Huck, thanks for clearing up the math. Sometimes people get so immersed in an intuitive free-association mode, that it inappropriately gets carried over into matters of exact science.
Although it is difficult to make a lot of sense of this, he seems to get 37 by reversing the digits of 73, which is 2 next to 75. Then 3 + 7 = 10 is the summation of the digits--the "numerological reduction" procedure he used in the passage just before this one--which then gives him his desired result, for some reason, 10. Probably 10, which reduces to 1, is a number of God. The 3 and 7 come out of his calculations. If they have any other significance, it is most likely that the 3 is the Trinity and 7 is a powerful number for various reasons, as we can see in the Theology of Arithmetic's section on the Heptad, or more probably, Philo of Alexandria's On the Creation. For Etteilla, 7 is most closely associated with the days of creation, of which on the cards (nos. 2-8) he specifies seven.(2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,) divine prescience of Eternity communicating itself by its works, which put in their true number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, = 21 = 12 = 3, together 36, it extends over Men by 1 + 6, 2 + 5, 3 + 4, which [p. 142] gives infinitely correct numbers. 16, 25, 34 = 75, 3 over the intelligences, 75 (2 next to 37, number by which in this spirit the Cabalists do not dare to count, seeing this number thus 1 integer + 37 + 8, and subtracting 1 from the 8, leaves 45 and 3 + 7 = 10.
Yes, I mention that in post 159 above. It's clear that Papus was working off the Etteilla deck for much of his Minor Arcana symbolism, but he was also adding plenty of elements of his own that are not found in Etteilla - just as C.C. Zain added his own correspondences and changes to the Falconnier-Wegener deck.Mary, not only is that seal on the Tavaglione 2 of Disks, but it's also on the Papus 2 of Disks.
I missed the part where Papus says the seals came from Etteilla. Please quote this from Papus. In fact, Papus explains that he drew from several different sources for the information he put on the cards. The word 'D'Etteilla' at the top of each card refers to the number directly above it, as in "Etteilla's card number 76”Why did Papus attribute these seals to Etteilla in his book on Etteilla's cards?
You claim this but you haven't shown any direct evidence that supports your claim. If you had the evidence it would revolutionize Tarot history. It's a supposition, not a fact.I have already discussed with Mary in private the fact that the Elus Cohens and Martinists had associated this group of angels with the Pips, long before Levi, Papus, and the rest of the latecomers.
That is Ambelain's theory of the Blaise de Vigenere seals, which all writers before Ambelain listed simply as the seals of the Shem Angels. The Golden Dawn used a different set of seals. As you say, neither appears on either the Etteilla or Papus decks (nor any other deck until the late 20th century). The timeline along which ideas appeared is important!Mary has found one set of seals for these angels, though those are actually the "mirror image demons" with the same astrological degrees.
In this republication of the work published in1951, the author would draw the reader’s attention to the Seals incorrectly attributed to the 72 Divine Names. These Seals are in reality their opposites. Conclusive experiments occurring between 1955 and 1960 allowed us to establish their eminently malefic and excessively dangerous character: incidents of cancer, suicidal obsession, corporeal possession and infestation have been observed and are beyond possible argument. December 1989, R.A.
You are assuming that everything in the Papus cards comes directly from Etteilla. I wish you had a copy of Papus' book in French, in which the material is organized entirely differently and where it is abundantly clear that the Etteilla material is only part of the book. For instance Papus explains that he got permission from his friend Saint-Yves to include his Archéomètre system on the Trumps. Without a doubt Papus was creating his own deck that combined elements of Etteilla, Christian and Lévi, and adding his own contributions!Here's where you lose me, Mary: You say "The Papus-Goulinat 2 of Coins does seem to be the missing link between the Etteilla and Tavaglione, as it has the name Poiel on it in Hebrew, but it doesn't mean that Etteilla made the link to the Shem Angels." No, it means that Papus is directly saying that Etteilla made the link to the Shem Angels! Poiel is one of the Shem angels, you'll find him nowhere else!
Where does Etteilla name the Shem Angels? Intelligences was a term used for lots of things besides the Shem Ha'Mephorash, not all of which were Kabbalistic. In fact, the term 'Intelligences' is Neo-Platonic. We might as well say that Iamblichus was referring to the Tarot because he used the term "Arcana". Arcana was a word long in use before it was applied to the Tarot.Etteilla himself names out the Intelligences, then Papus puts them on the Pips.
First - Etteilla makes direct, unambiguous references to astrology and to the North and South Nodes and the Part of Fortune - labeling the Coins suit with them and including a diagram on the 10 of Coins illustrating how the Part of Fortune is calculated.Meanwhile, please direct me to the evidence that the users of this pack, in the time it was fresh and new, had enough sophistication to understand concepts like North Node, South Node and Part of Fortune in the context of a Tarot deck. How did he include them in his divinatory matrix? Is there any text to tell us how these symbols integrate into his style of use? Where does he talk about the ways they affect the other three suits in the numbers 8, 9 and 10?
To me it seems just as easy to rule out astrological sophistication among this pack's users as it is to rule out kabbalistic sophistication.
”In the center is the drawing reconstituted by Gabriel Goulinat on the basis of Egyptian documents and the personal work of Eliphas Lévi. The engravings at the bottom of each of the cards are reproductions of the secret talismans of Eliphas Lévi . . ." p. 55
Well, the passage I quoted in the post just before yours is good enough for me.Where does Etteilla name the Shem Angels? Intelligences was a term used for lots of things besides the Shem Ha'Mephorash, not all of which were Kabbalistic. In fact, the term 'Intelligences' is Neo-Platonic. We might as well say that Iamblichus was referring to the Tarot because he used the term "Arcana". Arcana was a word long in use before it was applied to the Tarot.
(2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,) divine prescience of Eternity communicating itself by its works, which put in their true number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, = 21 = 12 = 3, together 36, it extends over Men by 1 + 6, 2 + 5, 3 + 4, which [p. 142] gives infinitely correct numbers. 16, 25, 34 = 75, 3 over the intelligences, 75 (2 next to 37, number by which in this spirit the Cabalists do not dare to count, seeing this number thus 1 integer + 37 + 8, and subtracting 1 from the 8, leaves 45 and 3 + 7 = 10.
I had already conceded in an addendum to my above posts that Etteilla could have been referencing the 72 Intelligences in Kabbalah in that quote. I'm willing to change! Now we need to find any references by Etteilla that would suggest that he linked Kabbalah with the Tarot deck and how.This is an aside, but it does show that he knew about the Shem angels. perhaps not under that name, but at least as 72 intelligences in Kabbalah.
It is still an open question whether Kaballah plays any role in Etteilla's system. I don't see any, but there is much about his system that is unclear to me.