What's so great about the Jacques Vieville Tarot?

Here is some info Robert of The Ka and Ba. The neighbouring countries borrowed the concept and you have Merkaba. I have a photo in my Egyptian book of them drawing the Sun Barque- they are face on, unlike on the tomb paintings they are side on. The book is too heavy a spine to put on the scanner. This should help..
http://mcclungmuseum.utk.edu/research/renotes/rn-14txt.htm
~Rosanne

prudence said:

(I know you do not share my enthusiasm for the weird and slightly squished look of the Vandenborre)

Click to expand...

That's not entirely true! I have it, and like it... but consider it not as good as the Vieville, which is generally considered the prototype

Take a look at this (very, very interesting) thread...
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=69458

And these images discussed in it:
King of Cups
Valet of Cups


And compare the Vieville and the Vandenborre. The Vieville is just so much more detailed!!

Look at the chair on the King. See how it is there on the Vieville and Vandenborre? Look at the King's hat. Now look at all the other cards. The TdM has lost the back of the throne (at least in my opinion). Notice the Dodal and the object which looks a bit like a lid for the cup, touching the kings shoulder? (It's on the Conver as well, and lost on the TdB).... I thought at first it might be the top of the "missing" throne. Then I noticed the flower on the shoulder of the Vieville. It's like a clasp or something. Now look at this, a detail from the Noblet. I suspect it's the flower clasp. If so, Vieville had it, Noblet had it, Vandenborre lost it, TdB lost it, Dodal transformed it, and Conver looks to me like he had it too.

Just that one detail shows so much information and the importance of comparing all of the decks when trying to see the evolution of the styles.

How did Conver know about it?

Look at the.. I don't know what to call it.. skull cap? scarf? around the kings head.. it's pretty much gone on Vandenborre, half of it is gone on the Conver, and it is reduced on the TdB and Dodal. Noblet has it. I realize it's not quite the same.. but I can "see" the transfromation.. and see who kept what and who lost what by looking at the images together.

Of course, these are how *I* see things, and I'm wrong a lot of the time. Always looking and exploring.. but the bottom line for me is that the Vieville has so many wonderful details, it is *my* must have deck.

The Dodal and Noblet are old and historically significant, but still they are basically like all the other Marseilles decks around. Sure someone might say a lot of the details are different, but I'm speaking in general terms.

The Vieville is different. Like the two strange creatures pulling the Chariot (I think they knew about Egypt in 1650 btw ). Then you have the Empress who looks like she just spent the last 6 months on a bender with some drunken sailors. Quite a few of the cards are very different from the typical Marseille. Not to mention the overall quality is very good. The fact it is still in print and doesn't cost an arm and a leg doesn't hurt either.

Regarding the Chariot, le pendu and I have had a number of discussions about this chariot, and its possible significance.

Let's just take it, as presented, that it is not a case of the deck being in part carved by various apprentices, with the 'horses' being completed by one of the least talented from an aesthetic realist perspective.

Perhaps, then, it is intended as having three human faces - or three human aspects. If that is the case, then it certainly brings to mind not only the clear Platonic three parts of the Soul, but also the charioteer as virtue of wisdom.

Here, I will simply point to the discussions in the thread Cardinal Virtue of Wisdom/Prudence, and, for the three parts of the Soul, to my quote of the same from some years ago when working on the Chariot Card (for the first Aeclectic Tarot community project), wherein I quote from the Phaedrus, in which Plato describes it thus:For me, this is where the Vieville actually excels in pointing out this likelihood with greater force than other decks: its artistically 'poor' rendition brings the possibility of such intent all the more probable given the otherwise astute and meticulous craftsmanship.

Vieville's Chariot's "horses" may be centaurs. These creatures appeared as the knights in Florentine decks (regular and tarots IIRC) in the sixteenth century (and probably the 15th as well).

Precisely!

I suppose I was trying to give an account as to why human-headed horses may have been represented.

But thankyou Ross, I had never made the connection to the knights in Florentice decks!

Well they have to be the strangest centaurs I have ever seen, given how well the horse end is depicted in the knights. I have not seen a centaur with a pharaoh headdress- maybe someone can scan a Florentine deck Centaur so we can see? ~Rosanne

Rosanne said:

Well they have to be the strangest centaurs I have ever seen, given how well the horse end is depicted in the knights.

Click to expand...

I think most French decks of this period and later don't show the hind-quarters of the horses on the Chariot card.

They are unusual, however, I agree (they have headress and no beards; no arms either (centaurs usually have both front legs and arms)).

I have not seen a centaur with a pharaoh headdress

Click to expand...

Is it definitely pharonic? I haven't seen an Egyptian nemys with a European-style circular crown on top either.

At least, tarots and myths do have chariots drawn by pegasus, swans, and centaurs, so centaurs wouldn't be out of place, if that's what they are.

Of course sphinxes were never forgotten in Europe, and by the time of Vieville the fascination with hieroglyphs and Egyptian art was in full swing (I'm thinking of the publications of Kircher, and how much impact they made - and the ready audience they found).

- maybe someone can scan a Florentine deck Centaur so we can see? ~Rosanne

Click to expand...

Sorry - my scanner's not working. They don't look like these anyway.

I do think they're mythological creatures, and it's not impossible they're sphinxes, but I prefer to think they are centaurs.

Cherubs

Here's an interesting link...

http://www.bibleorigins.net/cherubthroneside.html


On another related note...

I've often wondered if the "back-end-less" horses of the Marseilles chariot are rendered from sculpted decorations on the front of the thing. Perhaps they were visually confused in the depiction with the "real" horses.

Best,
OnePotato

Wow OnePotato I think your link is very interesting, and that may be the answer! The lines of the block made me think of feathers always- thats why I thought of The Ba an Ka- but the cherubims on the ark make much more sense! The images on the article are pretty convincing!~Rosanne