Ape of Thoth flawed!

Edge

Abrac said:
Hmmm...this is kinda cool. If this be correct, my greenie is probably from right around '85. It also has a red dot on The Priestess' eye.

My OTO card is dated 1978 and has Hymenaeus Alpha's name on it, but the LWB is dated 1978, 83. So the actual deck must be from between '83-'85. Lillie said her LWB has 12 as the lowest number. My numbers are 10 9 8, so mine is several years before hers. Email addys were becoming common by '95, so it's conceivable that your deck, Lillie, was printed sometime between '95 and 2000. Mine doesn't have any email addys. But an interesting aside from all this is the Stamford, CT addy associated with my deck. It would appear US Games relocated to CT around 1985. This would solve the last remaining riddle (to my mind anyway) as to the US Games address timeline.

Sorry, not trying to hijack your thread Edge. It's just that I find this all very fascinating.

No problem Abrac, IMO this is interesting stuff. My LWB # are also 10, 9,8. I also have the Stanford CT addy on my box. I have been using the Tarot garden Library as a reference, notice there is no mention of the Stanford CT as an address on any of the white box editions in that table, just an observation. Lillie seemed to indicate that her deck was dated around 2000 but also had the red dot syndrome. That's kinda strange considering her deck appears to be a later version than ours. Wonder what the heck is going on with that Priestess card lol. Now regarding the problem with my Magus... still know one else reporting a smilier flaw but several have the Priestess red dot. There is bound to be someone with a Magus card like mine or am I the only one... appears so. At least in this part of the Tarot cosmos. Regarding HA, he died in 85 so although it's possible the deck in question was printed then I feel it was issued earlier, just an opinion though.

Lillie

Ok.

LWB is little white booklet. Or has someone said that already.

My OTO card has Hymenaeus Alpha on it. It also has 1978.

The LWB has 78 & 83.

Stamford CT addy on LWB

One more thing.
I have the 78 normal cards, the hex and the OTO, but also an extra, blank card. (normal back, blank front.
This makes 81. One more than the normal 8 X 10 square.
So, one of the cards is added from elsewhere. From a box of OTO cards, or a box of Hex cards, or something like that.

Therefore, the copyright on the OTO might have nothing to do with the deck.
Likewise the LWB could have been printed many times in small runs as compared to one large run for the cards.
This would allow them to update theback page where there is that list of other decks.

It might also be useful to compare the other decks list, as stuff goes in and out of print, and therefore the list should change.

The original owner of mine said he bought it about 2000, I have no reason to disbelieve that, but he only ever said 'approx 2000' and also, the deck could have been printed a number of years before it was sold.

I do believe though that this deck of mine is probably one of the very last greenies.
nd it is very green.

Oh. Also on it all the astro symbols and hebrew letters are on the same side as each other.

Hebrew letters on the left, astro symbols on the right.
Some of the earlier decks have a few anomalies. The magus, moon and universe (I think) are switched round.
It might be interesting to try and pin point when this change was made.

This is so Thoth geeky stuff!
I'm a thoth nerd!
And I'm proud of it!

Emily

I have the red dot on the Priestess too.

But I also have a flaw on the 2 Wands. The right side of the card seems to be slightly out of line. The face on the hilt of the Wand on the right and the two snakes and Wand tip underneath gives the impression of being double lined, its eye-catchingly noticeable. Does anyone else have this flaw?

I have the extra white blank card too Lillie. My LWB has the same details as Abrac except that the address I have on my LWB is Samuel Weiser Inc. York beach, USA.

Abrac

Edge said:
Regarding HA, he died in 85 so although it's possible the deck in question was printed then I feel it was issued earlier, just an opinion though.

In another thread about the US Games timeline, gregory mentioned she had physically been to US Games at 38 East 32nd in NY in 1983. So if there is a Stamford, CT address, that would indicate post 1983, and if there is a card with HA's name on it, then it must be a deck that was printed in 1985 or earlier. That is my conclusion anyway. I could be way off.

Abrac

Lillie said:
My OTO card has Hymenaeus Alpha on it. It also has 1978. The LWB has 78 & 83. Stamford CT addy on LWB

Apparently the OTO card with HA on it was in use long after 1985. My deck sounds a lot like yours, Lillie. It could be possible you have a deck and OTO card from an earlier print run, with new packaging. Just a thought.

Edge

Emily said:
But I also have a flaw on the 2 Wands. The right side of the card seems to be slightly out of line. The face on the hilt of the Wand on the right and the two snakes and Wand tip underneath gives the impression of being double lined, its eye-catchingly noticeable. Does anyone else have this flaw?

Hi Emily (luv your sig) don't seem to have that on my 2 of W card.

Abrac said:
Apparently the OTO card with HA on it was in use long after 1985.

What led you to this conclusion, just curious.

Edge

Thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread. My conclusion is that I'm the proud owner of a very unique greenie...hehe as I am the only one in possession of a Magus card like no other. :royal:

Lillie

I don't see why my deck shouldn't be what it seems.

And anyhow, we don't know how many times these were actually printed.
Wether there was a huge print run that was sold for years or wther there were lots of small ones, like there were with the LWB.

The 'numbers' on the LWB probably refer to the printing history of that alone, and not to the cards.

The OTO card.
Like I say, my deck is from the late 90's/2000, it has the alpha OTO card.
What's the problem with that?
You can go into a shop and buy a book by Tolkien, printed this year, despite the fact that it will have an old copyright date (which will refer to when it was written, not when it was printed) and also dispite the fact that he has been dead for years.

The OTO card is the Statement of the OTO and it's head (Alpha), at the time he was the head. His death should make no difference to this statement, with his name, being put with the cards.

Now, it each one was signed by him, personally, and in his own hand, that would be different.
But it's not.

Edge

Lillie said:
The OTO card.
Like I say, my deck is from the late 90's/2000, it has the alpha OTO card.
What's the problem with that?

No problem that I'm aware of...

Lillie said:
The OTO card is the Statement of the OTO and it's head (Alpha), at the time he was the head. His death should make no difference to this statement, with his name, being put with the cards.

It would seem proper to update the card with the name of the new Caliph. Regardless, this is no longer the practice of the "powers that be", one only has to look at the OTO card issued in the latest releases of the deck to discover this.

Lillie

So who's the big boss man at the OTO now?

I bet he's got a funny name just like the last one.
These people can never be just called George, can they?

I havn't got a new one. I'll take your word for it that it has the new not Georges name on it.

I was just commenting on the earlier posts about wether the alpha OTO card would have been used after the guys death.
Which it clearly seems to have been.

Have they changed the words on this new one?
Is that why it has the new name on? Because it is a new and different statement?

What does it say compared with the old one?
What does the old one say?

Where did the 81st card come from, and which one is it?
I don't know, I never know.

Has anyone got every possible variant of this deck ever printed?
And if so, why?

I'm going to go away again.

Bye