Did Saint-Martin study the Tarot?

[wandking]

In Le Tarot des bohémiens: le plus ancien livre du monde [The Tarot of the Gypsies: The Most Ancient Book in the World] which English sources commonly refer to by an incorrect title, given it by translator A. P. Morton, The Tarot of the Bohemians, Papus writes:

, “Thus whilst the Freemason, an intelligent and virtuous man, has lost the tradition; whilst the priest, also intelligent and virtuous, has lost his esoterism; the Gypsy, although both ignorant and vicious, has given us the key which enables us to explain all the symbolism of the ages. We must admire the wisdom of the Initiates, who utilized vice and made it produce more beneficial results than virtue. The Gypsy pack of cards is a wonderful book according to Court de Gébelin and Vaillant. This pack, under the name of TAROT, THORA, ROTA, has formed the basis of the synthetic teachings of all the ancient nations successively. In it, where a man of the people only sees a means of amusement, the thinker will find the key to an obscure tradition. Raymond Lulle has based his Ars Magna upon the Tarot; Jerome Cardan has written a treatise upon subtility from the keys of the Tarot; Guillaume Postel has found in it the key to the ancient mysteries; whilst Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, the unknown philosopher, finds written in it the mysterious links which unite God, the Universe, and Man! Through Tarot we are able to discover and develop the synthetic law, concealed in all these symbolisms.”

isn't he saying Saint-Martin studied Tarot... Can anyone document this obesrvation? I see plenty of evidence that he studied numerology but nothing on Tarot yet.

[le pendu]

I might easily be missing something, but he seems to be referring to "Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin", of whom there seems to be much info on the web, rather than Saint-Martin himself, but perhaps you realize this and there is a deeper connection in the name.

google links:
http://www.wisdomworld.org/setting/martin.html
http://www.esoteric.msu.edu/VolumeIV...artinIntro.htm
http://theosophy.org/tlodocs/teacher...deStMartin.htm

best,
robert

[wandking]

yes the Freemason Saint-Martin of martinism he refers to... did he in fact study tarot?

[le pendu]

Ah, sorry to interfer, I thought I must have misunderstood something.

best,
robert

[wandking]

the movement the man set in motion in Freemasonry appears to also spawn the Bavarian Illuminatti or at least has several things in common with the other fringe Masonic group.

[jmd]

I have not looked at the links Le Pendu has given, but would find it quite surprising to find any writing or evidence for Louis Claude de St-Martin to have studied Tarot.

Apart from anything else, I suspect that we would find far greater details of Tarot in De Gebelin had this been the case.

This does not mean that Saint-Martin did not see the deck, or even possibly even used it, but rather that it was not made of as a central element in the various spheres in which he mixed.

[wandking]

I just started study of saint-martin... I'd read through quite alot of the letters at the links that robert generously offers before I posted here, however, I greatly appreciate the leads. thanks... JMD, what do you mean by this?
JMD writes: "Apart from anything else, I suspect that we would find far greater details of Tarot in De Gebelin had this been the case." why "in de gebelin?"

From what little is translated into english by saint-martin that I have read, I too would be surprised if he had written on tarot but tarot history never ceases to amaze me. Papus is obviously not above conjecture in his writings. He was an avid follower of Martinism, though and likely had more information on it than me. Besides he read in French!

[jmd]

If one looks at the dates of activity and areas of activity of Masonic meetings and movements in the Paris region, it seems that both De Gebeling and St Martin were active in Paris a number of years prior to De Gebelin producing his eighth volume of his Monde Primitif (the volume with the two essays on Tarot).

Though possible that they never met via Masonry, if (to copy your quote from G. Encausse/Papus) 'Louis-Claude de Saint-Martin, the unknown philosopher, finds written in it [Tarot] the mysterious links which unite God, the Universe, and Man', then I would have thought it quite likely that such an important factor would have somehow be mentioned in De Gebelin.

Also, it seems surprising that the later Martinist rituals and study did not include (to my knowledge) reference to what would have otherwise been viewed an important tool.

Of course, it IS possible that he came across Tarot during his more Pyrennees sojourn, and that he did make a similar 'Egyptian' connection as De Gebelin also made... perhaps even the latter gaining this idea from St Martin.

An even more radical (but unlikely) idea is that "M. Le C. de M." (who writes the second essay in De Gebelin) is our unknown philosopher, and that assumptions about his being Comte de Mallet are inaccurate.

It should be pointed out that St Martin was also posted with a military position around Foix.

Anyhow, though there is possibility, it seems rather remote that St Martin considered the Tarot as he is claimed to have done by Papus.

[wandking]

There is a multitude of reasons De Gebelin might not have wanted to mention Saint-Martin. For one, Martinism was considered a heresy and de Gebelin was a protestant clergyman.

What I know for sure is that de Gebelin writings on Tarot were published in 1781 CE and Saint-Martin wrote a great deal after that date. From the years 1787 - 91 Saint-Martin was very productive: during this period he completed the book The Man of Aspiration and wrote The New Man and Ecce Homo, to name only a few. I have access to none of these. All i have is meager online translations of letters he wrote. I was hoping someone with more linguistic ability might have seen something on his association to Tarot. From what I understand most of Saint-Martins' work remains untranslated, which seems a shame from what I've read thus far.

It's totally unreasonable to dismiss what Papus said based on nothing, JMD.
I realize most of these old writers offer a great deal of myth and conjecture but is it prudent to dismiss everything a writer offers simply because we find errors? To me, that's like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. BTW, I'm studying the bathwater, in case you haven't noticed.

My main interest in Saint-Martin and Martinism arises from quotes by Waite. Now I see he might have become exposed to Martinism through Papus, one of the few earlier writers he doesn't hammer without mercy.

[jmd]

...and studying carefully the bathwater may lead indeed to signposts to the babe once occupying it - I am not dismissing the study in the least - quite the contrary.

Rather, and like others have also done for details that seemed missing from other important authors, I have tried to carefully find quotes about Tarot from, for example, Steiner and Jung (which I have given in other places on this Forum).

It would indeed be wonderful to find evidence from St Martin for what Papus claims, or even circumstantial evidence (ie, other authors of the period making similar claims about St Martin). And this ongoing investigation is indeed wonderful.

Though De Gebelin may have been a pastor, he was one within what was also a heretical movement (namely protestanism). After all, heresy will be judged to be so from a particular perspective, and in that, both De Gebelin and St Martin would have felt in familiar territories.

...but let us take the same conjecture I make earlier and actually use it to reach the opposite conclusion for a while, and see how this may perhaps also be helpful in furthering this interesting search.

Further, I'll also take into consideration the post-Monde Primitif dates you so importantly mention.

If St Martin and De Gebelin mixed in similar circles in Paris, then it would even be more likely that St Martin, if not before-hand, then at least later, came across Tarot and its supposed link to Egypt and its esoteric 'significance'.

On that line of thought, De Gebelin may have given, either explicitly or in a circuitous manner, some keys to Tarot's importance to St Martin, who perhaps made further comments to others about the same.

It is still, of course, strange that such a tool deemed of such significance does not seem to have made it to at least most of the descendent groups of Martinists.