine de l’esprit.” I will try to translate more of the context in which that expression occurs. Hopefully I will get some help from a friend who teaches French, as here the going gets rougher.

[Cerulean]

Pure medicine of our spirit-not singular?? More the soulful essence or nature not of the body, perhaps on a grander scale than the singular.

Esprits des corps is collective.

"I can not but offer the cure / remedy for all intellectuals...so there is no need for any other...meaning he offers..."IReRr

Not sure, but the spirits, as similar to espirits des corps may be a collective, communual expression, if that makes sense in this phrasing.

While American English frowns on double negatives, sometimes period quaint English of Jane Eyre or Dickens or Victoriana might suggest first a close word translation. Grimauds versions of translated instructions through the ages are a bit off and can be puzzling. Am finishing up Lenormand items and their three versions elsewhere...not everyone was aware I had three versions of Lenormand verses I had
to wade through, so translations tweaked or modern guesses without pictures and texts can be seem unusually different than if you were doing readings...

No time to work on any further detailed contribution online this year, but was glad to help offline earlier with supplements. Catch you all when we meet again on the boards or pm if there is time.

Fantastic work...

Originally Posted by MikeH

I wrote that for Etteilla In French the phrase I translated as "spiritual medicine" is “medécine de l’esprit.” The problem is that in French the word “esprit” is broader than the English word “spirit”; it can also be translated as “mind.”

The same is true in German. “Geist” means more than “spirit”; Hegel’s “Phaenomenolnogie des Geistes” for example is translated as both “Phenomenology of Spirit” and “Phenomenology of Mind” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Phe...logy_of_Spirit).

In Etteilla’s case, the phrase “medécine de l’esprit” occurs on p. 182, in the Supplement to the 2nd Cahier. It is in Etteilla’s later thoughts addressed to p. 68 of the 2nd Cahier, where he called himself “Médecin de l’esprits,” physician of spirits—or physician of minds. Which is better, in English? Well, on p. 68 the full clause is Or in English: The word “intellectuelles” suggests that “mind” is the more appropriate translation. However it is not “mind” in the sense of “the exercise of the rational faculty,” as for example by scientists or lawyers, but a broader sense (Hermetic, but for all I know also that in ordinary French), in which the Hermetic deity himself is called “nous,” Greek for “mind.” The human mind acquires the higher knowledge of the divine mind not by reasoning alone, but by all the mental faculties. Jung’s classification of mental faculties or “functions” gives us some idea: the faculties of the mind include thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuition.

In 18th century French, even the word we translate as “to think,” “penser,” is broader than the English word “think,” which corresponds to the Jungian function of thinking. When Descartes (17th century, but the same) said, “Cogito ergo sum,” he was thinking “Je pense, ainsi je suis”; “penser” includes not just the rational faculty, but all the other Jungian functions, especially what we would term “experiencing.” It is not “I reason, therefore I am,” because an evil demon might be fooling him into thinking he is reasoning, when he only imagines that he does so, like a mad person who doesn’t know his thinking is off. It is more “I experience, therefore I am”—even an evil demon could not create the illusion that he is experiencing something, because the illusion itself is an experience. As Descartes says (http://www.wright.edu/cola/descartes/meditation2.html),
Another word that does not translate easily from 18th Century French into modern English is “Science,” which includes more than what we would consider “science”: it includes all that is capable of being accessed by the mind; “knowledge” is closer, or perhaps “the process of obtaining knowledge.” So when you see “knowledge” in my translations, probably the French word is “science”; another word that could be translated as “knowledge” is “connaissance”; that word I translate as “acquaintance.”

I would appreciate comments by others on these issues, especially those more familiar with French and other Western European languages than I.

I find it interesting that in the 2nd Cahier Etteilla rarely uses the word “divination” and never speaks of “predicting” the future by means of the “Book of Thot.” Its function is “médecine de l’esprit.” I will try to translate more of the context in which that expression occurs. Hopefully I will get some help from a friend who teaches French, as here the going gets rougher.

[Cerulean]

Hello Mike,

I sent you the files and made comment of Editions Delarue, but here's more detail.

1) My book:

Les Recreations de la Cartomancie
ou
Description Pittoresque
De chacune des Cartes du Grand Jeu de l'Oracle des Dames
avec des combinasons pour expliquer
Le Present, Le Pae, L'Avenir
par Mlle LeMarchant

Paris
Chez Tous Le Marchandes de Nouveauties


Paris - Imprime chez Bonavendure et Duceois 53, quai des Augustine

(Note: Mike H, your Las Vegas Library copy is also from Edition Delarue, but your text is missing the complete listing of their offerings that my book has).

The second to the last page lists, 6th title down.

Le grand Oracle des dames et des demoiselles, par Mlle Lemarchand. Nouvelle edition. Prix. 2 >>.

(Seventh title is the La Sibylle couleur de rose ou les oracles du destin, amousement de societe...this may be useful to check on the history/printing of the Jeu des Destin games/cards later)

The last page lists the following--first the deck and then the book that should accompany them:

Second title down:

Le grand Jeu de l'Oracle de Dames 78 cartes-tarots imprimes en chromo-lithographie, a l'imitation des minatures du XV siecle, a renfermees dans un etui, illust. et acc du livres explicatif. 10.

Explanation follows:
Nous pouvons affirmer en toute assurance que rien jusqu'a ce jour, on fait de carte, c'a atteint le luxe de cette interesante serie de tarots; le grand jeu de l'oracle est donc une collection a laqquelle la preference sera incontestablement acquise.
Il n'est pas necesaire de rappeer combine de personnes, portant un beau nom, ont pris d'interet a la cartomancie, pour faire paer notre jeu, qui en relalite est un objet d'art et un jeu de luxe; le petit livret explicatif qui l'accompange a ete ffait avec un sein extreme, et comme toutez le predictions qu'il donne ont gracieuse, le Jeu de lOracle pourra etre mi dans toutes le mains.

Recreations de la Cartomancie, ou decription ou description pittoresque de chacune des Cartes du Grand Jeu de l'Oracle des Dames avec des combinasons pour expliquer
Le Present, Le Pae, L'Avenir des tarots...............1 25
(par Mlle LeMarchant)


Here are notes about Jeu des Dames, Delarue edition:
(I will also post these and other gathered details later in another thread about the Etteilla Jeu de Dames, which I am still compiling).

Linked thread to Jeu des Dames, 1865-1870 (rough estimate)
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=164546

Notes:
The book and text that Editions Delarue published for Jeu des Dames--we know this, as the pictures in the book are clearly Jeu des Dames. The variations in how Eve is depicted (number 8) is the most striking--and the design and text that accompanies #8 Le Repose is changed later by Grimaud's Grand Etteilla designs. Grimaud, Papus and Waite also changed the upright and reversed meaning of the Ace of Wands while both Editions Delarue and Lismon's texts--Ace of Wands in the earlier versions of Lismon and Editions Delarue has Chute/Fall as the upright meaning and Naissance/Birth as the reversed meaning.

The 20th century reproduction of the Jeu des Dames (Editions Dusserre, not to be confused with the 19th century Editions Delarue) come with the more studious text from Julia Orsini, not the cartomancy text of the Les Recreations de la Cartomancie. My early observation was the text of the Julie Orsini Book of Thoth had similar information--Les Recreations de la Cartomancie seem to be geared toward cartomancy and amusement for young ladies.

MikeH. wrote:

c. 1867. Delarue puts out Tarot Egyptien: Grand Jeu du Oracle des Dames deck, designed by G. Regamey, originally printed by chromolithography by Hangard-Mauge (DDD p. 149). This style of card is generally referred to as “Grand Etteilla III.” Many of the trump figures are derived from the 15th century Nuremburg Chronicle(see link posted earlier in this thread). The booklet appears to be--if a reprint described by Cerulean in this thread is authentic--a revision of the “Julia Orsini” explications; the descriptions of the cards fit the new pictures.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cerulean's additional notes from Editions Delarue advertised list of books, last page:

At the same time they offer a Jeu des Dames, Editions Delarue has available the LeGrand Etteilla, listed as follows (for the sake of completeness, I will type the full description in the Editions Delarue book):

LeGrand Etteilla, ou l'Art de Tirer les Cartes, contenant: 1. une introduction rappelant l'origine des cartes, 2. l'indication des tarots qui composent le vertiable livre de Thot; 3. une methode au moyen de laquelle ou peut apprendre soi-meme sa destinee et a dire la bonne aventure; 4. l'explication des 78 tarots ou cartes egyptiennes; 5. une table de synonymes ou differentes significations des mots places en tete et en queue de chacune de ces cartes sibylliques; 6. une liste de cent demandes principales auxquelles il est facile de repondre en faisant usage du livre de Thot; 7. les regles de plusieurs jeux de tarots, par Julia Orsini. Un gros volume in-12, avec les 78 fig. des tarots....5>>

Le meme avec 78 figures colorees....6 >>
Ce livre n'est aucunement destine a propager les erreurs: beaucoup de personnes font de l'art de tirer ls carates un amusement, sans ajouter plus de foi aux predictions par les cartes qu' a toutes les sciences accultes en general.

Grand Jeu de 78 Tarots egyptiens, ou livre de Thot, pourservir au grand Etteilla, 78 cartes col.6>>.

La vertiable Cartomancie explicquee par la celebre sibylle francaise. Nouv. edit, 1750 fig....6>>