X La Rove de Fortvne

[jmd]

I've been meaning to scan this image for quite some months, and finally got around to doing it... in the meantime, I just cannot recall if someone else has posted the same (perhaps it is simply that I have had that image in mind for some time).

Here is an image, then, that depicts the Wheel of Fortune - or rather more specifically, Fortuna with the Wheel of Fortune:

Allegory by Bovillus (16th c.):
False and True Wisdom​

What here is fascinating is that we have Fortuna, with the Wheel of Fortune, as false Wisdom, contra Sapientia with mirror, able to clearly see the situation and herself.

 

[eugim]

X - La Rove De Fortvne

Hello everybody here ...

1-X - LA ROVE DE FORTVNE ( V+ V )
2-X - The interconnection between macrocosmos (∨) and microcosmos (∧)
3-Seeing the card at the middle of the cards sequence (XXI end conclusion arrived/Anima Mundi) could be I to VIIII microcosmic events,X point of interconnection with macrocosmos and XI to XX macrocosmos events.
(I think that Ihcoyc said this before also)
4-So I think it as symbol of the macro and micro evolution together.The wheel show the differents stages of it,forms of life changes (animal,human etc.) but the Spirit remains intact in the trip.
What evolves is the degree of conscious of the matter,and Spirit takes it as a vehicle for the transmutation he does on it.
Both in a macro and micro evolution together.(Comes to mind the russian doll the Mamushka)
5-Again for me Vieville is very usefull here.He shows animal and human forms in evolution as I said.(No other deck shows a human)

http://membres.lycos.fr/tarobat/mesjeux/vieville/lagaleriedestriomphes.htm

The way is reincarnation of the Spirit in the differents forms of the matter
6-Regards to the king of the wheel who rules it I see him more like a gryphon as in Conver deck for example.
As in the site add here the gryphon is understanded as the guardian of the divine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin#_note-0

Eugim

 

[eugim]

I made two mistakes.

1-Was Catboxer who prior mentioned the sequence topic.
2-I can t type V reversal opposite to mean that s both together ( X ) are the symbol of the interconnection between macro and microcosmos.

Eugim

 

[jmd]

Though I too make use of the link between ∨ and ∧ (I avoid the brackets, as "; )" leads to ), it's something more peculiar to the numbering of the card than of the image of the wheel itself, and hence perhaps not as fundamentally essential.

Still, I really like the view that by reflection on the joining of ∨ and ∧ as X, we have considerations as to both microcosmic and macrocosmic influxes.

 

[eugim]

JMD:
I also think that is too obvious simply relate the name of the card with its two V to the number of it.
I go far and say is childish...
But the point is that I omission fix the site below that show X card of Chosson.
Here by the use of different colour the X of two crossed rays of the wheel are distinguished.
Is that a simple coincidence without major intention of the engraver that could be or not coexist with subtle meaning ?
As any option is proven both could be a possibility yet.

http://tarotchoco.quebecblogue.com/files/2008/02/x.jpg

I don t remember saw that X on another deck.
Regards to the X as a confluence of macro and microcosmos comes of course to my mind the Masonic square and compasses.
Also the X letter was part of the first symbol of Christ being the first letter of his name in Greek.(Christogram)
Must be remembered that in very early times the christians looked close to Greek philosophy (First at Alexandria School and later as M. Ficino did)
For me the Tarot of Marseilles is a masterpiece of the old syncretism.

http://www.tesorillo.com/bizancio/3/justinoI_1.jpg


Eugim

 

[jmd]

I agree that with a six-spoked wheel, the image will resemble the 'I' 'X' at times used for the initials of Christ (a little distinct, though with some resemblance, to the Chi-Rho).

In the Chosson shown (though not necessarily other Chosson - I'm not sure on that one at all, as colours do vary across decks made with the same woodblocks), the two colours do suggest a 'I' and 'X'.

This to me presents a wonderful manner in terms of exegesis - rather than in card design per se. In other words, in the process of reading or narrative development, there are various ways in which details can be allowed to emerge and present their peculiar possibilities to the individual.

As further example, instead of seeing the spokes as V and ∧, we could see them as > and <. Even with these, the visual metaphor can then be expanded and questioned: are these things pointing inwards, or things outgrowing from the centre?

 

[le pendu]

The X and I are all very interesting, but I want to know what happened to the top of the back post?

Dodal and Noblet have a full support for the wheel, but Chosson and Conver seem to have it mystically floating in place.

Noblet and Dodal

Chosson and Conver

 

[eugim]

I agree JMD with you on the whole sense.
If one go too much far with literal iconography believe the card as it simply looks and making close up of each minimal detail,surely ends on the uncertain because may be all " works ".
The fact of that t is not few people believe that Tarot is an Atlantida or Lemuria Saga... (I respect also that opinions but I m not agree).
Just say that I find on the X as letter and as number a syncretism of that of Alexandria School time very close to Marsilio Ficino mind,a man who later did the work of compile these syncretism to his contemporaries.
I think he had very influence after his death in 1499 and believe he could was one of others who had influence on the minds of which created Tarot.
Regards to the monogram of Christ (a spiritual stage and not a person for me) I referred only to the X as symbol.

Eugim

 

[eugim]

Hello LE PENDV.
Welcome here...
Well for me may be the end subtle point aside ours personal perception of the cards,could be
How far could we go with literal iconography in minimal details ?
How distinguish how much degree of intention of hidden meaning if its there on the card ?
With very respect to author deck whichever...
Must I think that the decks were made as hotdogs fast for sell and thats all ?
I have my view as I posted on Moon thread,but I know is in progress yet.

Eugim

 

[le pendu]

Hello LE PENDV.
Welcome here...
Well for me may be the end subtle point aside ours personal perception of the cards,could be
How far could we go with literal iconography in minimal details ?
How distinguish how much degree of intention of hidden meaning if its there on the card ?
With very respect to author deck whichever...
Must I think that the decks were made as hotdogs fast for sell and thats all ?
I have my view as I posted on Moon thread,but I know is in progress yet.

Eugim

Hi Eugim, my point only is, again, caution... especially in the details. Conver and Chosson are missing the top of the back post, should I read something into that? Or simply assume that for ease of drawing the card, it made sense to omit it? Or perhaps Noblet and Dodal added it? Or perhaps... it doesn't really matter to the overall "meaning" of the card at all.. "The Wheel of Fortune".