Cult of Tarot Forum

I'd like to start by pointing out a few things about the Strength card which are not often talked about. I'm referring here specifically to the card in the Conver deck. I haven't compared the different versions (yet). Conver is sufficient and good for now.






1) Why are there things that look like teeth on the hat of of the woman ? Are they the teeth of the lion who doesn't seem to have any lower teeth (and even his other teeth are not in such good shape. No dentists in those days and definitely not for lions).

2) Why does the animal look more like an Afghan hound than a lion ? Were lions ever depicted as having so much long curly hair ?

3) Why is the woman's neck so thick ? (The same type of thickness can be found on the Hanged Man, at least in the Grimaud version, I haven't checked the others.)

4) Why does she have six toes ?

5) Why does she have the same shape hat as Le Bateleur ? I spent once a long time on Pinterest looking at pages of hats that people wore at the time - amazing how some people are fascinated with hats - on purpose in order to see if I could find a hat that looked like this. I didn't. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist though. Some people say the hat in the shape of a leminscate is very significant. But maybe it's got nothing to do with a leminscate and we're just putting a meaning on it that sounds cool and savvy because we want to put a meaning on everything.

That being said, hats were VERY important in those days. Like someone from the lower classes could be punished by wearing a hat belonging to the ruling class. It was all helluva codified their wearing of hats. So I think the hats in the TdM may have a significance.

I have some hypotheses and theories about some of the questions. For others I don't have any. I thought I'd first post the questions and see if you all have any bright ideas. Or even not so bright. Anything really. Brainstormings can lead down interesting roads.

Here is an earlier draft of my translation of an excerpt from Tchalaï's article Le tarot: comment s’en servir? (The Tarot: How to Use it) This is a stand-alone piece from the article, dealing with a method of studying a single card, incidentally, La Force.



Study of a Card: La Force

Observe the name, the shape of the letters, the number, the shape of the numbers. Allow whatever general ideas you may have on fortitude/force/power/strength [fr. la force] to come to you, and try not to become attached to any preconceived image, positive or negative. Contemplate this spectacle.

Allow whatever numerological knowledge you may have (e.g. the number 11 in your life) to come to you, without becoming attached to any absolutes.

Observe the card in question between card X and card XII. (Later you will have to find the common denominators between X and XI, between XI and XII, as well as between XI and every other card, including the minor arcana.)

Allow the colours and shape to permeate you, and every detail to impress itself upon you, without intellectual commentary. If that is pleasant or unpleasant, merely note it, and that is all. Be sensitive to the design, to the apparent volumes (true or false?). This is to be done every day for 10 minutes, for at least a month (either continuously or discontinuously) until such a time as you have completely memorised the card and all its details, without exception. This may take years.

Once again, at the moment of falling asleep, look at the card as though it were an icon or a mandala. Express the hope to see it in your dreams. Note these dreams, even those which at the time do not seem to have a direct relation with La Force. Later, this type of task will have to be accomplished for every single card.

Then, after this period of sensorial impregnation, objectively assess the extent and placement of the colours, according to the basic symbolism, the placement of the shadows and hatching. Count every stroke, every fold in the coat, every 'tooth' of the hat, and the teeth of the animal. What is this person doing?

Then, adopt the attitude of this person. You cannot. This body is lopsided. Take a closer look as to where the foot is placed (above the ground), and the shoes - assorted to the outfit? How many toes? Or straps? See how the head and arms are nice and well-drawn (the position of each finger), but the rest of the body, less so. Is it a woman, as the head and outfit would have us believe? And what of that line at the base of the neck? The head is placed on the rest of the body. Is it a body? Compare it with the other feminine bodies of the major arcana and of the court cards of the minor arcana. Is it a clothes hanger, or a scarecrow?

Return to the foot. Why does it not touch the ground? (Loss of contact with reality?)

Look at the animal. Dog? Lion? Its fierce eye and fearsome teeth (how many?), carefully drawn. Its curly mane. Look at the bottom of the card. It has no paws. It is a stick. (A broom? A witch on a broomstick?) Is it the pelt of a lion or a dog on a stick? It does not exist, or rather, it is also an illusion. When force is exerted on an illusion, it loses contact with reality. But who is applying this force? What theatrical play is being played upon the scene of arcanum XI? Allow this to settle in you like wine. Take up the card every now and again. Take it as a subject of reflection, a support of meditation. Imagine how the character's movements might flow. Use it as the point of departure for Ichazo* style exercises. Engrave it within yourself. Become arcanum XI. And, as Jodorowsky says, “breathe her, eat** her, drink her, make love to her.”

You will hate her, love her, then forget her. When complicity arises, that is when knowledge begins.

Notes:

* Visualisation exercises used towards the goal of reducing and sharpening the imagination and sensoriality, practiced in the Arica School founded by Óscar Ichazo. - Tchalaï.
** The term employed here is ‘manducate’ which is generally only found in reference to the consumption of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church. - Translator.

- Revue Question De. No. 30. Mai-Juin 1979.

_R_ : Thanks so much. Incredibly powerful method of integrating the Tarot cards. And there are things you speak of that I'd never noticed. I never noticed that the person's six-toed foot was not touching the ground. Now I don't think I will ever call the person "he" or "she" again. That thickness of the neck is not the same as the one in the Hanged Man. It does indeed look much more like a mask. I found something that I didn't know about. In the Middle Ages they had "masks of shame". And on this website, the first photo they provide of these masks of shame is one that looks sort of like teeth at the top. Similar to the one in the card of the Tarot.




https://museum-of-artifacts.blogspot.co ... %20designs.

Marigold wrote: ↑27 Aug 2019, 16:46 2) Why does the animal look more like an Afghan hound than a lion ? Were lions ever depicted as having so much long curly hair ?

Curly hair doesn't seem uncommon in old depictions of lions. Depictions that, to my mind, don't look a million miles away from Force.

Marigold wrote: ↑27 Aug 2019, 16:46 4) Why does she have six toes ?

Having six toes or finger is called polydactyly. If memorary serves, some ancient cultures attached an importance to this - bestowing status on the one with the defect. Maybe the Maya? Another Indian tribe?

Biblically, there's a giant said to have six fingers and six toes killed by David's brother.

"Yet again there was war at Gath, where there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also was born to the giant. So when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea, David's brother, killed him" (II Samuel 21:20-21; see also I Chronicles 20:6-7).

I don't know if any of that has relevance, but there we go!

I've said this before, but see if you can spot the rabbit hidden in the Grimaud version...

_R_ wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 07:30 I've said this before, but see if you can spot the rabbit hidden in the Grimaud version...

Yep. Rabbit is certainly there! So many hidden things in the Tarot of Marseilles. But let's spill the beans for those who don't know. It's in the Hermit. But I'd suggest we keep the Hermit for another discussion so as not to muddle the theme of the thread.

Marigold wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 07:33

_R_ wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 07:30 I've said this before, but see if you can spot the rabbit hidden in the Grimaud version...

Yep. Rabbit is certainly there! So many hidden things in the Tarot of Marseilles. But let's spill the beans for those who don't know. It's in the Hermit. But I'd suggest we keep the Hermit for another discussion so as not to muddle the theme of the thread.

I meant in La Force, but I won't spoil it!

devin wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 07:16

Curly hair doesn't seem uncommon in old depictions of lions. Depictions that, to my mind, don't look a million miles away from Force.

Well you've cleared up that question quite nicely. Thanks a lot !!!

devin wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 07:16 Having six toes or finger is called polydactyly. If memorary serves, some ancient cultures attached an importance to this - bestowing status on the one with the defect. Maybe the Maya? Another Indian tribe?

Biblically, there's a giant said to have six fingers and six toes killed by David's brother.

"Yet again there was war at Gath, where there was a man of great stature, who had six fingers on each hand and six toes on each foot, twenty-four in number; and he also was born to the giant. So when he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea, David's brother, killed him" (II Samuel 21:20-21; see also I Chronicles 20:6-7).

I don't know if any of that has relevance, but there we go!

Yes, some ancient cultures did indeed attach an importance to this. And there is a lot of reference to giants and six toes and six fingers. But I don't think there's any reference to giants in Strength in the TdM. There is some speculation that there is a reference to giants however in the Mat/Fou/Fol/Fool.

The bibilical reference I also don't see how it's relevant to this card.

It must have something to do with magical or supernatural powers. That's all I have to go on now. But who knows... maybe there are loads of giants in the TdM. There are loads of the mentioned in mythology from all over the world.

_R_ wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 07:35
I meant in La Force, but I won't spoil it!

Aahhh. Well I'll go and search !! Never heard this. So there are TWO hidden rabbits !!! That's amazing.

Edited to add: I found it. How extraordinary !!! What on earth is the significance of the rabbits then? Another question to be added to the original list.

And further edited to say that if we find a third one hidden somewhere, we may have the Three Hares https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_hares

Jean-Michel David's website is called Four Hares. On it he says "In Egyptian hieroglyph the hare stands for the sound 'wn' ('un'), meaning both 'to be' as well as 'to open' – and Wepuat was an epithet for the (hare-headed) god who opened the way into the afterlife (thus closely connected – and at times even incorrectly claimed to be identical – with Anubis, or even with Osiris".

Marigold wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 07:40 The bibilical reference I also don't see how it's relevant to this card.

Well, quite. If it made any more sense, I would worry I was heading toward a breakdown of some sort. Then again, at least the six-toed giant link fits somewhat with a functional reading of the card as representing strength, force, etc. Of course, it does also beg the question as to whether there is ANY significance to this particular visual quirck. Any significance apart from what an individual reader (quite validly, perhaps) may choose to imbue it with, that is.

As an aside, there does seem to be a certain visual affinity between the lion's mane and the Tower's descending flame. (Oh, and it rhymes!)



The ever multiplying rabbits remind me of old conspiracy theory that did the rounds here in South Africa for years: Many were convinced that the silhouetted thorn-tree logo of a local bank contained a hidden AK-47 and rabbit. This apparently had all sorts of nefarious political overtones and ramifications. Eventually a journalist approached the advertising agency responsible for the logo and showed that the illustration was a direct copy of a thorn tree image from a book on South African flora.

devin wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 09:54

Well, quite. If it made any more sense, I would worry I was heading toward a breakdown of some sort. Then again, at least the six-toed giant link fits somewhat with a functional reading of the card as representing strength, force, etc. Of course, it does also beg the question as to whether there is ANY significance to this particular visual quirck. Any significance apart from what an individual reader (quite validly, perhaps) may choose to imbue it with, that is.

Oh I would think that these quirks are all HUGELY significant. Those Tarot cards were drawn with great care. Nothing is insignificant. Each Arcanum is rich with symbolism.

Now it's surprisingly difficult to find a answer to our question on the internet. I checked also French websites but didn't come up with anything in particular.

However... I am thinking now that there is a reference to giants, but this does not imply that the person in the card is a giant. A website I came across which is not the greatest resource does at least provide a painting of Adam who has six fingers and say "Based on this ancient association of giants with multi-digits and superhuman strength, by giving Adam 6 fingers, Jan van Scorel gives him equally preternatural powers." So maybe this has something to do with Strength. Goliath was supposedly a giant - mighty strong he was.

devin wrote: ↑28 Aug 2019, 09:54 As an aside, there does seem to be a certain visual affinity between the lion's mane and the Tower's descending flame. (Oh, and it rhymes!)

Interesting. Thanks for this. Will give this some thought... but it seems tenuous the connection.

Marigold wrote: ↑29 Aug 2019, 08:23 Oh I would think that these quirks are all HUGELY significant. Those Tarot cards were drawn with great care. Nothing is insignificant. Each Arcanum is rich with symbolism.

I waver in my views on this and sometimes wonder if there's not more to be had in the structure (or lack thereof) of the deck and or the act of using the deck itself for divination, contemplation, or mystical incalculation. If the latter, it would be the ways in which the cards interact with a beholding consciousness and the effects this has on reality that would be of metaphysical significance.

Marigold wrote: ↑29 Aug 2019, 08:23 However... I am thinking now that there is a reference to giants, but this does not imply that the person in the card is a giant. A website I came across which is not the greatest resource does at least provide a painting of Adam who has six fingers and say "Based on this ancient association of giants with multi-digits and superhuman strength, by giving Adam 6 fingers, Jan van Scorel gives him equally preternatural powers." So maybe this has something to do with Strength.

Well, it's about the only 6 toe tie in that makes sense to me. Force is also a tricky one as I find there's something to be gained by contemplating a card in juxtaposition to its structural opposite, eg. The first and last card, the second and second to last cards, etc. Unfortunately Force sits as a pivot in the centre of the numbered trumps, making this operation rather difficult. But then perhaps we could take the fact that Force depicts a figure confronting or subjugating an animal while the Fool is running away from one as a sign that the two cards are a natural pair. Their functional meanings do also seem opposed: Confrontation vs. walking away, concerted action vs. fecklessness, etc. Anyway, if this is the case, the Fool's association (which is a new one on me) with giants could take on an interesting significance.

Marigold wrote: ↑29 Aug 2019, 08:23 Goliath was supposedly a giant - mighty strong he was.

The context of the biblical passage I quoted above links the six fingered giant to Goliath, although somewhat ambiguously.

Marigold wrote: ↑29 Aug 2019, 08:23 Interesting. Thanks for this. Will give this some thought... but it seems tenuous the connection.

Very tenuous, I agree.

Regards the biblical giants, I'm sure I remember reading somewhere that the original word that has been translated into English as 'giants' was used not so much to indicate physical size but great stature in the more metaphorical sense. Funnily enough, I think I came across this nugget in an attack on the ancient alien crowd mounted by Graham Hancock.... will check and post.

Okay, now, I haven't read this yet, but it looks like it could be very fruitful to the task at hand (or foot!).

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... e_painters

Here is the takeaway from the above paper:

The easiest explanation for the depiction of foot
deformity in some Renaissance paintings is that all of the
anatomical variations described throughout this paper
deal with some artifacts or mistakes by the painters.
However this is unlikely, as all the painters mentioned in
this study have styles admired for clarity of form, clear
compositional organisation and the visual effect of their
works. These qualities give the artists a strong reputation
for attention to detail and leaving little to chance.8,9
Extra digit descriptions are already present and known
in the ancient literature. Verses 20–21 in the second
Book of Samuel, in the version of the Bible authorised by
King James I, state:
And there was yet a battle in Gath, where was a man
of great stature, that had on every hand six fingers,
and on every foot six toes, four and twenty in
number; and he also was born to the giant. And when
he defied Israel, Jonathan the son of Shimea the
brother of David slew him.
The ‘man of great stature’ was the son of a ‘giant’ called
Rapha. Was Raphael influenced by the Holy Scriptures?
Although this is a possible iconographical meaning that
should be taken into consideration, it seems unlikely that
the devilish negative connotation16 of having six fingers
or toes could be somehow depicted on Christ or other
figures. It is also unlikely that Perugino, Viti, Martini and
Romano had accepted those meanings when depicting
similar anomalies in their canvases. Experts of symbolism
may argue that the presence of an extra digit was used
to indicate a ‘sixth sense’ in that person who was
engendered by ‘initiation’ with a higher power.6,7 Art
historians have long debated the meaning of the six
fingers. In two paintings, Raphael seems to play and
create an illusion with perspective and two Popes seem
to exhibit six fingers. In Sistine Madonna (1512) (Fig. 4D),
the right hand of Pope Sixtus IV is pointing at the
beholder and seems to have an extra digit (although
closer examination reveals no polydactyly). Heindel
(1865–1919) promoted the theory that the painter
made a play on the number ‘six’ in his name and the
Pope having a ‘sixth’ sense.16 Raphael also gave Pope
Julius II an extra finger in The Disputation on the Holy
Sacrament (1509–10) (Fig. 4E), even if the fresco is not
clear enough to make any further comment. Regarding
the depiction of an extra toe on St Joseph, Heindel has
argued that Raphael wants to show us that Joseph
possessed a sixth sense and that he might not be a blind
leader, having the ‘seeing eye’ required to point out the
Way, the Truth, and the Life;16 however, this is contradicted
by the fact that there were a high number of subjects to
which a presumptive polydactyly has been added.

For those who are attracted by the idea of intentional
representation of a pathological condition by the
painters, variations in depiction of feet in the canvas
shown in Figures 1B, 1C, 1E, 2A, 2B, 3A, 3B and 4C may
resemble an extra digit articulating with the fifth toe. The
presumptive medico-artistic diagnosis in these cases
suggests postaxial polydactyly, a congenital anomaly
described as the condition of having supernumerary
digits beyond the fifth finger or toe.17,18 There are genetic
markers that predispose to this condition, and its
varying degrees of expression (phenotype) range from
some extra tissue on the side of the foot, to tissues
comprising some bone, and more rarely, to an entire
extra functioning digit.17,18
Postaxial polydactyly in particular has been confirmed to
be a genetic trait manifested across members of a family,
often affecting several generations. Conversely, the
abnormal prominence of the outer margin of the foot
seen in the remaining paintings (Figs. 1A, 1D, 1F, 1G, 2A,
2C, 2D, 3A–D, 4A–C) may be identifiable as an acquired
foot deformity. A presumptive diagnosis of rheumatic
and arthritic disorders manifested as localised swelling
at the metatarsophalangeal joint of the little toe,
pseudogout or chronic gouty pouch could be suggested;
although the same location in the fifth toes of all figures
with no further systemic involvement is a slightly
unusual location for joint involvement in these types of
diseases. A systematic and widespread representation of
a localised infection, tumours and post-traumatic
sequelae seems unlikely but should be taken into
consideration. Previous authors have suggested that the
depicted anatomical variations are realistic details of real
persons, documenting a dominantly inherited
malformation within a family or deformities due to an
acquired disease. This hypothesis regarding the
presumptive depiction of congenital malformation is not
easily tenable, as the number of abnormalities is too high,
as shown in this investigation.
Although the painters worked in contact over a long
period of time, their production was limited to different
cities. One could allow that these artists were lifelong
dependents on one and the same genetic pool of
models, providing at least a few different subjects for
them in very different towns and periods of their artistic
life. But it seems that even the most fervid imagination
could not imagine that early 16th century Italy was
drastically populated with extra-digited, foot-deformed
individuals! Therefore, it seems unlikely that the presence
of these deformities can be explained by assuming they
are based on models from the same family. In addition,
the hypothesis of using real models with real diseases
including acquired deformities is hardly accepted because
of the high number of relevant canvases and the different
types of subjects involved.
The abnormal prominences on the outside of the foot
that have been depicted in varying degrees throughout
the presented paintings may be the efforts of the artists,
particularly Raphael, to study the tridimensionality of the
foot in different positions rather than a deliberate
attempt to represent a disease. The hypothesis that the
deformities were introduced as a visual illusion to
optimise proportions seems unlikely because only close
examination shows the anomalies. In particular, the
detailed preliminary studies made before every work,
through cartoons, drawings, sketches or designs, suggest
that such unnatural depictions were not repeatedly
committed by accident, especially because such accidents
could be adjusted in the final piece. Renaissance painters
were masterful draftsmen, whose propensity for drawing
anatomical structures improved with time, particularly
after their exposure to Florentine and Roman artists.
The five artists discussed here were thus perfectly
capable of adding these anatomical features without a
reliance on models.
Albury and Weisz presented a couple of further possible
explanations for the depiction of the foot deformity in
Renaissances paintings.2,19 On the one hand, there was a
tendency to depict subjects in some instances, especially
saints, with some physical anomaly so that they could be
recognised within the portraits. This concept was
discussed and adequately analysed by Charles Hope.20 A
significant example is St Roch who has been depicted
affected by plague buboes.21 On the other hand, Albury
and Weisz suggested that the cult of St Joseph that began
two centuries earlier increased in the 15th century,
necessitating somehow his symbolic celebration as a
martyr because of his life of sacrifices for Christ and the
Virgin.19 Painters found a subtle manner of expression in
the deformity of the foot of Joseph (Figs 1A, 2D, 4B, 4C)
who guided his family away from Nazareth towards
Egypt during the Massacre of the Innocents by King
Herod. The paintings in this study show St Joseph and his
feet during the nativity period before the trip to Egypt.
According to Albury and Weisz, the depiction of St
Joseph as affected by external foot prominence may have
been an attempt by the painters to add the sign of the
martyrdom of Joseph and signify his tenacity during the
escape from Nazareth to Egypt. Joseph undertook the
trip back and forth from Nazareth to Bethlehem or
Jerusalem on his feet while his family rode on a donkey.
Interestingly, Albury and Weisz proposed that the
representation of St Joseph’s foot deformity as a gouty
prominence was a way to magnify the representation of
burden by adding the pain of the metabolic disorder to
that given by the stressful physical efforts.19 The depiction
of the foot of St John the Baptist (Figs. 1B, 1F, 3D) affected
by the lateral prominence may also support this theory.
We agree with the authors that the depiction of the
bare feet of other saints and angels (Figs 2A, 2D, 3A, 3D,
4A), who have the same foot deformity as St Joseph and
St John the Baptist, can be considered part of the
symbolism and allusion to the sacrifices and martyrdom
of Joseph and John19,22 and a representation of poverty
and humility. Also the depiction of the deformity in the
feet of the Virgin and Christ (Figs. 1B–F, 2A–C, 3A–C,
4C) may be contextualised in this way, although the
interpretation is more difficult. The sign of the martyrdom
was depicted almost equally on the right or left foot in
the figures included in the present investigation, therefore
we cannot speculate further about the predominance of
one side to the other. The decision to emphasise the
martyrdom of this saint with the deformed foot, which,
during the Renaissance, was considered the humblest part
of the body, may be read as a further sign of humility.19

This seems to be the source of the 6th sense idea as quoted above. It is apparently of Rosicrucian lineage.

ANCIENT AND MODERN INITIATION
BY MAX HEINDEL

..........................

... and a close examination of the hand wherewith
he points will show that it has six fingers. There is not historical
evidence to show that the Pontiff actually had such a deformity, neither can
that fact be an accident; the six fingers in the painting must therefore
have been due to design on the part of the painter.

What its purpose was we shall learn by examination of the "Marriage of
the Virgin," where a similar anomaly may be noted. In that picture Mary
and Joseph are represented together with he Christ Child under such condi-
tions that it is evident that they are just on the eve of departure for
Egypt, and a Rabbi is in the act of joining them in wedlock. The left foot
of Joseph is the foremost object in the picture, and if we count we shall
find it represented as having six toes. By the six fingers in the Pope's
picture and the six toes of Joseph, Raphael wants to show us that both pos-
sessed a sixth sense such as is awakened by Initiation. By this subtle
sense the foot of Joseph was guided in its flight to keep secure that sacred
things which had been entrusted to his care. To the other was given a sixth
sense that he might not be a blind leader of the blind but might have the
"seeing eye" required to point out the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

..........................

Full text: https://web.archive.org/web/20090103145 ... an/ami.txt
Info on the author: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Heindel

devin : You've done some fantastic research on the subject. Thanks so much.

I think that from what we've discussed in this thread, I've come to the conclusion for now anyway that the six toes have something to do with some supra or supernatural power - perhaps a "sixth sense", i.e. a connection to the divine. And that there is something to explore further about giants. I'm going to devote some time to try and find something of worth in the wealth of information on the internet, sometimes hidden on the 20th or 30th page and from there one goes from link to link, from idea to idea, until one finds the pearl. If one is looking for treasure, one needs to go on a treasure hunt.

And I believe also now that Strength is wearing a mask of some sorts, and it is possible that it is a shame mask. She still needs to conquer those "animal", baser instincts... to put it VERY broadly.

The mask could represent also the "persona" which originally meant a theatrical mask in Latin.

There is still a post further up that you wrote that I would like to address, but I need to give it some more thought and my head is too tired right now to give it the thought it deserves.

And then I'd like to address some of the other questions in the first post of the thread. Unless someone gets there before me which would be lovely !

Talking about giants, I came across Gilgamesh in my wanderings. In the Qumran Scrolls, they found a fragment of the Book of Giants. The text's creation is dated to before 2nd century BC.

The reconstructed text from the fragment is as follows :

(Gilgamesh speaks) “I am a giant, and by my mighty strength in my arm, I can vanquish anyone mortal. I have made war with them (mortals) in the past but I am not now able to stand against my opponents who reside in heaven, and dwell in holy places. And not only this, but they are in fact stronger than I am. The day of the ravening wild beasts has come and that of the wild man [as I am known].

I think the Strength card may also be a reference to Gilgamesh. Amongst others. Mythology of all sorts permeates the Tarot. But then again, mythology permeates just about everything... There have been authors on the TdM who have mentioned Gilgamesh when discussing Strength, for example in the book "Ombres et Lumières du Tarot" by Carole Sédillot, amongst others. (There's old stuff that was hidden in the cobwebs of my mind during my hiatus from Tarot that seem to be coming back bit by bit. I hope I remember more.)

Marigold wrote: ↑27 Aug 2019, 16:46

5) Why does she have the same shape hat as Le Bateleur ? I spent once a long time on Pinterest looking at pages of hats that people wore at the time - amazing how some people are fascinated with hats - on purpose in order to see if I could find a hat that looked like this. I didn't. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist though. Some people say the hat in the shape of a leminscate is very significant. But maybe it's got nothing to do with a leminscate and we're just putting a meaning on it that sounds cool and savvy because we want to put a meaning on everything.

That being said, hats were VERY important in those days. Like someone from the lower classes could be punished by wearing a hat belonging to the ruling class. It was all helluva codified their wearing of hats. So I think the hats in the TdM may have a significance.

Would anyone have anything to say about this hat ? I'm really still not convinced that the hat on Strength and Le Bateleur (and also a couple of the Honours/Court Cards) is supposed to be a lemniscate. In fact, I sometimes think the creators of the TdM are laughing their heads off when they hear us tarot people talking of this.

I think actually a separate thread about ALL the hats in the TdM could be very interesting to explore. Seeing as hats were hugely important in those days.

The term 'lemniscate' was coined by the mathematician Jacob Bernoulli in 1694, so later than the earliest Italian decks of cards we know, but they do not depict this type of hat, if I recall correctly.

Jean Noblet's deck is slightly earlier by a few years too (1660s-1680s, according to T. DePaulis), but the Dodal, Payen and Conver decks all come later.

_R_ wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 02:41 The term 'lemniscate' was coined by the mathematician Jacob Bernoulli in 1694, so later than the earliest Italian decks of cards we know, but they do not depict this type of hat, if I recall correctly.

Jean Noblet's deck is slightly earlier by a few years too (1660s-1680s, according to T. DePaulis), but the Dodal, Payen and Conver decks all come later.

Ha. Whenever you post, it's like Father Christmas coming early with his gifts.

Thanks for the precision. Myself I knew that already, but it's a great thing to have added to this thread.

I don't take the Italian cards into consideration when I'm studying the TdM. Except for their historical relationship. I consider them to be two separate things things. But linked for eternity. Sort of like distant cousins. Italian cards were beautiful cards for the amusement and pleasure of the aristocracy (god I hate the aristocracy) and the Tarot of Marseilles was for "le peuple". Different intentions, different purposes. And also the TdM is now a tradition. Firmly established. Like Santa Claus (i.e. you).

_R_ wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 02:41 The term 'lemniscate' was coined by the mathematician Jacob Bernoulli in 1694, so later than the earliest Italian decks of cards we know, but they do not depict this type of hat, if I recall correctly.

Jean Noblet's deck is slightly earlier by a few years too (1660s-1680s, according to T. DePaulis), but the Dodal, Payen and Conver decks all come later.

Surely, earlier astronomers were familiar with the path the Sun traces through the sky, though? If not a proper lemniscate then perhaps the analemma?



https://www.space.com/31567-sun-analemm ... photo.html

fire cat pickles wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 21:24 Surely, earlier astronomers were familiar with the path the Sun traces through the sky, though? If not a proper lemniscate then perhaps the analemma?

You would have to check a work on the history of astronomy, but the point I was making is that the term itself, curiously enough, is contemporary to the appearance of the Marseilles deck. I expect checking a work on millinery would also be useful, to see if this is an actual type of hat, or an exaggerated depiction.

Marigold wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 15:47

_R_ wrote: ↑07 Sep 2019, 02:41 The term 'lemniscate' was coined by the mathematician Jacob Bernoulli in 1694, so later than the earliest Italian decks of cards we know, but they do not depict this type of hat, if I recall correctly.

Jean Noblet's deck is slightly earlier by a few years too (1660s-1680s, according to T. DePaulis), but the Dodal, Payen and Conver decks all come later.

Ha. Whenever you post, it's like Father Christmas coming early with his gifts.

Thanks for the precision. Myself I knew that already, but it's a great thing to have added to this thread.

I don't take the Italian cards into consideration when I'm studying the TdM. Except for their historical relationship. I consider them to be two separate things things. But linked for eternity. Sort of like distant cousins. Italian cards were beautiful cards for the amusement and pleasure of the aristocracy (god I hate the aristocracy) and the Tarot of Marseilles was for "le peuple". Different intentions, different purposes. And also the TdM is now a tradition. Firmly established. Like Santa Claus (i.e. you).

Hi Diana,

It is difficult if not impossible to separate these things entirely when dealing with a pictorial canon, although, yes, the French tradition is its own beast at this stage.

In this case, we are likely dealing with something specific to the Marseilles, although it is possible that the large headwear of the earlier Italian decks was somehow deformed along the way and ended up the way it did in France (e.g. the Visconti Bagatto). Or all of the above.

And I think you'll find that gambling is a widespread human vice, not confined either to a decadent aristocracy or to the plebeians.

Sorry, I misunderstood.

Although it is impossible to get inside the mid of any artist's head, it is reasonable to anticipate that they would have included the symbolism of the day in their work, as you've alluded to (I think?)

I'll have to research more to see when and if the discovery of the analemma came about.

fire cat pickles wrote: ↑08 Sep 2019, 10:46 Sorry, I misunderstood.

Although it is impossible to get inside the mid of any artist's head, it is reasonable to anticipate that they would have included the symbolism of the day in their work, as you've alluded to (I think?)

I'll have to research more to see when and if the discovery of the analemma came about.

As far as I know, Bernoulli's lemniscate is the first usage of the sideways figure of 8 to depict infinity, if that is what you meant. Of course that does not mean that the symbol did not exist prior to that.