Fundamental

**jmd** · 22-03-2004

As we each strive to deepen and further our myriad views on Tarot, there comes a point where certain fundamental structures, images, historical connections, allegorical understandings, or imagery becomes viewed as very much providing Tarot's foundation, or fundament.

We each carry these in various ways, whether it be that Tarot is properly grounded in one deck, in a small number of decks... in all and any decks whose creators decided to use the appelation 'tarot', including and irrespective as to whether they may have resemblance to what most of us would agree on.

When we meet others whose fundamental views on Tarot are different, there can develop either a clash of 'cultures', or a dialogue.

I am aware, for example, of numerous examples in these very forums of people who have considered decks they may never have otherwise considered and evaluated. Comparing is one thing, to decide to discern how a deck may or not be Tarot is another.

For myself, as some here are already aware, the fundamental characteristics of a deck includes much which manifests in the Marseille.

Am I therefore a 'fundamentalist'? Yes and no.

The term has come to be associated with religious bigotry. I certainly do not consider myself a bigot, and would also like to think that others do not see me that way - for I know that in my heart and soul I am not.

Am I, however, a fundamentalist in that other sense of that term - ie, in the sense that there are certain aspects which I consider that a deck needs to have in order to remain a 'true' Tarot? Here I will have to place myself in the fundamentalist camp.

This, of course, does not imply that the many wonderful other decks, many of which may have been imspired by Tarot, or have numerous similarities to Tarot, have no merit - quite the contrary. Numerous decks, including, for example, the Mantegna, are superb and beautiful (visually as well as in other senses). Even decks which may not have personal appeal have their incredible charm...

a question which I ask myself is how much can be changed of the deck, and it still remain Tarot ?. Here, of course, we may each have various answers, answers which show what type of fundamental attributes we discern for Tarot, and what kind, therefore, of fundamentalists we each are... not, of course, in the 'bigot' sense of the term!

northsea · 22-03-2004

The definition of tarot has widened over time with the availability of new decks to the masses. Up to about 1970, 'tarot' included mainly the Marseille, Visconti, Wirth, Egyptian, and the newcomers Rider-Waite and Thoth. Since around 1970, the term 'tarot' has expanded in the mass conscious to include decks such as the 'Dune tarot' which is certainly not 'tarot' in the Marseille sense.

Modern tarot artists have largely ignored the Marseille pattern in favor of Rider-Waite and Thoth. There are many 'Rider-Waite' clones, but few Marseille clones. The Nigel Jackson majors are loosely-based on Marseille.

The Old English is the closest modern interpretation of Marseille I can think of, but unfortunately over-simplified the Majors symbolism (and unfortunately for fans of pictorial minors, omitted the pictorial symbolism on the Cups cards). The only real Marseille-clone I can think of is the Fournier Marseille. The Jonathan Dee and Secret tarots have some Marseille symbolism, too.

Okay, I think I'm trying to say that I wish more modern artists would base their decks on the Marseille, but with pictorial minors (just my own preference). (I know you are familiar the history, jmd, but just rehashing it for myself.)

Rusty Neon · 22-03-2004

Here's where I sit on this debate.

I'll answer your question with some quick examples.

For me ....

Examples of Tarot decks

- Tarot de Marseille
- Viéville (even though its trump don't follow TdM sequence and that some are different in iconography)
- Visconti family deck
- Rider-Waite
- Motherpeace
- Shapeshifter (even though it has > 78 cards)
- Thoth
- Osho Zen (unconventional court cards)
- PoMo Tarot
- Greenwood Tarot
- Grand Etteilla
- Pythagorean Tarot
- LS Tarot of the Origins (re-visioned court cards and pip cards)
- LS Tarot of the Imagination
- modern day French decks for playing tarot (even though they have numbered postcard type trumps that have no traditional tarot trump counterparts)
- art versions of such French decks

Borderline

- Egipcios Kier: I'm really sitting on the fence with this one. It has no explicit suits or courts, but it is obviously based on a Grand Etteilla deck.
- Decks with a fifth suit: I'm ok with extra court cards or extra trumps, but I'm not sure whether a fifth suit keeps the deck as a tarot deck.

Examples of decks that are not tarot decks

- Minchiate
- Mantegna
- bridge/poker playing cards
- French piquet decks
- 64 card I Ching decks
- 52 card French cartomancy decks
- Symbolon
- rune cards
- Medicine cards

If someone has some other examples, I'd be interested in categorizing them.

**Lee** · 22-03-2004

Quote:

Originally posted by Tommy
The Jonathan Dee and Secret tarots have some Marseille symbolism, too.

Hi Tommy, can you tell me, is there an actual Jonathan Dee deck? I have only seen this deck as illustrations in a book (Tarot Mysteries by Jonathan Dee), and I've been wondering if it exists as a deck.

Thanks --
Lee

mj07 · 23-03-2004

Quote:

Originally posted by Tommy
Modern tarot artists have largely ignored the Marseille pattern in favor of Rider-Waite and Thoth. There are many 'Rider-Waite' clones, but few Marseille clones. The Nigel Jackson majors are loosely-based on Marseille.
...
Okay, I think I'm trying to say that I wish more modern artists would base their decks on the Marseille, but with pictorial minors (just my own preference). (I know you are familiar the history, jmd, but just rehashing it for myself.)

I was thinking the same thing.

Also, what are the FUNDAMENTAL differences between the Marsielles and the RWS decks (other than the non-pictorial minors)? I assume this has already been a topic of discussion but don't know how I would go about finding it! Thanks!

Moongold · 23-03-2004

I like this definition which came from Aoife in another thread from last year. Can't remember which one, but here is the quotation

Quote:

Originally posted by Aoife
I have found it useful to arrive at my own working categories:

Tarot Deck - pre-20th century, French/Italian - of which Marseilles and Soprafino are the master moulds

Tarot-Derivative Deck - RWS, CH Thoth, and their clones

Tarot-Inspired Deck - e.g. Sacred Circle, Osho Zen

As I said, these are purely my personal, working defintions.

I can see how the 20th century decks are derived from the Marseilles but I still think they are genuine tarot because they seem to have the fundamental structure.

Hope that isn't contradictory.

Diana · 23-03-2004

From the Merriam-Webster Online dictionary:

Main Entry: 1fun·da·men·tal
Pronunciation: "f&n-d&-'men-t&l
Function: adjective
1 a : serving as an original or generating source : PRIMARY <a discovery fundamental to modern computers> b : serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function : BASIC
2 a : of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts : RADICAL <fundamental change>; also : of or dealing with general principles rather than practical application <fundamental science> b : adhering to fundamentalism
3 : of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration
4 : of central importance : PRINCIPAL <fundamental purpose>
5 : belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics : DEEP-ROOTED <her fundamental good humor>
synonym see ESSENTIAL
- fun·da·men·tal·ly /-t&l-E/ adverb

1. The very first entry above is one which made me jump. Jump with excitement and relief. "Serving as an original or generating source". The original and generating source for the Tarot as we know it today, with its esoteric symbology (so I'm not talking about the Visconti Sforza here) is the Tarot of Marseille.

As I am a student of the Tarot of Marseille, the Ur-Tarot, and as I stand in awe of it, I can proudly stand before it and proclaim "I am a Tarot Fundamentalist". For yes, I rely on this original and generating source for my understanding of Tarot. The original and generating source is enough for me. I prefer to go directly to the source, rather than go through different channels. (I don't believe in the Pope, for instance. No, I prefer him in the chocolate medal form.

)

2. of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts : RADICAL <fundamental change>; also : of or dealing with general principles rather than practical application <fundamental science>

I am present here too. The essential structure I adhere to. Absolutely. Goodness, I once tried doing additions with 2 and 2 equal five, but they did not work at all. This is very much an Emperor definition.

3. adhering to fundamentalism - obviously I do, if I am a fundamentalist.

4. of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration - I don't know what this means. So I'll abstain here....

4 : of central importance : PRINCIPAL <fundamental purpose>
5 : belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics : DEEP-ROOTED <her fundamental good humor>

Yup. Most definitely of central importance to me. And the Tarot certainly belongs to my innate or ingrained characteristics.

I have just discovered that I am a Tarot Fundamentalist, and wow, am I proud to be one.

Nay, not proud. Honoured. The Tarot has a humbling influence on one. Especially if one is a Fundamentalist.

Diana · 23-03-2004

Quote:

Originally posted by mj07
Also, what are the FUNDAMENTAL differences between the Marsielles and the RWS decks (other than the non-pictorial minors)? I assume this has already been a topic of discussion but don't know how I would go about finding it! Thanks!

Gosh mj07. The answer to your question is very complex. If you don't have copies of both decks. If you have copies of both decks, you can begin by comparing them card by card, detail by detail.

That would be step number one.

DewDrop · 23-03-2004

Quote:

Originally posted by Diana

3 : of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration

Can it be that WE are relating to this "lowest component" of our complexed mind (that is realy a vibration in the sense of Albert Einstein: E-m3) when we read our tarotcards?
or in other words: our reading is produced by this "lowest componet" of our complexed mind and transformed into words so it can reach the Querent, and that we are meerly a medium in this case.

WE: the person who is giving a reading.

mj07 · 23-03-2004

Quote:

Originally posted by Diana
Gosh mj07. The answer to your question is very complex. If you don't have copies of both decks. If you have copies of both decks, you can begin by comparing them card by card, detail by detail.

That would be step number one.

hmmm... thanks. but what I don't understand is, how do you read the numbered cards intuitively without any kind of picture on it? *confused*
maybe I just need to spend some time in the Marsielles study group, or something?

jmd fourhares Join Date: 05 Aug 2001 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 8,502	Fundamental As we each strive to deepen and further our myriad views on Tarot, there comes a point where certain fundamental structures, images, historical connections, allegorical understandings, or imagery becomes viewed as very much providing Tarot's foundation, or fundament. We each carry these in various ways, whether it be that Tarot is properly grounded in one deck, in a small number of decks... in all and any decks whose creators decided to use the appelation 'tarot', including and irrespective as to whether they may have resemblance to what most of us would agree on. When we meet others whose fundamental views on Tarot are different, there can develop either a clash of 'cultures', or a dialogue. I am aware, for example, of numerous examples in these very forums of people who have considered decks they may never have otherwise considered and evaluated. Comparing is one thing, to decide to discern how a deck may or not be Tarot is another. For myself, as some here are already aware, the fundamental characteristics of a deck includes much which manifests in the Marseille. Am I therefore a 'fundamentalist'? Yes and no. The term has come to be associated with religious bigotry. I certainly do not consider myself a bigot, and would also like to think that others do not see me that way - for I know that in my heart and soul I am not. Am I, however, a fundamentalist in that other sense of that term - ie, in the sense that there are certain aspects which I consider that a deck needs to have in order to remain a 'true' Tarot? Here I will have to place myself in the fundamentalist camp. This, of course, does not imply that the many wonderful other decks, many of which may have been imspired by Tarot, or have numerous similarities to Tarot, have no merit - quite the contrary. Numerous decks, including, for example, the Mantegna, are superb and beautiful (visually as well as in other senses). Even decks which may not have personal appeal have their incredible charm... a question which I ask myself is how much can be changed of the deck, and it still remain Tarot ?. Here, of course, we may each have various answers, answers which show what type of fundamental attributes we discern for Tarot, and what kind, therefore, of fundamentalists we each are... not, of course, in the 'bigot' sense of the term!

22-03-2004	Ask a Professional Tarot Reader Top #1

northsea Citizen Join Date: 02 Nov 2001 Location: usa, west of the rockies Posts: 1,110	The definition of tarot has widened over time with the availability of new decks to the masses. Up to about 1970, 'tarot' included mainly the Marseille, Visconti, Wirth, Egyptian, and the newcomers Rider-Waite and Thoth. Since around 1970, the term 'tarot' has expanded in the mass conscious to include decks such as the 'Dune tarot' which is certainly not 'tarot' in the Marseille sense. Modern tarot artists have largely ignored the Marseille pattern in favor of Rider-Waite and Thoth. There are many 'Rider-Waite' clones, but few Marseille clones. The Nigel Jackson majors are loosely-based on Marseille. The Old English is the closest modern interpretation of Marseille I can think of, but unfortunately over-simplified the Majors symbolism (and unfortunately for fans of pictorial minors, omitted the pictorial symbolism on the Cups cards). The only real Marseille-clone I can think of is the Fournier Marseille. The Jonathan Dee and Secret tarots have some Marseille symbolism, too. Okay, I think I'm trying to say that I wish more modern artists would base their decks on the Marseille, but with pictorial minors (just my own preference). (I know you are familiar the history, jmd, but just rehashing it for myself.) Last edited by northsea; 22-03-2004 at 12:05.

22-03-2004	Ask a Professional Tarot Reader Top #2

Diana Citizen Join Date: 01 Jan 2002 Posts: 8,213	From the Merriam-Webster Online dictionary: Main Entry: 1fun·da·men·tal Pronunciation: "f&n-d&-'men-t&l Function: adjective 1 a : serving as an original or generating source : PRIMARY <a discovery fundamental to modern computers> b : serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function : BASIC 2 a : of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts : RADICAL <fundamental change>; also : of or dealing with general principles rather than practical application <fundamental science> b : adhering to fundamentalism 3 : of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration 4 : of central importance : PRINCIPAL <fundamental purpose> 5 : belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics : DEEP-ROOTED <her fundamental good humor> synonym see ESSENTIAL - fun·da·men·tal·ly /-t&l-E/ adverb 1. The very first entry above is one which made me jump. Jump with excitement and relief. "Serving as an original or generating source". The original and generating source for the Tarot as we know it today, with its esoteric symbology (so I'm not talking about the Visconti Sforza here) is the Tarot of Marseille. As I am a student of the Tarot of Marseille, the Ur-Tarot, and as I stand in awe of it, I can proudly stand before it and proclaim "I am a Tarot Fundamentalist". For yes, I rely on this original and generating source for my understanding of Tarot. The original and generating source is enough for me. I prefer to go directly to the source, rather than go through different channels. (I don't believe in the Pope, for instance. No, I prefer him in the chocolate medal form. ) 2. of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts : RADICAL <fundamental change>; also : of or dealing with general principles rather than practical application <fundamental science> I am present here too. The essential structure I adhere to. Absolutely. Goodness, I once tried doing additions with 2 and 2 equal five, but they did not work at all. This is very much an Emperor definition. 3. adhering to fundamentalism - obviously I do, if I am a fundamentalist. 4. of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration - I don't know what this means. So I'll abstain here.... 4 : of central importance : PRINCIPAL <fundamental purpose> 5 : belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics : DEEP-ROOTED <her fundamental good humor> Yup. Most definitely of central importance to me. And the Tarot certainly belongs to my innate or ingrained characteristics. I have just discovered that I am a Tarot Fundamentalist, and wow, am I proud to be one. Nay, not proud. Honoured. The Tarot has a humbling influence on one. Especially if one is a Fundamentalist. Last edited by Diana; 23-03-2004 at 05:11.

23-03-2004	Ask a Professional Tarot Reader Top #7

Rusty Neon Citizen Join Date: 12 Mar 2003 Location: Land of Snow and Ice (O Canada) Posts: 4,843	Here's where I sit on this debate. I'll answer your question with some quick examples. For me .... Examples of Tarot decks - Tarot de Marseille - Viéville (even though its trump don't follow TdM sequence and that some are different in iconography) - Visconti family deck - Rider-Waite - Motherpeace - Shapeshifter (even though it has > 78 cards) - Thoth - Osho Zen (unconventional court cards) - PoMo Tarot - Greenwood Tarot - Grand Etteilla - Pythagorean Tarot - LS Tarot of the Origins (re-visioned court cards and pip cards) - LS Tarot of the Imagination - modern day French decks for playing tarot (even though they have numbered postcard type trumps that have no traditional tarot trump counterparts) - art versions of such French decks Borderline - Egipcios Kier: I'm really sitting on the fence with this one. It has no explicit suits or courts, but it is obviously based on a Grand Etteilla deck. - Decks with a fifth suit: I'm ok with extra court cards or extra trumps, but I'm not sure whether a fifth suit keeps the deck as a tarot deck. Examples of decks that are not tarot decks - Minchiate - Mantegna - bridge/poker playing cards - French piquet decks - 64 card I Ching decks - 52 card French cartomancy decks - Symbolon - rune cards - Medicine cards If someone has some other examples, I'd be interested in categorizing them.

22-03-2004	Ask a Professional Tarot Reader Top #3

Support the Forum via Google Adsense
	#ADS