reconsidering a cathar connection

Ross G Caldwell

Hi Mary,

Teheuti said:
Someone does need to bring out those old theories every once in a while as new connections could be made as new evidence is discovered.

I think the major point is that Catharism doesn't count as a theory explaining the meaning of the Tarot trump sequence. It doesn't explain anything that requires explanation.

The allegories are common to Italy in the early 15th century. They are secular and religious, befitting a game of cards invented in that time and place.

For instance, it doesn't seem totally far-fetched that the Cathar ex-pats in Concorezzo could have influenced the Umilitate order of Maifreda Visconti that was only 5 miles away or even had influence with Guglielma herself.

A lot of things were just "5 miles away" from places where unorthodox ideas existed. I'd say it's a good bet that unorthodox ideas existed in Rome, hundreds of metres from the Vatican, or even in the head of the Pope himself.

The point is not that unorthodox ideas existed a certain distance from where Tarot was played, or even invented, but that there is absolutely no reason to believe in the first place that Tarot contains any unorthodox ideas.

Find the unorthodoxy, or something unusual to the culture of the time, and THEN seek an explanation for it.

But that doesn't mean they influenced the design of the deck, either in the 15th c nor especially much later in Marseille.

Exactly. And therefore - this whole discussion is worthless except to expose a fraud.

You rightly point out important historical works that have examined the Cathar question and the issues they bring up should be addressed. And I agree with you about that.

At the American Culture Association conference a few months ago, a scholar of the Langue d'Oc (spelling?) mentioned that 30 to 40 years ago when she lived there that elderly locals all believed that the tarot originated with the Cathars of the region. It was part of their folk beliefs. Sorry - I can't look up her name - am writing from a friend's flat in London.

Mary

I know very well the kind of people your scholar is referring to. It is a 20th century belief. When it comes up in conversation that I study Tarot history, they say things like "Il descend des cathares, non?" (It comes from the Cathars, doesn't it?) or the Templars, or the Egyptians, depending on what they've read... It is not really a folk tradition (depending on how many generations you think it takes to make a tradition); it is just pop-tarotism.

The popular idea of Catharism is mostly a romantic idea of the late 19th century, which occultists picked up much like the romantic idea of the Templars. It is not surprising that the oldest people around, when they have any opinion at all, repeat the legend. Where were they to get the facts, after all?
 

foolish

wow! i guess i hit a little nerve there.

let me back up a bit and use your lengthy but highly charged response, mj, to try to put a few things in perspective:

1) perhaps my participation in this forum has given some people the wrong impression of what i am trying to do. i understand that the purpose of the forum, at least the historical secion, is geared toward investigating evidence about the tarot. this is a good thing, and perhaps if i was involved a little earlier, i could have avoided a few errors. however, from the very begining (as stated in my preface), i have said that i am not trying to make myself out to be a tarot scholar. in fact, i refer people to kaplan, o'neill, dummett and others for this. of course, this does not excuse the appearance of any mistakes at all. my thanks to those who have pointed out some of them already - changes have been made, as i am still in the pre-publish mode. my goal is to be as accurate as i can. interestingly enough, my interpretaion of the cards and their iconography has not been affected by some of these historical innacuracies.

2) although i may not have the same level of expertise on tarot history as many in this forum, i did not simply begin to write a book out of total ignorance of the subject. as far as research is concerned, i now have an extensive library (in my terms at least) not only from tarot scholars and writers, but also of the historical events surounding the albigensian crusade, the inquisition that followed, the art of the middle ages, etc, of which 86 books are referenced in my bibliography. so i think i have a pretty good idea of what's out there. of course, i haven't read every single book on the subject - and i don't think i need to in order to present my ideas. the one on revelations, for example, slipped by. as as far as revelations goes, i understand that o'neill has basically dismissed it on grounds of its inability to be inclusive to all the cards (a seeming fault of some other theories like mokely's, etc.) but i'm open to hearing what you have to say to that.

i hope you keep in mind that it's NOT my purpose to create a scholarly investigation of every theory of the tarot that has been proposed to date, as that would take a series of volumes which only people like the members of this forum would probably be interested in reviewing. the fact is, however, that the presence of other theories out there doesn't diminish the possibility of this one having substance.

3) which brings me to an important purpose of the book, which is the interpretation of the images of the tdm within this historical context. i believe that the associations i make to the cathar story are beyond a coincidental level. but i will leave it to the reader to make that decision. in any event, this is what i believe is unique about the book - not just the historical investigations. in fact, the information i present beforehand, in part I, are there basically to give the reader a better basis of reference for the interpretations in part II.

i think most people will understand the fact that some of the wording on my website is obviously used to promote the book. (statements like "throroughly reasearched" were written by my printing and design team - let's cut them a little slack for their enthusiasm). the "groundbreaking" part of the book, however, is not the fact that i was the first person to bring up this theory (another point i clearly make in my preface - did you miss that part?), but the fact that i procede to interpret each card within the context of this theory - something that waite, nor anyone else i am aware of, has done. in fact, waite's analysis of the tarot involves a variety of other sources, from which he helped designed his own deck, diverging in many ways from the tdm.

4) the search for "evidence" is always admirable. and there are varying levels of evidence. i hope i didn't imply that the theory of the cathar connection to the tarot is on the same level of evidence as certain other information we have such as the time or place where the tarot originated. it certainly is not.

5) i am not suggesting that the tarot had only one purpose - that of preserving the cathar mesages. i have stated elsewhere that the tarot most likely had many uses. it was obviously used as a card game. and it was probably used as a method of teaching moral lessons too. after all, its use of universal symbols opens it up to a wide variety of interpretaion - jung did a pretty good job of that. but i don't think anyone should get defensive about the possibility that the cathar connection is yet another one of these uses.

i guess the fact that mary had discovered someone who lived in languedoc who mentioned the "legend" of the cathar-tarot connection probably doesn't have merit in your mind, mj. but as we know, legends are often born out of real history. perhaps you should consider this itself as an "alternative" to be looked at.

lastly, let me say that iconography and symbolism has always been used to represent alternative meanings. let's not assume that because we see the image of the pope, for example, that we know exactly what the artist had in mind in every case and that it could only have meaning in its orthodox sense. it would make more sense for someone looking to express their heretical views to use the traditional common themes of art than to produce a new set of images which would probably serve as evidence to get them killed if it was discovered by church authorities.

all in all, i am actually encouraged by the various reactions i am getting. yes, even yours mj, as it tells me that the book should create a lively reaction in the general public - and this is my audience. perhaps when you have the chance to read the entire book, and not just the introduction, you won't feel so upset with me.
 

foolish

since i have only "released" the introduction of the book at this time, i can not expect anyone to get a complete sense of what is being presented other than the basic underlying concept. on the other hand, it doesn't make sense for anyone to act as though they can present a fair review or critique of the book before they have even read it.
 

Rosanne

Huck said:
.... :) ....

Robert Swyrin has the respected right to present his ideas and have them discussed and I would guess, that's a good choice for and from him to get some critique before he invests his money in a book production, which possibly has some weaknesses.
Robert had shown his interest to learn something ... well, I think, that's good, and I would appreciate, if some more authors would seek this way.

I think, these forums are the natural meeting place for young authors to test the value of their work.
Nobody came perfect in the world, and likely most will not have reached this goal, when they'll leave it.

Sure, Robert's representation has mistakes and perhaps there's a lot of missing experience, but ... me for instance, I've to learn every day, and I've no problem to be occasionally a little bit stupid.
Especially worthwhile for some personal progress I perceive the occasional stupid question, often it doesn't matter, if it's mine or somebodies else.
Now there you go Foolish- someone who is generous and considerate in helping enthusiasts along the meandering Tarot Historical path.
There would not be these discussions if it was all cut and dried and we all knew everything there was to know about Tarot.
People have seen many things in Tarot- after all I think it was in the 20th Century that the basis for the pips of the Visconti was discovered.
"The Mamluk Playing Cards" were discovered at the Topkapi museum in Istanbul by L.A.Mayer, who in 1939 wrote a treatise on this deck.
Fancy that! An Arabic influence in a Christian Milan- who would ever have thought it. Mah Jong, played in China for 4000 years only gets discovered in the West in 1911 when China becomes a Republic. How like cards the game is or at least like the game of Rummy. There are trumping tiles too!

At least now with the diatribe against you as in previous posts- your thread views will rise- and that must be good advertising :D
Maybe MJHurst is really your agent :p
~Rosanne
 

foolish

it's nice to put it all in that perspective, rosanne. i don't think any one can say that the jury is in this issue. at least that's the impression i got after reading so many different and often conflicting theories on the tarot.

what i am offering is simply what i consider to be an interesting presentation of one of those alternative views, since it includes an interpretation of the cards within that context. i fully expect that my interpretation will be regarded by tarot scholars as a product of the author's fantasy. fair enough. i had fun putting it all together, and i hope others will find some enjoyment in reading it. as i said, it was never supposed to be a comprehensive review of the tarot's history or a scholarly treatice, for that matter. it is more for the general public who has an interest in medieval history and the tarot as a symbolic form of religious art - and are open to looking at the traditional tarot in a new way.

i may have stepped on some toes by not making that extremely clear at the beginning, and some may have thought that i was out to offer proof of this theory - something i have said is not possible.

having been up against the firing squad at this forum and lived through it, i can at least say that what i may lack in the demands of scholarliness i have made up for in imagination. it's been a valuable experience.
 

foolish

what seems ironic, though, is that i am being accused of not being open to other theories, when in fact it's clear that some people here are actually unwilling to discuss this theory as a possiblity, and dismiss it as if the case is closed.

i also find it odd that some have accused me of not presenting evidence to back up my claims when the book has not even been released yet.
 

Bernice

foolish: what i am offering is simply what i consider to be an interesting presentation of one of those alternative views, since it includes an interpretation of the cards within that context. i fully expect that my interpretation will be regarded by tarot scholars as a product of the author's fantasy. fair enough.
I think that if you make that very clear in the book - perhaps the preface? - then discerning readers will enter the pages with an open mind..... and a respect for your honesty and imagination.

You say that the book will contain card meanings (for the trumps?) which align with Cathar beliefs. So it sounds as if this will be another approach to reading with historical decks. Even though not stamped with historical validatation. An interesting approach, to see the cards in a fresh different light.





Bee :)
 

foolish

It was surprising to think that no one had seen this
connection before. But I soon discovered that several notable
tarot historians had already suggested a similar link between
the tarot and the heretical sects of the Middle Ages. A few
even mentioned the Cathars by name. In his book, The Tarot,
for example, Alfred Douglas writes, “It has been suggested
that the Tarot cards might have been produced by Cathars
as a means of representing their doctrines pictorially to those
who were illiterate.”1 However, no one, to my knowledge, has
actually attempted to describe the details in the images of the
individual cards in this historical context. This is the gap this
book intends to fill.
thank you bernice. i had hoped that some of the statements which i have already made in the preface had made this apparent. here are a few excerpts from that section:

I understand that some of the ideas I am presenting in this
book conflict with the accepted theories of many tarot readers
and historians. I also understand that an attempt to prove any
theory of the tarot beyond question is futile.]

My intention is to present a picture which may stimulate
one’s imagination and unlock further interest in the history and
evolution of the tarot. I ask only that the reader begin with an
open mind and withhold his or her final opinion until the end
of the book.
It should be made clear from the beginning that this book
is not about divination or fortune telling, nor is it about how
to read a tarot spread.
It is not within the scope of this book to present a complete
analysis of the tarot or to review all the existing theories
regarding its origins. For those interested in learning more
about the various theories of the tarot’s development, I would
refer them to the writings of Robert O’Neill, Stuart Kaplan,
Michael Dummett, and others who have already provided us
with comprehensive reviews of the subject. I present here only
what I believe to be useful as a background to the understanding
of the Cathar connection.
i hope this helps to clear up any misconceptions about the scope and intent of the book.
 

Bernice

It should be made clear from the beginning that this book
is not about divination or fortune telling, nor is it about how
to read a tarot spread.
This is disappointing, as a meaningful description of the (marseille-type) cards other than Waite-Smith one would be welcome to many people who might prefer to read with the pre-esoteric decks.

However, I see that you clearly state that this work is from your own viewpoint, your own speculations. That is honest.


Bee :)
 

Debra

From the table of contents, it looks like the focus of the second half is card-by-card. New ways of seeing the images can't help but enrich readings, I think.