Mother on the Pope Card

[f. silvestris]

As there has been a fair amount of discussion about the presence or absence of the mother on the Pope card, I've posted a sheet of cards printed in Milan by Lattanzio Lamperti in the mid 19th century, which shows her very clearly.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a58/invbks/blog006.jpg
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a58/invbks/blog007.jpg

Although I don't go along with Venicebard's schema, the presence of these figures does, for me at least, deepen the card.

[venicebard]

Without meaning to rain on your (our) parade, are you sure that's mom? To my eye it looks more like the first pair of suppliants are followed by a second pair, or else that three are being introduced by a fourth, perhaps of higher rank... OR a mom, I can't really tell.

I'm interested in why her presence deepens the symbol for you. Does it have to do with the central essence of my take on it, that it focuses symbolism on blessing-cleansing rather than the personality of the particular pontiff?

[f. silvestris]

no raining involved.

Your posts made me take notice of the arm in some Marseilles decks, and I was interested to see it expanded into a definite figure on this sheet (at least, I would take the figure to be an elaboration of the arm, rather than independent invention on the part of Lamperti, or whoever).

The reproduction I have is wretchedly small (3.5 x 1.5 cm - approx 1.5 x 0.5 inches) and, of course, breaks up too much to be of any great use if I try to expand it to a useful size.

As far as I can make out, there are two tonsured figures, one behind the other, on the right, and an untonsured figure, with another figure, arm slightly raised, just behind it, on the left.

No, I personally don't see any reason to definitely identify this last figure as mama, but then I'd say the same of the other appearances of the arm I've come across - it could be lashed to the end of a pole, for all we know. I was, however, taking your attribution as given for the sake of argument, and thought this was perhaps an interesting expansion of the image.

Best, Felis

ps. Picture source – Lise: Il Giochi di Carta, 1988

[venicebard]

Originally Posted by f. silvestris

No, I personally don't see any reason to definitely identify this last figure as mama, but then I'd say the same of the other appearances of the arm I've come across - it could be lashed to the end of a pole, for all we know.

In this last case, would we not be able to tell from a somewhat surprised expression on the pontiff's face? Seriously, I admit that secure identification of the technically ambiguous arm with mom arises mainly from a bardic setting in which V and III are the female and male pillars of the body-aka-temple, but also, I would say, from gut feeling that that would be the natural association a card-player of that era would make, given the diminutive size of the supplicants (making them children and also perhaps recalling the purity-of-voice of a boys choir, since they are presumably the same male twins that appear in their 'raw' state in XVIIII). However this argument of mine is weakened by the rarity of the arm's being noticed by moderns apparently. Still, you are most likely right about it being elaboration on the arm, rather than mere concoction.

[f. silvestris]

Originally Posted by venicebard

I'm interested in why her presence deepens the symbol for you. Does it have to do with the central essence of my take on it, that it focuses symbolism on blessing-cleansing rather than the personality of the particular pontiff?

With the essence yes: as a matter of gut-feeling, and experience of the card in practice, I find the card more resonant as a depiction of action (blessing-cleansing or perhaps thanking Cthulhu for the loverly severed arm) than as a representation of a figure.

[jmd]

Rather than 'the arm being rarely noticed' by some of us, it is the ambiguity or unclarity of various decks that is noted, which a very small number of decks have seemingly increased in ambiguity by colouring the card in such a manner as to render the possibility of an additional arm more prominent.

As posted by f. silvestris, there are of course a small number of decks that increase the two smaller figures, and thereby try to make sense of lines from some earlier decks that are difficult to bring to inner clarity. One of the beautiful aspects of many Italian decks is that they do aim for calrity of image, whilst seeking to, wherever possible, reflect earlier tradition.

Personally, I do not in the least think that there was an arm intended nor even depicted. Rather, carved the lines are such as to present the folds of a cape.

Of course, in working with certain decks, the ambiguity does allow for an arm to be 'seen'. I personally would not, however, universalise the specific lines of such a deck and claim that this is what constitutes more typical Marseille-style accuracy - especially given this lack of possible arm in many other Marseille-style decks.

As a personal preference for the Grimaud and other decks depicting this ambiguity, of course, and especially if it fits better with one's personal insights into correlations that may be made, then the depiction may be prefered... but not necessarily by those of us who do not work with such additional correlations.

[venicebard]

Fair enough, jmd. I've worked from Grimaud so long that I take certain things for granted I perhaps should not. Still, I think the case can be made: the hand is at a slightly odd angle to be the boy's. Yet I will say you have the diminutive size of the hand on your side perhaps (I have always taken this to mean it is feminine). The only Marseilles-type (early) designs that really do away with this feature (as opposed to just making it more ambiguous than Grimaud) would appear to be those that for other considerations as well can be shown to be other than mainstream: the bitterly satiric quality in Noblet for instance, or the artistic license of a Vieville. (They also possess a roughness of design, a lack of refinement not present in the Conver, which is surely why this became standard.) I don't have time right now to fully research and argue the case, but will in a few weeks I hope.