Is the Papess a Man?

In a recent discussion with JMD, we were considering the possiblity that the Papess was actually a second Pope.

Both of us turned to the "Great Schism" or "Western Schism" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Schism) as a possibility for the Papess card in the Tarot deck. The timing is very good, 1378, recent enough to be in the minds of the creator(s) of the tarot, (assuming a 15th Century creation, as most "Tarot Historians" do).

And the setting is correct, with Avignon being a possible keypoint for early tarot development. Add the history of the Avignon papacy( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avignon_Papacy ) and you have a **VERY SLIGHT** possiblilty that Tarot might reflect this divide.

I would have left it at that, a fun fantasy worthy of minor contempation, except today I finally aquired the wonderful "tarocchino" by Giuseppe Maria Mitelli ( http://l-pollett.tripod.com/cards38.htm ) which features two popes.

I realize that in the Tarocchino Bolognese the Papess, Empress, Emperor, and Pope were originally grouped as "The Popes", all of equal value, but in these cards (from around 1660-65) the Empress, Emperor and Pope are clearly such, but the Papess is also, clearly, a man... and this made me wonder again.. is the Papess really a second Pope?

Just thought I'd throw this out there in case anyone found the concept interesting.

best,
robert

I realize you are having an intellectual / historical discussion that attempts to ask a seemingly simple question , but viewed from the other side of the isle I can't help reflect on the tendency for men to eternally remake everything in their own image and effectively negate the feminine at every turn. Not that this is in any way your intention, but something that one should be aware of as part of the patriarchal legacy we are saddled with.

Dark Inquisitor said:

I realize you are having an intellectual / historical discussion that attempts to ask a seemingly simple question , but viewed from the other side of the isle I can't help reflect on the tendency for men to eternally remake everything in their own image and effectively negate the feminine at every turn. Not that this is in any way your intention, but something that one should be aware of as part of the patriarchal legacy we are saddled with.

Click to expand...

I respect and understand your comment, and no, that is certainly not the intention, even misguided, of my post. I only thought it might be interesting to discuss.

best,
robert

There are a number of cards that have clear masculine depictions in early decks, or early representations (whether these be paintings, woodcuts or stone carvings). Of these, the ones that stand out are representations are what we would familiarly name Strength (as Samson or Herakles) and the World (as Christ).

This does not take away from a more 'balanced' representation in Tarot's development, and one could even argue that the early representation may have been mis-represented by the very bias carried by the artist, to be 'corrected' with time.

With regards to card II the Papess, there has already been some wonderful notes of early representations of the image (not only as card) as clearly Papesse.

Yet, when one looks at some of the variety of images in various decks available, what seems also suggested is the possibility of two masculine figures, one bearded and the other not. Ie, one more Eastern (whether Orthodox or Coptic, for example) and the other Roman.

In this case, the beardless one would be perhaps an indicator of the Roman Pontiff, and whoever depicted the bearded Pope would also have indicated, by numbering, the eastern superiority of that Pope over the Roman see.

Alternatively, and following further this line of thought, the beardless 'pope' may be a bishop, rather than Pope...

This is not 'remaking' the image in masculine idiom, but rather looking carefully at representations, however iconographically 'faulty', and acknowledging and investigating various possibilities, to be rejected when found wanting on their own merit.

There are, in any case, a number of Renaissance paintings that appear to depict two Popes, one eastern and the other 'Roman'... though I'll have to see if I can easily find them to add to the thread.

(Patriarchal, schmatriarchal!)

I see the middle class playing the game Triumphs for some time before the nobility (in Italy first) began toying with the new craze, thinking they ‘improved’ on it by hiring artists to paint crude versions that often missed the point of the more sophisticated and complete symbols block-printed on cards used by ordinary people. These were of course used until worn out, then discarded. I believe that’s how the designers (circa 1400?) planned it: planting images in the collective mind that would ‘trump’ those of the less numerous but more insidious nobility. Of course the experiment failed, except in one striking detail: it caused the ultimate survival of the original form of Triumphs, the Marseilles. And this may have been the ultimate goal of the sage or sages behind it all along.

The survival of the symbol language preserved in tarot demanded that the images be common yet slightly irreverent notions (some moreso than others). In the case of the female cleric, ‘Papess’ is, I feel certain, just the common nickname applied to it so to speak: it was a cleric like the Pope, but female, so the mind of the commoner of the new middle class gave it its irreverent moniker – the name has, I believe, not much deeper significance than this.

But the image itself draws a contrast between its own monkish, bookish side of faith – the cloister – and trump V’s public, accessible side, where one from outside (arm entering LePape from right) can seek its blessing. To me, of course, it is because letter numbered 5 means blessing (month starting at yuletide) and letter numbered 2 means repose, quietude, restraint (autumn, waning moon). But even just on the surface, V is the five fingers of the hand that blesses, II the duality of the separated or cloistered. To beard II to me is utterly gross and nihilistic: monks don’t have beards (except in the Eastern Church?). Yet more than one character in TdM is meant to be ambiguous in sex, to be one sex in one context and the other in another – the chained figure on the left in LeDiable for sure is thus, being in one sense the second of the Junior Warden’s two assistants in the Masonic Lodge and in another the feeling-mind chained along with the desire-mind to the pedestal of the body-mind or usurper (that which should serve, not rule).

But I can present argument for LaPapesse being primarily and necessarily female: it is 2, therefore E the waning moon, therefore time for weaning a girl child. This is ancient practice (part of the ancient wisdom virtually wiped out by Christianity and its ‘learnedness’)

(Sometimes my arguments are short!)

I like the Mitelli ‘Magician’: well drawn, and a better substitute for LeBateleur than the Cary Sheet’s ‘Devil’ is for LeDiable. It raises the round (meaning the tambourine) to lift our eyes and gain our attention while the dog also strives upward (this being the lofty fir, after all)

I thought I'd add the image on the right to this discussion.
http://www.romeartlover.it/Subiaco7.jpg
It's from this website for the Sacro Speco, in Subiaco, Italy.
http://www.romeartlover.it/Subiaco.html

The caption for this image says:
"The portrait on the right shows a pope of the VIIth century, but the XVth century painter did not care about historical accuracy and Agatho I, who died in 681, is crowned with a very nice triregno, the triple crown introduced by Bonifatius VIII (1294-1303)"

I thought it was interesting that this is an image of a Male Pope created in the 1400s. It reminds me of the Papess.

robert

le pendu said:

I thought it was interesting that this is an image of a Male Pope created in the 1400s. It reminds me of the Papess.

Click to expand...

Or a masculine woman pretending to be a pope maybe ?

In art one must consider the artist . For example if you look at the Statue of Liberty , her face is quite masculine . But it doesn't mean she is really a man. This is either due to a desire to hearken back to classical ideals, or a characteristic of the artist's style. As a sculptor myself , it have taken note that is very difficult in most cases for artists to depict the opposite gender convincingly . There will usually be little details that give clues to artist's gender. For example, the Mona Lisa has Leonardo's face. Intentional or not on his part , it is not uncommon at all for artists to recreate aspects of their own face in their work consciously or unconsciously. When I sculpt a male figure I have to be very careful he doesn't end up looking androgynous if that is not my intention . Male artists depicting women will often overlook the fact that they have added heavier jaws and odd proportions like bigger hands .

If the Papess is really a man, and therefore the opposite of what she is labeled, what about the other cards? For example, is Devil then really .. God?

Dark Inquisitor said:

Or a masculine woman pretending to be a pope maybe ?

In art one must consider the artist .

Click to expand...

Point taken and agreed, perhaps I have distracted the direction by adding the image. I added the image because it is a 15th Century Italian painting that, when I first saw it, I thought it was "The Papess", and find it interesting.

What I think is an interesting concept is the possibility that the tarot may have originally portrayed two popes, and the Schism which might make such a concept possible.

Sorry if I have sidetracked the conversation.

robert

In "The Complete Illustrated Guide to Tarot," Rachel Pollack writes:

"Throughout the late Middle Ages and into modern times..., a legend persisted that a woman once became pope. Known as Pope Joan, she disguised herself as a man when young and became a priest. Over time, she rose to bishop, then cardinal, and finally pope, taking the name of Johannes, or John. Those who consider this a true story maintain that after the pope's death, when the Church discovered the truth, it wiped out the historical record..."

She also notes that Maria Visconti, whose descendants commissioned the tarocchi cards (the Visconti deck that is) was burned at the stake by the Church of Rome because she was chosen by the Guglielmites, a Gnostic sect, to be the first of the female popes, who according to them would take over papal rule under the auspices of Christ resurrected. Hence, the papess may be connected to her, at least in the Visconti version.

westside

Hi westside,

I'm not sure I've noticed you over in the History section before, so welcome!

Both of the possibilities that you mention have been discussed in threads here, if you'd like more info on them, a quick search for "Pope Joan" and "Manfreda" will bring them up. Other common explanations for The Papess is that she represents "The Church", or "Faith", which will come up in those threads as well.

Thanks for contributing, it's nice to have you participating.

robert