The I. C. Tarot

[spiravdaeg]

First, I'm lousy at boards - having neither the time nor the gabbiness to spare. Not unsocial, just from past experiences have found that too much is said about too little.

That being said, I just wanted to formally announce that I'm done. The I. C. Tarot is completed - a 100 card deck. 5 suits of 14 cards each, 30 'Major' Arcana. This deck is animated, every card. In addition, each card has an associated sound file.....some noise, some music, some mixes, some the spoken word(s). So when a card is revealed the reader/user sees a moving image and background audio.

The I. C. Tarot is new - with some links to the past, the roots of Tarot; however, its is of its own 'stripe'. It embodies my biases, prejudices and vision. So don't expect it to be anything like what you've seen before. I can only reiiterate, its a new thing. I know of no other like it. Consider again, its fully animated with audio. That alone sets it apart. Every card is unique, each 'suit' is unique and not of the wands/coins/swords/cups/Majors variety. Rather they are the: Axes of Nature, the Bowls of Faith, the Chains of Science, the Devoirs of Trade, the Efforts of Art and the Figures of Triumph (the last, the 'Majors'). Court cards consist of the Child, the Warrior, the Mistress and the Master. There are 8 completely new 'Major' cards and all but the first 8 'Majors' embody new and completely different concepts from the say Rider-Waite/Marseilles versions of the Tarot.

After over 30 years of reading the Tarot (since my high school years in 1971) I figured it about time to do what we all think about - create my own. So in the year 2000, I got started. This is what I've come up with to date. So go easy on the criticism those of you who may get a copy or see it - its far easier to declaim than it is to do the deed of making a Tarot in its entirety. I can laughingly state that that's why there are so few versions versus the number of readers in the world. Much easier to run down to Books-A-Million or surf to Amazon and just buy a pretty deck. Truly a case of no pain, no gain though. And believe me, the I. C. Tarot has been called a 'pain' or much, much worse by me many a time during its design.

It is laid out as a 'book' of 106 web pages. A Cover page, an Index of thumbnails, 2 pages of explanatory/background info and notes, a Layout page and finally, a Slideshow for sequential no-sound and quick partial viewing (apx. 5 second view per transition). Each card has its own page as well. Thus, 106 pages total.

In addition, there is embedded a bit of a sub-routine on the Cover Page allowing any user to have a randomly selected card appear; thus, allowing for a single card reading (or multiple if you wish to use the javascript repeatedly). To be honest, I really enjoy that feature and use it personally daily. I've included the original static image deck, with blank cards for those who wish to either create their own deck or modify mine. (and yeah, I've included the back of the card for print-out also.)

Each card is annotated and all sound files may be user-controlled provided that some 'helper application has been selected by your browser of choice.....Quicktime, Real Player, Windows Media Player... In other words, a mini-player will appear at the bottom of each page allowing for full control (or to turn off/on) the sounds dependent merely on what the user's system default/browser associated player is. All cards are linked to the main index and include forward and reverse hyper-links to advance to the next or prior card in the deck series.

I've 'packaged' the deck in 3 ways/CDs. First, a self-extracting .zip file that will place the deck in the 'My Documents' folder of any 9x/ME running pc. Or, if as the extraction process occurs as a default extraction, will place same in a new My Documents folder on the 'C:\' drive of any NT/XP running pc. Either way includes an icon that can be used to start up the program is in that new folder. An icon that can easily be copied/cut to the desktop, the system taskbar, program menu....wherever the user desires. This version and the following version run quite well on any pc of the 700 Mhz 256 SDRAM Pentium III or above specs.

Second, a standard .zip file which the user may unpack to wherever in their system they desire. Again, icons are included which may easily be re-targeted to start up the I. C. Tarot.

Last, a CD/DVD runnable (is that a word?) version which may be used in any drive provided that the drive letter assignation is either D:\, E:\, F:\ (this is due to the chance of there being more than one hard drive or CD/DVD drive in any given pc). Each drive above has a start-up icon on the disk to fire up the software. It is recommended that this version be run on a pc with a fast CD/DVD (x48+ read) drive as retrieval time is crucial due to file size. It runs quite well on a pc with 2.0+ GHz processors and 512 Mb of SDRAM. Mediocre on 256 Mb RAM and 700 MHz processors. This should give you the reader an idea of the range of machines this version of the I. C. Tarot operates decently on.

All versions have been tested on Windows 98/ME/2000/XP with good results and stable operation. As the program is in the format of web pages, further testing was done and modifications made to ensure that it would run the same and be presented identically on a variety of browsers: IE 6+, Netscape Navigator 7+, Mozilla Firefox and yes, even AOL's version of IE v9+. Last, the program was tested on SUSE Linux with good results. Total occupied disk space is apx. 555Mb+.

All versions are completely free of and have been tested for viruses, spy/ad ware and any other bug that could be a problem. Gods I hate things like that!!! Popups, redirects, whatever. There is none of that in anything I create.

For those who are interested in obtaining a beta version copy please contact me. I will respond as time, life and work permits. So, don't think I'm ignoring you. Just as a self-employed man, my time is spoken for in advance it seems constantly. Should I get deluged (a wishful thinking scenario), I will do what I can dependent on demand. I'm just one guy who has to pay the bills and live a relatively normal life.

I am currently working on a strictly DVD version of this deck for non-pc manipulatory usage. My daughter's idea. If it ever gets off the ground, it will contain a DVD, a booklet and the entire printed deck of the static image cards. Basically a matter of converting all the cards and pages to DVD format and writing the menu/access program. If the trend of time and the past creation of the deck experience holds the same, it ought to be done in about 1.5 years. I plan on distributing the deck at this time for free (but for the 50 cents or so per CD, and whatever mailing/shipping costs it takes to get the deck out to people, and maybe a bit more for the time to burn copies.....say about $5 (I earn $50/hour in my current trade of marine electronics and it does take about 6 or more minutes to setup and burn a copy).

So. Again, please contact me if you are interested. I can email you either a sample card for a 'tempter' or I've even toyed with the notion of placing a portion or the entire deck/CD on 'YouSendIt' or 'MegaUpload'. Otherwise, its a snail-mail/UPS/FedEx delivery process.

Please don't use the forum to respond - I check in maybe once every six months....so you'd have a heck of a wait. LOL.

spiravdaeg
Bradenton, Florida

email address removed by moderator

[Major Tom]

Welcome to the community and thanks for telling us a bit about your deck.

I've had to remove your email address from your post as posting an email address is a violation of the forum's rules, but people will still be able to email you via the link in your profile and the link below your post. Removing your email address from your post will have the additional benefit of minimising the amount of spam you'll receive.

Originally Posted by spiravdaeg

There are 8 completely new 'Major' cards and all but the first 8 'Majors' embody new and completely different concepts from the say Rider-Waite/Marseilles versions of the Tarot.

I find it fascinating that you chose to use 'tarot' in the title for your deck, when clearly an addition of 8 cards and different concepts for the first 8 trumps mean that it isn't really tarot. It all sounds very interesting. What prompted you to create it?

[spiravdaeg]

Major Tom,

Thanks I guess. My apologies for not catching that link rule. No problem, it doesn't matter to me one way or the other. But.....your comments. I must rebut.

Okay, please read the published definitions of what Tarot is and how it is

structured.

Definitions (Wikipedia)

Tarot (Tar-oh) is a system of symbolical images. Whatever their original
significance, the cards have been used since they first surfaced as much
for divinatory purposes as for trick-taking card games. Tarot is currently
used as tool for reflection on one's personal life, as well as an aid to
meditation. Tarot is normally embodied in a deck of 78 cards, similar to a
regular set of playing cards. In the English speaking world, tarot is
widely seen as a form of cartomancy. In France, tarot is most often
employed as a trick-taking card game. Tarot has long been regarded as
taboo, due to obscure associations that predate its 19th-century occult
associations. Roman Catholic sermons inveighing against the evil inherent
in playing cards can be traced to the 14th century.

Take a second read - "Normally embodied" is the exact wording. That does
not preclude nor bar the non-normal. Or any other digression or modification. As history surely proves to be the case.

Another example: see article link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarot
note the words, "The typical 78-card tarot deck......" in the second section
just past the 'origins' section. Again, the wording is "typical". Nothing
mandatory or somehow regulated there to prohibit an alternative structure.
That same link goes into quite some detail regarding decks with other
numerical counts - for example, "The 77-card Tarot resulted from adding 21
Trumps and the Fool to an early 56-card variant (14 cards per suit)".

And read on!!! - this quote is especially noteworthy, "This first known
deck seems to have had the usual 10 number cards, but kings only and only
16 trumps — the later standard (4x14 + 22) wasn't settled and still in 1457
a document is known, which speaks of Trionfi decks with 70 cards only [5]"
Now as to the numbering of the Trumps - Major Arcana cards; most especially
the first 8 cards. The Pierpont Morgan-Bergamo/Visconti Sforza Tarocchi
deck may or may not be the oldest of the surviving decks in existence (the
Yale pack with 67 remaining cards, and the Brera pack with 48 remaining cards - 1428 and 1441 respectively to the best of historical knowledge to date); however, the V/S deck had NO numbers or titles! Remember that fact? The earlest numbered sequence was the Catalin Geoffroy deck of 1556/7 in the following order: Fool, Magician, High Priestess, Empress, Emperor, Hierophant, Lovers, Chariot, Justice, Hermit, Wheel of Fortune, Strength, Hanged Man, Death, Temperance, Devil, Falling Tower, Star, Moon, Sun, Judgment, World. This is oft-referred to as the 'Geoffroy Sequence'.

Now and on, My personal deck of choice - the Tarot of Marseilles has upon
the 2 of Coins the dates - 1748 & 1930, Grimaud. Interestingly enough, the
8th Trump/Major Arcana card is Justice and the 11th is Force. So too is My
Swiss Tarot 1JJ deck, 1974 AGM Muller. But hey now!! the 2 of Trumps/Major
Arcana is what? Junon and the 5 is Jupiter! Seems the good old boys in
the Vatican had their say, huh? No High Priestesses or Popes in some pagan
tool.

Now the so much beloved and plagarized Rider-Waite deck. The 8 of
Trumps/Major Arcana is Strength and the 11 is Justice. A fairly close
reversal of the Marseilles deck and Swiss decks.

Finally, there has been a deck designed over a quarter of a century ago by
the well-known author Mr. Piers Anthony that has 100 cards. As of 1980 and
some years prior. The first actual deck published of his 'Animation Tarot'
was created by a Ms. Stephanie Peters of Germany in or around 1985, over 20
years thus in existence.


So what is the point to all this? The word Tarot, what does it mean anyway?
the best choice of phrase I've heard is, "philosophical abacus". In other
words, a numerical/orderly and representative tool used to know how to know. I am not a Christian, Jew or Moslem. I cannot give credence or tip my hat to any so-promulgated notion that their is some mystical Kabbalistic meaning
buried in the cards....unless, you happen to be a devout Jewish scholar and
believe in that faith. Nor can I give credence to any other religion in
existence today as having the market on the structure and design inherent
in the many decks available today. No more so than say a strong belief in
Arthurian legendry means that the Arthurian Tarot is the end-all of the
Tarot.

To state something emphatically or as if from a position of knowledge..."that it isn't really tarot." does not make it correct. You must prove such a statement sir. Anything less merely shows ignorance of facts. The Tarot is unique to each user/reader and to each question addressed. There is fair proof that the Tarot is at least somewhere in the neighborhood of 600+ years old. It has and will go through many changes. Just as there are decks printed in many of the languages spoken on this earth, with cultural iconry buried in each deck so designed pertinent and meaningful to the creators and printers in those lands; so too, can there be changes in virtually any part of the structure of the deck so created. From the number of cards, the individual card title, sequencing, correspondences and so on. To force some sort of inane zealotry upon the Tarot is to cease to learn and thus....to reveal a basic lack of understanding of the Tarot.

A person must pick the deck that suits them best if they haven't the time
to create their own. A deck scrawled upon napkins yet meaningful and usable
by the reader is no less a Tarot than the most rare or expensive deck
published. It is all a matter of the qualities sought and desired, needed
and understood that are found in the actual deck in hand. Or in my
creation, upon a pc screen. A 'Tarot' deck is what works in a card/individual page-like format. There is no proof of number or order of cards; only, some relatively recent adherence to the 78 card 'rule' or 'decree' of Trump ordering Historically, any such hide-bound statement is rendered invalid. A "standard" Tarot would be a stagnant and repulsive thing. That would be tantamount to saying the MotherPeace Tarot is invalid due to being round!

spiravdaeg

[Major Tom]

I look on in awe as you not only take the bait but I believe the phrase is 'hook, line and sinker'.

Originally Posted by spiravdaeg

Okay, please read the published definitions of what Tarot is and how it is structured.

Not only have I read the published definitions, I've written some of them. We've held many debates about what tarot is right here in this on-line community without any real resolution. What constitutes tarot seems to be a matter of opinion and not of fact.

You may think me hidebound, but I'd prefer to be called a traditionalist. For me, if tarot takes the form of a deck of cards then it also further takes the form of 78 total cards, these consisting of 22 trumps, 16 courts and 40 pips. You are welcome to disagree but I think you'll find for most of the history of tarot this is the form. Again, for me, the further one moves from this form, the further from tarot you are. Your deck (with is it 86 cards?) seems very far from tarot indeed. You are welcome to call a cow a horse. It doesn't make you correct, but then this is a matter of opinion as I said above.

Originally Posted by spiravdaeg

There is fair proof that the Tarot is at least somewhere in the neighborhood of 600+ years old. It has and will go through many changes.

You might wish to check out Tarotpedia, but most scholars trace tarot's history back to the 1420s or thereabouts. Something less than 600 years, but we're nearly there. Certainly I must agree tarot has gone through changes and will continue to go through changes, but some of those changes become something other than tarot. Please note that this is not to say that these 'other things' do not have value, but it is to say these 'other things' are not tarot.

Originally Posted by spiravdaeg

A deck scrawled upon napkins yet meaningful and usable
by the reader is no less a Tarot than the most rare or expensive deck
published.

I wholeheartedly agree with you here.

Originally Posted by spiravdaeg

A "standard" Tarot would be a stagnant and repulsive thing. That would be tantamount to saying the MotherPeace Tarot is invalid due to being round!

I completely disagree with you here. Tarot is tarot because it has a standard structure. The MotherPeace Tarot adheres to the standard 78 card structure. What you describe of your creation does not. I hasten to add that this does not take anything away from the usefulness or mammoth achievement of your creation.

I would urge you to stick around and share your creation with us. If you join in with our conversations you might just learn something and we might just learn something from you. And isn't that really what a tarot community should be about?

[Alissa]

Originally Posted by spiravdaeg

A person must pick the deck that suits them best if they haven't the time to create their own. A deck scrawled upon napkins yet meaningful and usable by the reader is no less a Tarot than the most rare or expensive deck published. It is all a matter of the qualities sought and desired, needed and understood that are found in the actual deck in hand.

Fascinating discussion, I find myself agreeing with various points on both sides. Myself, I admit to being something of a purist in how I define a "Tarot" versus and "oracle" deck... in my mind, if the author chose to add any cards, at all, it's not a "Tarot" deck but an oracle deck.... This is totally my own subjective thing, I do not propose that such a definition should be universally adapted by anyone.

But, I was struck by your description quoted above here... it reminds me so much of something else I read here many years ago....

Originally Posted by Ravenswing

In a cafe, I saw a woman who took 22 packets of sweet n low, wrote numbers from 0 to 21 on them and spent the night doing readings. She wouldgrab them in her left hand and throw them high up into the air, sometimes even hitting the ceiling.

She used the ones that landed on the table for the reading-- reading them where they landed. If they landed with the number down, she read it as reversed; but other than flipping those over, she never moved them.

it was incredible. and accurate-- dead on.

never saw her again, but it was something that you'd never forget

fly well
Raven

Another discussion we seem to enjoy on our boards is "Does it matter what you use to read with?" and for many folks, like me, the answer is no! Read with sweetnlow packets if they're there... read with the tools that are upon you, and one realizes the abilities (i.e. the "magick") comes from within.

So, to tie it up, is a deck with more than 78 cards a "Tarot" deck to Alissa's definition? Nah, I'm very stubborn with the label, I admit.

Does a deck with 100 cards make it better or worse to read with because it isn't strictly 78 cards and 4 suits? Depends on the reader... depends on how the reader connects with the deck... depends on if the reader feels that chemistry, much like falling in love... we don't always know *why* the spark is around us, but we know we like it, and so we seek for more.

I hope for your deck's publication to know much success, spiravdaeg!


(The former librarian references the source material here)

[Ravenswing]

Hi guys--

Alissa-- I've been away a bit lately, and I fly in and see myself quoted... from long ago and far away....

Anyhow, I'm a traditionalist like Mr Major Tom. Although...

Some time ago, there was a great trilogy by Piers Anthony dealing with this strange world of TAROT. It's a great read (if you can find them-- they're OOP (or convince me that you WILL return them if I loan them out to you)) Each chapter is based on a Major arcana Card... except there's 30 majors (10 chapts per book).

The whole story creates a new deck-- 100 cards in total. So, is it tarot? Maybe. (As I see it, tarot is a particularly structured sub-set of oracle. a special case, so to say)

Oh. by the way-- watch out for my upcoming gematric tarot-- re-vamped, new and improved... Those of you who were around a few years ago might recall the deck Laurel and I were working on.

Hi Laurel!! a sincere welcome back. (She may very well might be my muse-- or at least a connection to her. She returned to the board and my lights went back on)


Oh, why not-- here's a bit of a teaser. the gematric tarot is images based on verses of gematric poetry. What that means, I'll leave to you to figure out. For reasons of ordinallity, DEATH is the first card up. And here's its verse:

DEATH

the dual secret

there is the alpha
whether be the omega?

Daughter of life
Bride of death
Thou art mild

In the palace of fires
She awaits

Thy fate is in the balance
Be certain of the change


Image to come sooner or later. (though I might wait 'til the whole set of 78 is finished. Last time I got caught in mid-stream)


fly well
4ls
Raven

[Alissa]

((((((Raven))))))

You? ...You are not forgotten....

Do share more when you're ready to.

I read the Piers Anthony series a few years ago when merc30 sent me the books - I had mixed reactions, but it was entertaining to see nearly 250,000 words dedicated to a scifi plot revolving around Tarot.

[Fire Cat]

What an interesting discussion...

According to strict constructionist, those who say that "only" a 78-card deck is tarot, where does the minchiate tarots fall?

Why then can we not call this new creation a "minchiate" tarot (with 3 extras)?

KK

[spiravdaeg]

Okay folks, I suppose its time for the old adage of "we must agree to disagree". Anything else will be self-defeating and ludicrous. I can see its apparent that for various factors there are some highly charged feelings at work here. Perhaps this posting will aid in the addressing of some of those emotions at work.

Let me begin a bit by making clear who I am in relation to my interest and passion for this subject. Today I am the age of 51 bordering on 52, I first was exposed to and purchased my first deck of Tarot cards in 1971 during my graduate high school year. So that means for the last 35 years I've used (and abused perhaps) this means of insight we all call Tarot. The first 100 card deck I became aware of, also called a tarot deck, was Mr. Anthony's in 1980. So to my mind and understanding such factors as the number of cards, suit designation, sequencing and so on has accepted the inclusion or lack of various features and concepts for now at 26 years.

Major Tom, I here must assume that you are the same person who has a site @ http://www.majortom.biz/. If I am incorrect than much to follow will be nonsensical and inaccurately directed. But if you are Thomas Schick you and I share a background in terms of time - your statement that, " I truly began my study of the tarot in the early 80s..."(about the time the third book of Mr. Anthony's describing a 100 card deck was published) and my above statement of my first beginnings with the cards in 1971 shows we both have been interested for over a quarter of a century apiece. Some other parallels, via a 32 year marriage (so far) to an 'Air Force Brat', the daughter of a now retired USAF Lt. Col - you and I possibly might have been within arm's length of each other should your earlier career taken you to Eglin,Homestead or Colorado Springs. So in some respect I have come to know men such as yourself and highly regard the training and experience you achieved to become an 0-4. AS the father of a USCG E-6 currently enroute to the Black Sea, I mean that, a personal thanks for your service to this country of our's.

But for the same reasons myself and that son I mention often come to disagreement, you and I may find ourselves a bit at odds. It comes down to the concept you call tradition and being a traditionalist. Each man sees such a thing as either being comforting/able or not. In the case of the cards, I can see no such thing as tradition. I merely see a murky past of constant change still ongoing in the development of the many decks being created to this day. Furthermore, to use the analogy of that also greatly disputed work - the bible - its all a very relative thing. One 'traditional' religion may harken to the King James version, another to the New American.....to include or not the Apocrypha books for example. What one of so-called 'faith' holds to be canonical another does not. But does that mean that a bible with say 5 more books within its binding is not a bible? Granted, the hard-core of any particular belief may answer unequivocably, "yes".

Are not the decks of tarot and the issue surrounding the contents rather similar to my analogous proposal? Like the bible, rewrites, modifications and alterations have been made to effect the concepts desired by the authors or creators. And like the bible, the exact definition of what a tarot deck size and order has been altered according to the individual's beliefs. In both areas, controversy and debate has raged over many years with no provable outcome in sight. Rather, more changes still are being made to this day.The recent news item concerning the book of Judas as a case in point.

In a recent email exchange between myself and Mr. Anthony on 5/25/2006 he wrote, "There is no one standard Tarot deck. I know, because I tried to correlate about 20 decks card by card, and gave it up halfway through because there was no correlation. I think my conjecture that some key cards have been lost is as valid as anyone's claim to a limit of 78. [signed]Piers Anthony"

Another direction of conflict regarding the Tarot is in the meaning of the word 'tarot' itself. At the end of this post I'll include some snippets and links to several sites discussing this issue. Again though, rampant are the disagreements and lack of concord. I've found that the very word 'tarot' most often actually is an adjectival word rather than a noun. We say, "tarot" as in 'the tarot'; but, 'the tarot' we speak of is emotionally, mentally and possibly spiritaually conceived by that of each of our's experience. What springs to one person's mind may be the Rider-Waite, another's the Marseilles, another's .....some other deck of the thousands available. What does the 'Fool' look like to you when it is mentioned? Or the 'Sun' ..... or do you perhaps think 'Le Mat'or 'Le Soliel' immediately?

The word 'tarot' is most commonly used as a modifier of a noun...."a deck of tarot cards", "a tarot reading", "a tarot spread" and so on. Or as the object of a prepositional phrase often relating to another noun in a sentence, "a reader of tarot", "a discussion of tarot" and so on. When it is used as a noun as in the examples, the conveyance of the concept of a deck, the purpose to which that stack of cardboard slips is what is referred to usually. Not inherent in that wording is a restrictive definition of the concept itself. When we say, "the Tarot" we are talking about an entire set of tools being used towards a purpose. Rather like a socket set - it can be metric, English or some other form of measure, order or size. As long as the 'job' is accomplished it matters not at all what the toolbox contains. And too like the mechanisms a socket set must address to repair, as a tool, are constantly changing, so also is the tarot being modified constantly to suit the needs presented by contemporary circumstances. But if anyone wishes to refer to a non-78 card deck as tarot, oracle, fortune-telling, gaming, gypsy or whatever nomenclature they prefer...deck - so be it.....for their own perception. I state only that all or any other(s) has/have a similar right(s).

Another issue we have between us is a basic difference. Again assuming (always a dangerous thing to do) that you are the person I think you are, you and I are somewhat apart in our purpose of using the cards. The person under my assumption has published charges:
"In person Tarot reading price list:
15 minutes - £10
30 minutes - £20
45 minutes - £30
60 minutes - £40"
; whereas, I do not charge....preferring to accept gifts only if offered by way of thanks. No differently than I would accept a home-cooked meal from a neighbor as a thanks for say helping them with yard work. Financial considerations do have a way of being an influence on the ease with which alterations may or may not be made in the philosophy and intent behind the understanding of any subject. I view the Tarot as a gift I share with those who inquire and in truth, as a gift into my life. I just cannot understand charging someone for a gift I give them. Laughing a bit, its like giving your mom a necklace for Christmas and saying, "hey Mom, that'll be $49.95 plus gift-wrapping". Tradition, form, rules can be so much more binding when subsistence is a part of the equation.

I wonder if back in around August/September 2000 you too were contacted by "Majestic Vision/Mystic Realms/ASR Enterprises" (think Miss Cleo)? Does the name Patrick Seely mean anything to you? The company I just mentioned was doing a world-wide scan of all known readers and soliciting them for 'employment' offers. One of those 800/900# hotline psychic scams. If you could de-principle yourself, there was a bit of money to made. I found it a perversion of something I was passionate about. And like any other passion in my life, I just couldn't see charging for or making such a personal act....of passion, yes...something I could ask money for. Needless to say, I turned them down.

I'm sorry but money I gain by being self-employed in the field of marine electronics - not the reading of Tarot. Nor when I offered originally here in this forum to share my I. C. Tarot did I intend any sale or marketing ploy. Rather, it was to be freely given to most anyone who asked/emailed me (though help with CD burning costs and postage would've been nice). But being someone who didn't read the fine print, I didn't know that I could not publish my email address within the body of a posting. Again, I am in the field of electronics and read (or skip over) various EULA's, FAQ's and such daily. The equipment I sell, service, initialize and maintain is just another form of networking (and by the way, internet capable). Like in my own office network, I prefer my own safeguards and means of connection and contact. I sideline in small business and residential networking issues and troubleshooting and do not I must admit trust any other scheme to protect my or my customer's equipment and data.

But, like entering someone else's home, this is not my site and I yield to the propriety of the site. No differently than would I expect the same behavior from a guest in my home. Still, in light of possible conflicting income-related issues, I can certainly understand the prohibition. I suppose asking you to trust that I didn't intend to sell; rather, to give away CDs is a bit hard to expect from a 'dot biz' businessman. So I will withdraw my offer and trust any person(s) so interested in obtaining a copy who have a wee bit of surf-savvy to locate my address using other means. As this site is called, "Aeclectic", an alternative spelling of what I am certain is the word - 'eclectic'..."selecting from or made up of different systems, doctrines or sources [Websters's], I am assured that those so interested will find a way to seek/obtain what they wish.

All I do ask is that the rules of debate be followed. Proof of any statement should be a 'given'. As an example, you stated, "Not only have I read the published definitions, I've written some of them." I found that particularly interesting. My first thought was, "where?"; my second, was that you have decreed the ability to define upon yourself. I suppose then I too have that right? Perhaps that is exactly what I am doing, have you thought of that? My being not 'traditional' may impart to me a similar self-designated power. Other rules of debate are 'footnotes'. I cannot just accept someone's words as fact when a definition or reference is made. I would greatly like to see the proof for myself to analyze at my leisure. Part and parcel to why I strive to give links to the sites I quote. In fact, often those very sites request that such links be given and acknowledgements made. Adherence to proper form in a hopefully constructive argument should be made.

Finally, what is a novice? Is a person who has themself labored to create for over 5 years a novice? Perhaps. Is there a certain time limit that must be passed to no longer be considered an initiate? Again, perhaps or perhaps not. When does wisdom begin? I recall words like, "out of the mouth of babes" and realize that truth has no particular built-in measure as to when such can erupt from a person. I agree that give-and-take can be immeasurably fruitful; but only, if all parties approach one another on an basis of the recognition of equality in terms of respect and honesty. For any person to assume a role of leader must be by proven worth, not self-declaration of such a role. Respect like friendship can never be demanded, only given freely. In the venue of the tarot, with its long history (and I do admit I added a few years in my 600+ statement due to an educated guess that the use of cards for divinatory purpose antedated any decks still in existence) no one of us has or is able to have all the answers. Sharing what we learn, what we experience and what we believe while respecting the beliefs of others is paramount. So while we all await the invention of a time machine to resolve the issue permanently I conclude that this argument is fun; yet, will never end.

Below as mentioned, some links and bits of tarot definitions:
************************************************** ********


* Torah, Hebrew meaning the law
* Taru, Sanskrit, deck of cards
* Ta-Rosh, Egyptian meaning the royal way
* Rota, Latin meaning wheel

Some believe Tarot relates to I-Ching while others still like the folk lore of the gypsies. we may never really know where Tarot began and if it was used as a divination tool centuries ago or if it was just a fancy card game. http://www.spiritualnetwork.net/tarot/about_tarot.htm
****************************
What is the origin and meaning of the word Tarot? The word Tarot may have originated during the fourteenth century in Italy in the word form of Tarocco or Tarocchi. Also, Tarot cards first appeared in the region of Northern Italy where the River Po flowed, a tributary of which is the River Taro. The word Tarot is the French word given to the cards. Other words describing the cards include Tarok, Taroc and Tarock .http://www.onlinepsychics.net/tarot.html
**********************************
Topic: The time and place of the origin of the tarot

Inaccurate: The tarot comes from Egypt; India; China; Fez, Morocco; the Sufis; the Cathars; Jewish Kabbalists or Moses; or the origin of the tarot is unknown.

Current Historical Understanding: The tarot originated in northern Italy early in the 15th century (1420-1440). There is no evidence for it originating in any other time or place. The earliest extant cards are lavish hand-painted decks from the courts of the nobility.


Topic: The origin of the word "tarot"

Inaccurate: The word is Egyptian, Hebrew, or Latin; it is an anagram; it holds the key to the mystery of the cards.

Current Historical Understanding: The earliest names for the tarot are all Italian. Originally the cards were called carte da trionfi (cards of the triumphs). Around 1530 (about 100 years after the origin of the cards), the word tarocchi (singular tarocco) begins to be used to distinguish them from a new game of triumphs or trumps then being played with ordinary playing cards. The etymology of this new word is not known. The German form is tarock, the French form is tarot. Even if the etymology were known, it would probably not tell us much about the idea behind the cards, since it only came into use 100 years after they first appeared.http://www.tarothermit.com/infosheet.htm
All in all the above is a very nicely written article.
*****************************
The Name Tarocchi

Tarocchi (Italian, plural form of Tarocco) also known as Tarock (German-Austrian name) and Tarot (French name), is a specific form of playing card deck, which in its history was used for different trick-taking games and also for cartomantic interests and divination (concrete forms appear at least since the article of Court de Gebelin in the year 1781), also as a field for artists to display specific iconographical forms often connected to an ideological system in the background (already a strong factor in the first decks known in 15th century). It is recorded as one of the oldest types of playing card decks known.

The playing material (a deck with usually 4x14 normal Italian suits and court cards, which include in contrast to other forms a cavallo or knight, with additional 21 trumps and a Fool; the suits may differ to other national patterns) is older than the name of the game, which, according current research state, became known in the year 1505 parallel in France (Taraux) and Ferrara (Italy, as Tarocchi) (Tarot press note) (Details). An earlier form of the game had the name Trionfi or triumph, this name developed later as general term for trick-taking (trumpfen in German, to trump in English) and disappeared in its original function as deck name. This earlier name of the game is first documented in February 1442, Ferrara {document).

Although the objects are relatively clear of Italian origin (28 notes of the term Trionfi from 1442 - 1463 are counted)[1], it seems, that the final name Tarocchi developed from French influence (Italian speakers of today claim that French words with an ending "-ot" had been commonly transformed in endings with "-occo" and "-occhi".) The poet Berni in 1526 still has some mockery for this (still new) word: "Let him look to it, who is pleased with the game of Tarocco, that the only signification of this word Tarocco, is stupid, foolish, simple, fit only to be used by bakers, cobblers, and the vulgar".

Various contradicting suggestions has been made in the past to explain the original meaning of the word "Tarot". They range from "old Egyptian origin" till the more profane "a cardmaker from the French village Taraux produced Tarot cards".http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarock
***************************
http://*******.com/faq2.html - about as erudite an explanation of the etymology of the the word 'Tarot' as can be found.

[Major Tom]

Originally Posted by spiravdaeg

Okay folks, I suppose its time for the old adage of "we must agree to disagree".

I have often wanted a 'smilie' to symbolise applause. I applaude you sir.

I'll ignore the personal for what a true gift you gave us with your post. (I'll send you the cheque for the PR later )

Edited to add:

Would you please tell us more?

Give us a link to an image?

If we strip away the personal and the quotes from other websites, you have not actually told us why you consider your deck tarot although you've given us to understand that you feel strongly that it is. Perhaps you'd like to tell us why you consider your deck tarot? Isn't it really a deck you've designed for divination, to use as an oracle?

We have rules of conduct. Please read them.