Diana
pan: In case you don't scroll up (you were obviously posting at the same time that I was), I made a post further up asking you something! Just telling you in case you miss it.
A look at Tarot as very Ancient, and subject to concerted mis-representation
pan
good question diana!
the answer i believe is that the tarot was saved
from book burning by somebody who recognized
its similarity to Qaballah. Rescuing the cards was
itself a heretical action. The existence of those
cards on ones person after would have been enough
to get the person burned alive or worse. So the
monk or monks in question made a new deck with
enough christian symbology to pass under the radar
of the more zealous elite.
By for instance putting a "pope" card in the mix
and thus acknowledging the papacy, they made a deck which related well enough to the culture of
the time that tho heretical wasn't cause for immediate execution.
The original cards which the monks copied from were then either well hidden or destroyed.
The likelihood is that only monks would have had access to those materials at that time, and that
the cards were storehoused as spoils of war for perhaps several centuries before being rescued;
possibly directly from the book burning pyre.
The point is, the cards we now have are roman catholic distortions. The marseilles deck and others saved tarot from extinction, but at the
cost of a great deal of changes.
What people look at and think of as the evolution of tarot is in my mind clearly the pattern revealing itself through the distortion, as well
as potential influences from tarot- like decks from the muslim world etc.
thanks for drawing my attention back up, i wouldn't want to miss a good question.
the answer i believe is that the tarot was saved
from book burning by somebody who recognized
its similarity to Qaballah. Rescuing the cards was
itself a heretical action. The existence of those
cards on ones person after would have been enough
to get the person burned alive or worse. So the
monk or monks in question made a new deck with
enough christian symbology to pass under the radar
of the more zealous elite.
By for instance putting a "pope" card in the mix
and thus acknowledging the papacy, they made a deck which related well enough to the culture of
the time that tho heretical wasn't cause for immediate execution.
The original cards which the monks copied from were then either well hidden or destroyed.
The likelihood is that only monks would have had access to those materials at that time, and that
the cards were storehoused as spoils of war for perhaps several centuries before being rescued;
possibly directly from the book burning pyre.
The point is, the cards we now have are roman catholic distortions. The marseilles deck and others saved tarot from extinction, but at the
cost of a great deal of changes.
What people look at and think of as the evolution of tarot is in my mind clearly the pattern revealing itself through the distortion, as well
as potential influences from tarot- like decks from the muslim world etc.
thanks for drawing my attention back up, i wouldn't want to miss a good question.
Diana
Makes sense.... and follows very closely and quite parallel to my beliefs. (I still hover around the Templar connection like a bee around a flower, although it makes most people snigger at me 
).
).Eberhard
the Templars also had been in the Middle East, and The Califat of Cordoba was the "Silicon Valley" of its time. What I wonder is where the Egyptian style decks come from, out of a sudden; the Wegener design of 1896 seems to be the first in public, further modified by The Brotherhood of Light Zain, BOTA ... But Mozart's Magic Flute much earlier brought Masonic knowledge out in the open. Is there a hidden undercurrent?
firemaiden
Pan you are not offering your ideas as "interesting theories" you are offering them as a done deal fact.
If we disagree with you, you say we are brainwashed, or delusional.
That is not the kind of counter argument that I would qualify as "intellectual".
If we disagree with you, you say we are brainwashed, or delusional.
That is not the kind of counter argument that I would qualify as "intellectual".
pan
hmm.
that may be true.
you see, there is a certain amount of
anticipation of whats going to happen
when i say things...
this is not the first time i have been
down this road.
I'm sure i am carying my own baggage
and for that i apologize.
I am presenting what i see as fact.
from my perspective,
there you folks are sitting in the matrix
and i have information i know people don't
want to face or hear.
So how much do i create the sense of confrontation?
Whats my contribution?
Gawsh...good question.
I hope you will continue to point out my
breaks from cogency and decency and
i hope that its still clear whats going on
in terms of what i am attempting to communicate.
I think that if i went looking for an ad hominem
count, what i would find would be possibly a bit different than what you are saying.
However justified or angry i may be it is wrong of
me to post ad hominems; even in response to ad
hominems directed at me.
Thanks for pointing this out and i apologize sincerely and hope that you can keep me honest.
Thanks again
ppan
that may be true.
you see, there is a certain amount of
anticipation of whats going to happen
when i say things...
this is not the first time i have been
down this road.
I'm sure i am carying my own baggage
and for that i apologize.
I am presenting what i see as fact.
from my perspective,
there you folks are sitting in the matrix
and i have information i know people don't
want to face or hear.
So how much do i create the sense of confrontation?
Whats my contribution?
Gawsh...good question.
I hope you will continue to point out my
breaks from cogency and decency and
i hope that its still clear whats going on
in terms of what i am attempting to communicate.
I think that if i went looking for an ad hominem
count, what i would find would be possibly a bit different than what you are saying.
However justified or angry i may be it is wrong of
me to post ad hominems; even in response to ad
hominems directed at me.
Thanks for pointing this out and i apologize sincerely and hope that you can keep me honest.
Thanks again
ppan
catboxer
Zo, mein freunds...is this the end of the line for the Aeclectic History Board? There was a time when it was a great place to come and discuss history and related topics. Of course, we had our disagreements, and sometimes disagreed vociferously, since many passions attend this subject. But the disagreements were always tempered by a measure of mutual respect.
Now we're treated to the conspiracy theory du jour, and told that if we don't believe it, it's because we've been blinded by the sugared propoganda of papist agents. I guess that's okay. After all, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is sometimes shelved in the history section.
But I do have a conspiracy theory of my own, about both the internet and tarot-type people, and it's this: cyberspace is tilted, and the tarot studies corner of it is the one that lots of the nuts roll into.
Now we're treated to the conspiracy theory du jour, and told that if we don't believe it, it's because we've been blinded by the sugared propoganda of papist agents. I guess that's okay. After all, "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" is sometimes shelved in the history section.
But I do have a conspiracy theory of my own, about both the internet and tarot-type people, and it's this: cyberspace is tilted, and the tarot studies corner of it is the one that lots of the nuts roll into.
Umbrae
catboxer said:
Hear Here!
pan
lol
gawsh, you'll give me so much power?
i could "end" the history board?
gee whizz.
i notice that you have completely sunk to ad hominems.
You have failed to follow my example.
You have not done a point for point
analysis.
you are arguing now from an appeal to
emotion; making yourself out as a victim.
the danger of being willing to critically
self introspect
as i was and am willing to do,
is that people like you aren't.
you have allready decided from the word go that
i am wrong.
You don't deliberate.
You don't think.
You don't reason.
You attack.
They have a saying in logic class;
continued use of ad hominems means your opponent
doesn't have an argument.
And you don't.
The lies and misinformation of the catholic church
are just an easy sham i can knock over in two days.
The defenders of the status quo can only play
with insults. They haven't a leg to stand on.
I have shown you my integrity.
You have in return shown me pettyness
crassness and the bully dark side.
shrug
whateva
gawsh, you'll give me so much power?
i could "end" the history board?
gee whizz.
i notice that you have completely sunk to ad hominems.
You have failed to follow my example.
You have not done a point for point
analysis.
you are arguing now from an appeal to
emotion; making yourself out as a victim.
the danger of being willing to critically
self introspect
as i was and am willing to do,
is that people like you aren't.
you have allready decided from the word go that
i am wrong.
You don't deliberate.
You don't think.
You don't reason.
You attack.
They have a saying in logic class;
continued use of ad hominems means your opponent
doesn't have an argument.
And you don't.
The lies and misinformation of the catholic church
are just an easy sham i can knock over in two days.
The defenders of the status quo can only play
with insults. They haven't a leg to stand on.
I have shown you my integrity.
You have in return shown me pettyness
crassness and the bully dark side.
shrug
whateva
pan
before this thread is hijinked by people who
obviously didn't meditate long enough on the meaning of the lightning struck tower,
lets return once again to the topic of this thread; Gnostics.
Gnostics were Christian or PreChristian depending
on who you ask, a heretical sect of jews who
bridge the gap between judaism and christianity
in terms of the evolution of those ideologies.
Gnostics, like Essenes, lived in the desert and
followed a monastic existence. They believed a lot
of things which made isolating themselves from the
rest of judaic society neccesary.
The question on the table is, could the gnostic have been influenced by tarot?
obviously didn't meditate long enough on the meaning of the lightning struck tower,
lets return once again to the topic of this thread; Gnostics.
Gnostics were Christian or PreChristian depending
on who you ask, a heretical sect of jews who
bridge the gap between judaism and christianity
in terms of the evolution of those ideologies.
Gnostics, like Essenes, lived in the desert and
followed a monastic existence. They believed a lot
of things which made isolating themselves from the
rest of judaic society neccesary.
The question on the table is, could the gnostic have been influenced by tarot?
