Princess of Disks symbolism

Hi all--I'm curious about the particular symbolism of this card, but also about how people come to attribute personal symbols to the cards in general. When I first saw the Princess of Disks, I was utterly captivated. I got a Scandinavian feel from her, particularly Finnish--which really made me identify with her, as I'm a quarter Finnish and a quarter Danish.

I made an immediate connection not only with the card, but also with the disk she holds. To me, it's the Sampo: a magical object forged by Ilmarinen the smith in the Finnish national epic _The Kalevala_. The Sampo was supposed to be a three-sided mill, one side grinding out grain, one salt, and one money. Its lid is multicolored and even though it is eventually destroyed by Louhi, mistress of the North Farm whose daughter Ilmarinen courts, its fragments take root and continue to produce and symbolize prosperity. It makes perfect sense for the Princess of Disks, the earth of earth, to be holding the Sampo (who knows, perhaps she is the daughter Ilmarinen had been seeking to wed, born of witch-blood and proper bearer of the Sampo).

Now, I made this connection because I study folklore, hence I've read _The Kalevala_ and some of the scholarship on Finnish national identity and so on, and I'm not saying that Crowley or Harris necessarily knew about the role of the Sampo in Finnish epic poems (although _The Kalevala_ was originally published in the mid-1800s)... but the connection is there for me, and it's not any less meaningful even though I doubt it was intended by the creators. I also don't believe in a collective unconscious system of universal symbolism, so I'm not trying to push that explanation here so much as wonder about how symbols come to mean in the first place.

So I guess I'm asking two things in this post: which symbols and meanings do people see in the Princess of Disks (am I the only Sampo seer?), and what the process of symbol attachment looks like for others.

This is my favorite card in the deck. Harris got this one perfect. Funny you don't believe in universal symbolism or collective unconsciousness, because that's exactly the way things like archetypes and tarot work. Often an artist, particularly a tarot artist, channels the spirit in ways that she only knows in her (collective) unconscious mind. She may have no conscious awareness of exactly why she painted something a certain way. It is the divine spirit guiding her hand. The spirit moves the flesh in ways that most humans are not evolved enough to comprehend.

lampkin said:

This is my favorite card in the deck. Harris got this one perfect. Funny you don't believe in universal symbolism or collective unconsciousness, because that's exactly the way things like archetypes and tarot work. Often an artist, particularly a tarot artist, channels the spirit in ways that she only knows in her (collective) unconscious mind. She may have no conscious awareness of exactly why she painted something a certain way. It is the divine spirit guiding her hand. The spirit moves the flesh in ways that most humans are not evolved enough to comprehend.

Click to expand...

Hm, I'm not sure if that came out in writing the way I meant it--I believe in symbolism, and I believe in unconscious processes, and I don't disbelieve that these things might interact, but it's just not a huge part of my personal paradigm. It was drilled into me when I started school that things like archetypes and the collective unconsciousness are too vague and ulimately unknowable to be useful in intellectual discussions; however, I don't believe that they are invalid concepts (obviously they speak to a lot of people) and I'm still sorting out for myself what I think about these things. It's tough being a spiritual academic...

I suppose I prefer to think in terms of resonances in order to describe patterned phenomena (not necessarily aiming to give a total account of their origins). An artist might be drawn to an image that resonates with her experiences and aesthetics, which might be due to collective cultural materials or due to recurring iconography. The artist's representation would convey something about the initial inspiration as well as her own experience, which would in turn speak to someone else due a combination of these things...

Anyway, I'm just rambling, and I hope I didn't offend anyone with my first comment about not being into collective unconscious explanations.

Archetypes and the collective unconsciousness are vague, but I strongly encourage you to open your mind to these mystical concepts. There is much more to the mysteries of life than pure reason and intellect. It's good you have a handle on that for starters though. A lot of people seem to only know how to think with their heart, and then they get offended easily and end up involved in a lot of emotional arguments, which naturally are doomed to failure from the beginning. Since you've got your intellectual base covered, I suggest moving on to different areas, since sticking to the swords suit can only teach you so much. Pay attention to synchronicities and your dreams, and you will probably begin to notice a larger intelligence at work. Indeed all consciousness is bound together, it's all part of the same thing.

prosewitch said:

Hm, I'm not sure if that came out in writing the way I meant it--I believe in symbolism, and I believe in unconscious processes, and I don't disbelieve that these things might interact, but it's just not a huge part of my personal paradigm. It was drilled into me when I started school that things like archetypes and the collective unconsciousness are too vague and ulimately unknowable to be useful in intellectual discussions; however, I don't believe that they are invalid concepts (obviously they speak to a lot of people) and I'm still sorting out for myself what I think about these things. It's tough being a spiritual academic...

. . .

Click to expand...

Indeed! Academia is pretty hostile, on the whole, to something like the Tarot, or Jung's collective unconscious. And, definitely, modern education indoctinates us all--drills it into us, as you put it--that things like archetypes and other mystical stuff is a bunch of vague, subjective, fuzzy headed stuff that isn't really a way to arrive at anything objectively valid.

I second the call to keep your mind (and heart) open to the possibility that these things are actually MORE true, and MORE useful than so-called scientific terms.

I have a background in engineering and physics, and I work at a particle accelerator. And I'm proud of my background and my scientific education. I worked very hard for it. But, honestly, if I had to choose one over the other, I'd go for Tarot, mythology, magick, etc. in a heart beat. Fortunately, I DON'T have to choose. In fact, I see no conflict between them. But, enough about that!

On to the Princess of Discs. I SO LOVE THIS CARD. I fell in love with it the first time I saw it on the cover of DuQuette's book on the Thoth Tarot. It spoke to me. It was magical. And she just keeps getting more luminous the more I get to know her. But I don't feel anywhere near qualified to speak to the symbolism on the card. Maybe someone who is qualified will speak to it.

In any case, I think your story just goes to show that archetypes are more than subjective fuzzy excuses for concepts, and that they ARE universal, and more than that, that they are LIVING ENTITIES, living realities. That's been my experience, anyway, for what it's worth. Not my blind belief or dogmatic assertion, mind you, but my experience. So far.

Well, since no one has responded about the Princess of Discs symbolism, I'll chime in.

First off, I did a search and found this thread but it doesn't talk about the disc she is holding.

The Princesses are the thrones of the Aces, and the interior of the disc is a yin/yang symbol, surrounded by three concentric layers of twelve petals, so maybe the disc represents the germ of the element of Earth flowering out into the elemental manifestation of Earth.

So, doesn't this tally nicely with the Sampo?

I made an immediate connection not only with the card, but also with the disk she holds. To me, it's the Sampo: a magical object forged by Ilmarinen the smith in the Finnish national epic _The Kalevala_. The Sampo was supposed to be a three-sided mill, one side grinding out grain, one salt, and one money. Its lid is multicolored and even though it is eventually destroyed by Louhi, mistress of the North Farm whose daughter Ilmarinen courts, its fragments take root and continue to produce and symbolize prosperity. It makes perfect sense for the Princess of Disks, the earth of earth, to be holding the Sampo (who knows, perhaps she is the daughter Ilmarinen had been seeking to wed, born of witch-blood and proper bearer of the Sampo).

Click to expand...

I'm only a beginner but it seems to me that the connection you made with this card and the disc she is holding does indeed make perfect sense when compared against what I have read to be the symbolism of this card.

Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. I have no idea what the three sets of 12 petals symbolizes.

36 petals

3 dozen of 12 = 36

Maybe it refers to:
The 36 Tattvas. These tattvas are the cause of much confusion and are often viewed as if they were an emanationary system. This seems quite incorrect. The first two tattvas are Shiva and Shakti. These two are inseparable. Surrounding them are the three Shaktis of the supreme called Iccha, Jnana and Kriya. It is these three who give rise to all triangles, that is to say to all creation. It is this multitude of Shaktis which collectively is Maya. Maya is limitation through delusion. This delusion is caused by the number of possibilities. Maya Tattva is said to wear five kanchukas or bodices. Two of these are parallels of Shiva and Shakti -- limitation in respect of space and time. These two primordial restrictions give rise to three others, which themselves are reflections of Iccha, Jnana and Kriya. The first is limited desire, the second limited knowledge and the third limited activity.

An individual deluded by Maya consists of Shiva and Shakti under the terms purusha and prakriti. Purusha is the embodied Shiva, prakriti the embodied Shakti. Being deluded by Maya, the three primordial Shaktis of Iccha, Jnana and Kriya take the form of ego (ahankar), intelligence (buddhi) and memory or Association (manas). Incarnated in the five elements of space, fire, air, earth and water, the embodied being has five powers to sense, five powers to act, and five Impressions. <b>These together make the 36 tattvas. It is the delusion of Maya which prevents an individual from realising her or his oneness with Shiva-Shakti and the three primordial Shaktis of Iccha, Jnana and Kriya. </b>

http://www.religiousworlds.com/mandalam/jvala.htm

The Princess of Disks is definitely nothing if not primordial in my opinion. Since she is Earth of Earth, she is the root of the root. In my own way I think I understand this because I got this card for myself when I first started tarot and in a way I am too a root of a root (Sun and Moon in Taurus).

Another way I can think of describing this is when I experience my intuition. It's so rooted in me, when following it I don't think it, I feel it without words or thought. It's my natural program: I do the right the thing without thinking it.

I think the Princess of disks is running on program Earth. For analogy purposes, she is the human incarnation of Earth elementals, viewing all from her cave of intuitive, Earth-connected knowledge, and translating it into fire, water, or air. This is how she makes people understand her (and often themselves) not being understanding, but being the principle UNDERSTANDING itself.

To me she says "The center is so deep you cannot even see or know it is there. Relinquish yourself and go in." Possibly, because she is so much of all, of one, that is why as Crowley says when describing her, she is a wheel of fortune unto herself. Think of the many interactions/possibilities/potentials of deepest Earth. Jewels to be flashy, potential energy for ignition (fire), container for water, mingling to bring forth vegetation, clay forms, etc (water), and in trees seeds to be scattered, and by it's passivity earth gives air something with which to test its strength (sort of like opposites defining each other). Plus, elements contain air, water, and combustible elements in and of themselves

Edit: Also, when you think of Earth x Earth as two continental plates, another dimension is added to the Princess of Disks dynamic. Sometimes, her two Earthy selves (the Earth-identity, and Total Earth) slide past each other. Other times, one plate will subduct water from the bottom of an ocean, other times subduct itself. In both instances the material is burned, metaphysically "processed" until such time when it is extruded/rises back to the surface. Her eruptions can be a steady stream of ash (some intellectual realization? Princess of Swords -esque?) or etruding rocks and sparks (Princess of Swords). And when she's still she's the Princess of Disks, and perhaps still for a long time, gathers snow on her mountain (Princess of Cups?)

Other times, at war with herself, she's an Earthquake. Where Earth met Earth there is now a rift of Air between them. It's like she's completely dynamic or not at all. Maybe her middle ground is to keep steadily learning?