Cult of Tarot Forum

Hi everyone!
I've just startend reading Greer's 'tarot for yourself' as a beginner. So one of the first excersises is to look for roses on the cards, which I did. But I noticed something else while doing this: on the clothing of all the court cards of the suit of wands, there are lizards (or salamanders?)
So I tried doing the same as for roses: wrote down what pops up in my mind.
So here we go: lizards are small, reptiles I guess. They adapt to their environment, which is mostly rocky. They squize themselfs in gaps and are very fast. Sometimes they might seem sneeky.
Could enyone help me on the symbolisme of these lizards and how to interpret?
Thanks

Hakumata wrote: ↑28 Nov 2019, 11:03 So here we go: lizards are small, reptiles I guess. They adapt to their environment, which is mostly rocky. They squize themselfs in gaps and are very fast. Sometimes they might seem sneeky.
Could enyone help me on the symbolisme of these lizards and how to interpret?
Thanks

I think that what you are seeing is a salamander.

I also found that to be such an odd creature to appear on Court cards. I think I saw them as "lowly" but when I looked into it I found I couldn't have been more wrong.

One thing is salamanders are said to be able to withstand fire. If I am not mistaken (and I very well could be) the salamanders you see appear on the court cards of the suit of wands. That is the suit of fire.

They also represent some of the more fiery traits like intuition, passion and power.

You are very perceptive to see the trait of adaptability as well. That is also commonly associated with them. Also, think about how they can grow new tails. They have the power of regeneration, renewal.

Sneakiness is also a commonly applied trait. For my taste though, I find that a little too religious. It's not like they are trying to trick us when they slither into cracks. I mean they don't then jump out and say boo!

I see them as noble little creatures very fitting in the company of the Courts.

Yes, these are salamanders. They are one of the so-called "elementals".

"An elemental is a mythic being that is described in occult and alchemical works from around the time of the European Renaissance, and particularly elaborated in the 16th century works of Paracelsus. According to Paracelsus and his subsequent followers, there are four categories of elementals, which are gnomes, undines, sylphs, and salamanders.These correspond to the four Empedoclean elements of antiquity: earth, water, air, and fire, respectively."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elemental.

In the RWS deck, the Wands represent fire, and the salamander represents the alchemical symbol of fire. They do not burn or consume themselves in fire.

(I don't know much about the RWS deck, but this I do remember from somewhere!)

Beat me though why he only put salamanders, and not the other three elementals in the other suits. What's the point of only putting one ?? Golden Dawn stuff I suppose. Or just a personal fancy of his or Pamela Colman Smith's ? I read recently somewhere that he left her a lot of liberty for the Minors, contrary to the Majors.

I've been thinking about these elementals and why there is only one of the four apparent in the RWS deck.

I'm thinking that Waite thought that one hint would be enough for people to deduce by themselves that the other three elementals are also there. He didn't need to spell it out in other words, be so explicit. And gnomes would have looked at bit odd. Also sylphs. And undines. Not really fitting for his deck. But a salamander is discreet and full of meaning.

Also, but I don't think so - I'm more inclined to think my first conclusion makes sense - he could have also wanting to clarify that Wands are Fire. In the Tarot of Marseilles tradition, sometimes there is debate as to whether Swords are not rather the Fire element. But this seems unlikely I think that he would have bothered with this debate, if he even knew of it. (I wonder where and when this debate started in the TdM tradition... I'm not sure I know even how to find out. _R_ (fellow TdM member) may know. I'll write to him and ask.)

There's some interesting reading on Elementals over at sacredtexts.com : https://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/sta/sta25.htm

The third group of elementals is the salamanders, or spirits of fire, who live in that attenuated, spiritual ether which is the invisible fire element of Nature. Without them material fire cannot exist; a match cannot be struck nor will flint and steel give off their spark without the assistance of a salamander, who immediately appears (so the mediæval mystics believed), evoked by friction. Man is unable to communicate successfully with the salamanders, owing to the fiery element in which they dwell, for everything is resolved to ashes that comes into their presence. By specially prepared compounds of herbs and perfumes the philosophers of the ancient world manufactured many kinds of incense. When incense was burned, the vapors which arose were especially suitable as a medium for the expression of these elementals, who, by borrowing the ethereal effluvium from the incense smoke, were able to make their presence felt.

Thank you both for sharing your knwoledge!

I've always mistaken lizards for salamanders and vice versa, sorry
Salamanders make more sense than lizards in the 'adaptibility'-side of the symbolisme, since they are amphibies.
I did a quick Wikipediaresearch: Some ley their eggs in water where they develop and transform, other kinds give birth to their eggs on land. So which kind would they have want to display? Also, salamander comes from the Persian word samandarun which means 'fire inside'. This would come from the fact they often live in the woods, around or inside fallen branches for example. When you use these branches for a campfire, the salamanders who were hidden in the branches fled from the fire as if they we're born out of it. Maybe wands also symbolise the branches they lived in after being thrown into the fire and expierence rebirth? Sorry, making a lot of associations maybe but that's how to learn I guess

Joan Marie: what you said about intuition, passion, renewal and power helps me interpret and capture the meanings of these court cards better, thanks for pointing that out! What you said about sneakyness hahaha, that's true, they won't say boo Also 'hiding' , is a meaning I can't really relate to these court cards eather. The quickness of their movement, relates a lot more I guess.

Diana: interesting what you said about leaving only one clue. I guess gnomes and nypmhlike creatures in the background would have been odd indeed
Also, I would like to know more on this debate in the Tdm. I don't know anything about Tdm, but batons and swords look similar for me at first glanse. So I also follow the thouhgts about the salamanders as clarificationelement.

Yes salamanders are a hermetic elemental associated with fire.

As to the Tarot de Marseille (TdM), and its ancient "cousins" there were no elemental correspondences to the suits. That was a much later addition, perhaps the French esotericists (e.g., Alliette, De Gebelin), or maybe as late as Waite and company (I will have to check my resources to be certain.) But I am certain originally in the TdM, the suits did not have those elements attached to the 4 suit objects. There are 2 major theories about suit correspondences in the traditional tarot. One theory is that originally the 4 suits were associated with the 4 classes of society: Wands (Batons) = peasants, Swords (Epees) = nobility, Cups (Coupes) = clergy, and Coins (Deniers) = merchants.

However another theory prevails - the objects simply, and most logically, correspond to their function: Batons (wooden slats) are for building, creating objects, e.g., think of building a house with wooden planks. Swords are for defense/protection, setting boundaries, and attack, e.g. think of defending your family and territory against an aggressor. Cups are for celebrating and nourishing, e.g., thinking of raising a toast at a party, drinking life-giving water. Coins are for acquiring resources, providing for yourself and loved ones, saving and spending, e.g., think of saving up to buy a home. These are the correspondences I use when I deal with the 4 suits. I never use the hermetic elements anymore.

Sorry for going a bit astray here!

Hakumata wrote: ↑29 Nov 2019, 00:38

I've always mistaken lizards for salamanders and vice versa, sorry
Salamanders make more sense than lizards in the 'adaptibility'-side of the symbolisme, since they are amphibies.
I did a quick Wikipediaresearch: Some ley their eggs in water where they develop and transform, other kinds give birth to their eggs on land. So which kind would they have want to display? Also, salamander comes from the Persian word samandarun which means 'fire inside'. This would come from the fact they often live in the woods, around or inside fallen branches for example. When you use these branches for a campfire, the salamanders who were hidden in the branches fled from the fire as if they we're born out of it. Maybe wands also symbolise the branches they lived in after being thrown into the fire and expierence rebirth? Sorry, making a lot of associations maybe but that's how to learn I guess

Hakumata : You can discard I would think all you learn about the real-life salamander. This salamander that we're talking about is a mythical being, dear to the alchemists of the time. An alchemist was "one who was versed in the practice of alchemy and who sought an elixir of life and a panacea and an alkahest and the philosopher's stone". This salamander in the RWS, unless one is interested in alchemy, is as far as I can make out just to show that the Wands are of the fire element. So I don't think you should focus too much on it.

(I'd never hard the word "alkahest!!". )

Also, I would like to know more on this debate in the Tdm. I don't know anything about Tdm, but batons and swords look similar for me at first glanse. So I also follow the thouhgts about the salamanders as clarificationelement.

The debate concerns both the Swords and the Batons. Not because they look similar. But whether they would represent Fire or Air. There are good arguments on both sides. It's up to the reader, according to his or her preference, to decide, if they use the elements in their interpretation.

Belenus wrote: ↑29 Nov 2019, 01:51

As to the Tarot de Marseille (TdM), and its ancient "cousins" there were no elemental correspondences to the suits. That was a much later addition, perhaps the French esotericists (e.g., Alliette, De Gebelin), or maybe as late as Waite and company (I will have to check my resources to be certain.) B

Thanks for your great contribution to this thread. I would suspect that Gebelin and co. did take into consideration alchemy when they were figuring out how to use the Tarot for divination. I'd like to have some confirmation about this though. And also I wonder at what point in time (20th century seems likely) the debate started. It may have begun when people starting writing more accessible books for a more general public.

When I read the cards, I find it hard in the TdM not to refer to the four elements. But I don't think of salamanders or undines. Just the four elements. I find it useful to see how these elements interact with each other, e.g. fire can be extinguished by water. But what you say about the "function" of the different items is also necessary I think.