Le Pape - two pillars or throne?

In the Noblet version of the card, what appears behind the figure of the Pope seems to be the backrest of his possible throne. Certainly it has two pillar-like sides which form its frame, but central may be the throne (though more on this a little later).

In contrast, the major versions of the Marseille (Payen, Chosson, Dodal, and Conver) each have clearly only the two pillars, as, it seems, standing clearly as simply such.

At the entrance to King Solomon's Temple were two pillars, each of a particular dimension (refer to Kings or Masonic ritual for specific detail). It could be, then, that the pillars are to depict the entrance to the sacred, in front of which sits the representative of St Peter.

This has a double allusion, for at the gates of Heaven he is claimed, within Catholic legend, to likewise sit, and guard.

St Peter - or the occupier of his chair - here then sits at the entrance to the way into spiritual paradise, and the means to attain such.

Spare chairs and pillars.

In my illustrated Grimaud behind le Pape is definitly two pillars. I had thought they represented the two outside pillars on the Tree of Life- Severity and Mercy. Looking at the others I have (2 Hehe) behind Le Pape is what looks like to me a ladder backed chair/ the throne of Peter? I have just realised why the acolytes are small- I think they are depicted that way to show the immensity of Le Pape- as in towering above them. I have also read that the chair signifies a doorway and Le Pape is saying to get through the door you must go through me. I do not hold to that view at all and would never see it as that way in a reading. But a lotus or a crescent would bring out the same feeling in me- you would not have to go through a Human to get to your Nirvana.~Rosanne

pillars and ladders

If the Maranos Jews theory is retained as one possible origin of the TdM - then do we have a cross between the pillars of the Temple and Jacob's ladder? Both being initiatory stages - or series of stages. The Noblet Pape is my favourite - his expression, his face - and that ladder-pillars combination are just a perfect way through or up and better still - both!

The ladder really exercises me, but then I like to go up. I always liked the story of Jacob and his Ladder. But then, where is the Angel? (or is Le Pape the Angel...? - this would underline futher his kinship to Le Diable, of course).

I definitely see pillars, regardless of the origin and the Tarot. The Vieville (Marseille cousin, but) has no ladder but two sculpted pillars topped by a capital like a Temple's. We also see the faces of the acolytes in profile - so the acolytes and the statues on the pillars could be mirrors of each other. We are the acolytes - and are drawn to the Temple - and to get there we must pass Le Pape...

As I see it, the Pope is obviously sitting in a throne, but that is probably not in question, here (or is it?).

Thrones are small pieces of architecture, and there is even a close relation between a bishop’s throne and a temple; as you know, the word cathedral comes form the Latin cathedra, meaning seat or throne, and therefore the main church of a diocese is simply the one where the throne of the bishop is placed. In symbolic terms, we could maybe say that a Pope is seated upon the Church itself. We can see equivalence between the throne’s architecture and a temple’s architecture, and the two side columns can belong to either one, depending on our level of study of the subject. They probably were meant to have such ambiguous significances, in (for instance) medieval depictions of Saint Peter’s throne, or even in depictions of Christ or God’s throne (there are a few).

Of course, any depiction of a column, in such context, can be a reference to either the two pillars in Solomon's Temple, the Gates of Heaven, the two outside pillars on the Tree of Life, etc… and the throne itself, of course, can have multiple readings. Plus, and always according to the context, almost every ascensional element could have the same common referent of, say, Jacob’s ladder.

The fact that thrones are usually high chairs (and in the Bible, Solomon’s throne has six steps to it) can also help to explain why is that acolytes are smaller, and seem to be in a lower level.

Silvia

Bits of this and that

Your post Smleite makes the most sense to me. I did not know the connection between the words cathedral and Throne. So now all the correspondances can be used.. Jacobs ladder,Kabalah Pillars,Church throne etc etc. I have wondered if we place to much profundity to the design of the cards and not their woodcut value. Badly explained -so sort of -Le Pape sits on throne- so put Le Pape on throne says the woodcut printer.Thats the extent of it.(The painter in me denies that tho LOL) I am constantly pulling myself in two directions knowledge versus intuition, intuition versus common sense etc etc. ~Rosanne

Rosanne said:

Le Pape sits on throne- so put Le Pape on throne says the woodcut printer.Thats the extent of it.(The painter in me denies that tho LOL)

Click to expand...

The painter in you is right, I think. Whatever the medium used, the master cartiers (who made cards) were trained in iconography, and in subtle double or triple meanings. The idea of throne as cathedral as Temple, as Ladder, would not be difficult for them to grasp. They were descendents of the master imagiers of the Middle Ages, those that made the images (in stone, in stained glass, in frescoes) in Cathdedrals. If you flick through a book on cathedrals, or on Medieval artists, you'll see very quickly they were used to dealing with many layers of meaning in one single image (the architects and master masons did the same for the actual structure and layout of the cathedrals).

Those traditions were carried on for many centuries through the initiatory stages from apprentice, through journeman, to master (card-makers grew out of the guilds of painters and printers), which taught both the practical and the sacred dimension of their trade. In fine art we can see it in the fashion for allegorical painting, which went on well into the 18th century. Most trades guilds degenerated during the 18th century - after the period of Dodal and Payen - and were eventually swept away (in their medieval form) by the Revolution.

Most versions (Dodal is a very good example) the pillars
don't come up to the top of the card, which contrasts
to La Papess, where "something" raises her canopy high
above the top of the card. And is Le Pape really sitting?

Jean-Claude Flornoy graciously provides us with
invaluable images and references...

click on: Dodal "Le Pape"

click on: Noblet "Le Pape"

*

PS: "New" English language
Flornoy Homepage:
http://www.tarot-history.com/

Fulgour, thank you for the New site link, I will save for later to read as it's late here, but already I can see the value in it.

With regards to the pillars and his staff, it may also be worth noting their relationship - at least visually, but also, in my view, symbolically.

In the thread 78 Weeks: V - the Hierophant/Pope, I note (amongst other things) that

If one places oneself at a point in the scene (outside the card's captured frame) such that the Pope's eyes are directly met, what one notices are not two, but effectively three pillars - the third, and central, being his staff, at the top of which is the depicted Tree of Life. Hence again, not by the left- nor the right-hand pillars of excesses (behind him), but by the central pillar (in front of him) must one work towards the spiritual.

Click to expand...

Just thought its visual relevance may add a little in this section.

The throne=cathedra aspect is also, of course, worth noting, as are, in this sense, the number of individuals depicted.

This is not only the first card in the sequence with more than one individual (irrespective as to whether human or other), but precisely three.

Its relationship to the speaking of Christ that 'Where there are two or three gathered in my name, there am I in their midst' (Matthew 18:20) - also, incidentally, a favourite amongst Cathari.

If the Temple was considered the place on Earth wherein God abides, the Cathedral, in contrast, becomes Temple only when the faithful meet. The distinction is here that whereas in Greek, Egyptian, or early Jewish views, God resided in the holy space provided for him (or her), in later Christian tomes he occupies the space created by those meeting in his name. A Cathedral without people, unlike a Temple, is empty of the numenous presence until the faithful congregate.

Of course, it may be argued that God/Christ is omnipresent, and hence this view does not hold theologically. I am trying, in very succinct form, to highlight a difference that also appears to be important in the representation of this card, and the relationship between the Pillars at the entrance to the Temple, the Cathedra upon which he sits, and the meeting of the three people, presumably 'gathered in his name'.