How does learning the history of Tarot affect your readings? Each deck on it's own terms? Stick to your own system?

[MarieBernard]

As I learn more about Tarot it seems clear that a lot of the correspondences we use, Kabbalah, Astrology, Elemental, even Fool's Journey, are not there in the original decks. I think we don't have the cultural literacy to read the cards with the original meanings, though. Obviously the Visconti-Sforza Tarot would be meaningful as far as which card "trumps" another, even without being numbered, and the Sola Busca could have unique pictures that still spoke to people enough to understand why they were there. We don't have that.

 

Do we go by intuition, which undoubtedly the first readers must have used in fortune telling, even if the symbols on the cards have changed in their significance to us? Do we attempt to piece together the medieval, renaissance, and early modern mind set so we have the cultural coin to say what the cards signified? Do we take each deck as it's creator intends, no matter how close or divorced to "historic" meanings they may come? 

 

What of systems of color, Kabballah, element, planet, decan, etc? Can they be useful even on decks that specifically reject one tradition or the other? Do we make systems based on what we've learned, entirely divorced from the author's intent?

 

Historic Tarot is interesting to me because of course there is a system, even if we can't entirely understand the perspective of Tarot players and cartomancers of the past. One trump must be more "valuable" than others, cups clearly equaled love in the early going, but it seems an impossible task to understand even an outline of what they were projecting onto the tarot images, numbers, and suites.

 

How do you read? How do you put together the different traditions? How does it effect your reading of decks that are informed by different traditions? 

[Sadewa]

I don't read Tarot that much now (my current go-to is lenormand), but I do remember facing pretty much the same confusion as you now do. Background info: I live in a country where Tarot is foreign and most readers have to either read sources in a foreign language (basically English) or scavenge fragmented information which is basically unfinished translation. And do I remember seeing sooooo many correspondences in Tarot tutorials. Kabbalah, Astrology...... Pretty much anything you can think of.

 

I need to say that you are absolutely free to choose your own style, use these systems, not use these systems, it actually doesn't matter as long as your chosen path suits your purpose and provides you with accurate and necessary information in readings. What I'm saying here is my own take on Tarot: When I was studying Tarot, I felt overwhelmed by the heavy correspondences in the books, so I ditched them altogether, saving only essential commentary on the cards' pictures and some suggested meanings. So I basically read only by observing the cards rather than linking them to various esoteric traditions.

And it worked just fine. I didn't get to predict as "precisely" as I now do with lenormand (It's not Tarot's fault entirely, it mostly had something to do with me myself as a reader who was still learning how to read), but still I had moments that amazed not only me but also folks that I was reading for. I saw things that I never thought I could see in the cards: a neighbor's house being renovated, a domineering father, a soon-to-arrive delivery person...... All these were done without Kabbalah-ish esoteric knowledge.

I had basic understanding of the history of Tarot (I had to frequently answer to other peoples' curious questions anyway), and I do occasionally look into history to see why a certain card is interpreted in a certain way. But I don't really think that learning history to the extent of piecing together a medieval mindset is essential to accurate reading.  The cards themselves still "work" today because they embody various "scenes" of human life,  and historical interpretations still lives in today's teachings, which don't really take a historian to figure out. Yes, certain interpretations may have roots in a historic social context. But aren't me dealing with situations that happens NOW when we commence a reading?  I think it's more rewarding to focus on the cards themselves rather than historic and esoteric factors.

As for decks designed specifically following a certain esoteric tradition. I would suggest that you have a certain amount of knowledge before purchasing it, because a deck's design do affects its meaning (It's hard to predict that tomorrow would be sunny when you draw a Strength card from a deck that painted rain on it). If you don't have that knowledge but had that energy to do some extra learning, there really isn't anything to stop you, but one deck doesn't represent Tarot as a collective whole. While a lot of books on the Anglophone market do have heavy esoteric and even psychological references, it should be noted that some readers in other countries very likely take different approaches, some of whom may not have the opportunity to sell a book and disclose their practices.

 

I'm not posting this to somehow undermine those who associate Tarot with esoteric and psychological knowledge. I know splendid readers who do so and give accurate and down-to-earth readings, so the whole thing really depends on how well you know your system. However, I have also encountered individuals and sources that markets Tarot with certain historical/esoteric/psychological associations and somehow claim to be reading the cards in "the only correct/ most accurate way". I have also seen folk who rely so heavily on historic sources and external references that I honestly wondered why bother with Tarot and not using a more "relevant" oracle.

[Rose Lalonde]

The statue of the Venus de Milo is made of beautiful Parian marble, but people don't tend to worry that the marble's original state for millennia was raw stone in the earth, and that the image and idea of a goddess was superimposed on it recently in historical terms. We don't feel the need to break up her features and put it in the ground again to get back to the marble's pure origins. 

 

I feel much the same about what people have done with a great pack of cards - their aspirations to work with the deck to express something about the fundamental nature of the world, be it the Golden Dawn's syncretism or a Pagan wheel of the year, or something else. So it doesn't bother me that these things weren't there at the start. It also doesn't bother me, of course, if someone would prefer to work only with the beautiful original.

 

As for reading styles, I don't think that a structured system and intuition are different, but instead that a system of symbols (either found or created ourselves) is a springboard for intuition for those who enjoy it.  There's also the 'unstructured system' of looking at the art from our own perspective in the present moment with no reference to set ideas. 

 

I very much agree with Sadewa that everyone is free to choose their own style of reading. In fact, I think becoming a good reader depends on finding the style that works best for you and mastering that through repeatedly working with the cards. It's no good to read in a way that someone else thinks is best. For me that meant spending a long time doing readings in very different ways, looking at the results, asking if it worked, and since more than one way worked, asking if it felt satisfying and inspired me. 

[katrinka]

Jean-Michael David has done extensive research into Tarot history, I took his course years ago and found it useful for separating legend from fact (the Popess is not Pope Joan, though the fact that the legend exists does say something.) I don't remember everything he wrote about every character, but I do think that at least a passing familiarity with Tarot history is vital. He has a book:
https://www.lulu.com/en/us/shop/jean-michel-david/reading-the-marseille-tarot/ebook/product-1nq5qry9.html?page=1&pageSize=4

And Andy Boroveshengra's been helpful in this regard. It was from Andy that I learned about the pittura infamante, and the fact that the Hanged Man is being dishonored, like Mussolini. The bits about enlightenment, the halo, are later Golden Dawn constructs. Originally the Hanged Man didn't carry that meaning. Much like they changed the Mountbanke to a ceremonial magician.

And yes, this does affect my readings. A Thoth or RWS is not a TdM. I sometimes need to adjust to what I'm using, though as a whole I prefer the older ideas.
It's always worthwhile to read more, to learn more.

 

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by katrinka

[MarieBernard]

Thanks for the answers! I was so curious to see what others did. My question was prompted by the Old English Tarot, which is not a straight Marseille, but has art work, however the art doesn't hint at the traditional meanings like the TdM Medieval Cats Tarot. It has a typical US Games LWB yet the small drawings don't necessarily go with the meanings given unless you stretch your imagination. I have some good books on reading TdM decks, also for Thoth and RWS decks, but that one made me question how other people interpret their cards. Is it TdM? Should it be it's own thing? Unlike something like the MaryEl, Dark Goddess, or Journey into Egypt it doesn't seem to have it's own system, so it's either ignore the art and use it as a RWS, Marseille or Italian tarot, or make up my own definitions.

[katrinka]

Use the art that's on the cards. Otherwise you might as well leave in in the drawer and use RWS, TdM, etc. 😉

[Sadewa]

Regarding the Old English Tarot,  Ibelieve that it isn't purely a TdM deck, but it doesn't necessarily have to be its own thing either. There are actually valid sources teaching you how to read this kind of pip decks. I heard that there is a book called Untold Tarot that specifically deals with doing actual readings with pip decks. Haven't read it, but did hear praise about it.

[katrinka]

I have it. It gives you several options for interpreting pips. I do like it.

[Sadewa]

39 minutes ago, katrinka said:

I have it. It gives you several options for interpreting pips. I do like it.

That's nice. From the feedback I hear I believe it is solid work.
 

I assume the deck mentioned is the one below? If so, then a number+suit logic should provide a workable interpretation.

[Pretzel]

This question had puzzled me for a while (and I guess I'll always wonder about it). What I've found is the more I learn about numbers, mythology, symbols, etc - the more my intuition can kick in and make the best correspondences. For example, one day I was looking at the three of cups, and the grapes were catching my eye. The grapes reminded me of the Greek God Dionysus, which then made me relate the three women in the card as the Maenads (female followers of Dionysus who in modern terms were 'party animals'). I feel this could totally work with the 3 of cups, even if I got to it in a roundabout way.

 

I feel the more knowledge I have, the more the universe can work with me in reading the cards. That's not to say that way is for everyone.

Re: decks which have different traditions, that could also help you. For example, one day I was called to use a specific deck but didn't know why. I realised during the reading that the deck I chose wasn't a mistake - the image on a certain card wasn't in my other decks, and it was exactly the image I needed in order to do this reading.

Then there's others who don't bother with any of this stuff and they are amazing readers. I guess the universe knows how we work.

Edited June 17, 2021 by Pretzel
typo

[devin]

Well, for one thing, the Tarot seems to be possessed of an extraordinary generosity, accepting quite fluidly that which we map onto it, and giving us something useful in return. So, I don't think history is an essential component, and we need not necessarily trouble ourselves with achieving an authenticity of meaning.

 

That said, the Tarot, with its wealth of images, does provide us with a gateway into the history of human thought and philosophy (well, Western, anyway). The trail of the Wheel, for example, can be followed back to our first attempts at mapping and modelling the procession of the heavens, then the technological and cultural pattern-break that was the invention of the wheel. So, where I think historical research can come into its own is in deepening our practice. A good example of this is elemental associations. If we decide to use them, there is a wealth of historical thought and contemplation at our disposal, from the classical to the medieval. Entering into conversation with this lineage can allow us to feel at home with our decisions as to how our Tarot practice engages with these principles and reveal uses and applications previously unsuspected.

 

Not being of a particularly scholarly bent, I have found two books to be of great help in entering into the medieval world (for the Tarot, in its Marseilles incarnation, strikes me as an artefact eminently medieval). First, C.S. Lewis's The Discarded Image, which was suggested to me by a member of this forum, provides a wonderful and concise insight into the conceptual ordering of the era. Second, Johan Huizinga's Autumn/Waning of the Middle Ages is an aesthetically inclined approach to understanding the consciousness of the medieval as it reveals itself through art and literature. 

 

To me, when medieval concepts are taken in a constructive and open-minded spirit and then combined with the contemporary consciousness (for your are right, we are inescapably moderns), the results can be very interesting indeed. And that doesn't just go for Tarot, btw.

Edited June 18, 2021 by devin

[JudyReadsCards]

I'd like to take a moment to say Thank You to everyone who's commented here. I'm so appreciative of the depth of knowledge and wisdom that's shared in this forum. I've only just commented elsewhere that I wish we had the ability to Like posts. 😊  Here's a big 👍 for all of you. 😘

[MarieBernard]

@Sadewa Yes, that's the deck I was talking about. The style of the cards is generally Marseille/Italian, but the small images on the pips are taken from a 14th century English manuscript called the "Luttrell Psalter." 

 

@devin Thanks so much for the book recs, I love C.S. Lewis and studying art and literature as products of, and clues to, the mindset of the particular time and place of their creation, so those are right up my alley. 

[Sadewa]

1 hour ago, MarieBernard said:

but the small images on the pips are taken from a 14th century English manuscript called the "Luttrell Psalter." 

That's fascinating. I wonder if the designer actually took pieces of history to fit into the cards' essential meanings, or they just did so to make it look better, though. I don't really have or read the deck, but I bet it'll be a fascinating ride to find out those answers.

 

[euripides]

I'm another one for blending historical knowledge with intuition. I'm really interested in history and so some of that - like the origin of the Hanged Man and the trickster magician, the wandering fool and court fool, and so on - that all comes in to my interpretation of a card. Not necessarily at a very scholarly level; it's just floating around there in the back of my brain somewhere.  Likewise, Biblical ideas. While I'm rather interested in the idea of very formal correspondences, I find most of those related systems too artificial and complex for my tired mind to deal with.

 

I find that with few exceptions, I do best with decks that stick fairly closely to the RWS originals - something about Pamela Colman Smith's artwork just really captures so much archetype, history and tradition that it makes it really easy to find your own narrative there. I have a few other decks that align closely and build or develop the ideas - like the Spiral, which I love, or Kat Black's Touchstone - with rich artwork that offers room for connection and interpretation. I don't do so well with pared-down, abstract, or very idiosyncratic decks.

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, Sadewa said:

That's fascinating. I wonder if the designer actually took pieces of history to fit into the cards' essential meanings, or they just did so to make it look better, though. I don't really have or read the deck, but I bet it'll be a fascinating ride to find out those answers.

 

You can find out a little with a simple image search.
They don't fit my meanings, which are based on number and suit. The Five of Batons appears to show birds feeding on the ground. I can't reconcile that with changes and working with your hands. And the Seven of Swords appears to show a man about to slay a small dragon. My meaning is much more dire - misfortune, loss and setbacks.
https://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/old-english/
 

The images may be purely decorative, or the deck might have its own idiosyncratic method. But the images I'm pulling up aren't ringing any bells for me.

[Sadewa]

26 minutes ago, katrinka said:

The images may be purely decorative, or the deck might have its own idiosyncratic method.

I don't really think that it has its own special methodology, but again maybe I'm just really bad informed.  I do remember seeing people around me using this deck, but few, and those who used it either read it with RWS memorization or treated it as a TdM-style deck. 

 

It does look pretty, though. It will make a great scene in a thriller movie. 😊

[katrinka]

2 hours ago, Sadewa said:

I don't really think that it has its own special methodology, but again maybe I'm just really bad informed.  I do remember seeing people around me using this deck, but few, and those who used it either read it with RWS memorization or treated it as a TdM-style deck. 

 

I certainly didn't mean to imply that you were ill-informed!
There are certainly different ways of reading by number and suit, and using one of the playing card methods will get you something a bit different from using, say, Unger/Jodorowsky. It may even be that they aren't meant to convey number and suit meanings at all - not everyone even uses those.

I just can't relate those small images to any TdM method I've come across. I'm stumped. And if they're taken from a psalter, well...

 

Quote

It does look pretty, though. It will make a great scene in a thriller movie. 😊

 

Maybe it's time to put out a casting call for the next Solitaire. 😸

Edited June 19, 2021 by katrinka

[Guest]

For me, each card is an eikōn. So knowing the historical origin and nature of the symbols is key to understanding what is written in each eikōn on an essential level. What the card says, as a whole. It can also help us understand the use of certain figures from antiquity by the early modern period.  
 

Much of that stems from the first deck I had which was by Caroline Smith and John Astrop. The symbols on each card were explained, but in such a way, that they form a whole. I found that useful working with the Elemental and later the Grimaud Marseille and Harris-Crowley decks.  With the latter, Harris’ essays and Crowley’s book are immensely informative, in terms of genesis, to how they viewed figures such as Aset, Anpu and Nut.  

Edited June 20, 2021 by Guest

[Sadewa]

 

Looking back at my previous reply and also readingvaluable insights by others, I realized that my initial reply is probably a little bit misleading and I'd like to clarify a bit. 

 

I'm not against studying the historical aspect of the cards. Like many other experienced readers here have pointed out, it is necessary to understand the cultural context to a degree in order to understand why and how the cards are created and read at such.  I myself also had to some reading in history abd it was rewarding. 

I was probably a bit triggered by "piece together a historical mindset" thing. But now I guess it's just my misunderstanding. My English does get rusty sometimes.

 

As for esoteric systems like Kabbalah, my main point is just that there is no problem with digging into esoteric associations, and there is absolutely merit in all that, but esotericism don't necessarily need to be actively present in your everyday readings. 

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, Sadewa said:

Looking back at my previous reply and also readingvaluable insights by others, I realized that my initial reply is probably a little bit misleading and I'd like to clarify a bit.

I'm not against studying the historical aspect of the cards. Like many other experienced readers here have pointed out, it is necessary to understand the cultural context to a degree in order to understand why and how the cards are created and read at such.  I myself also had to some reading in history abd it was rewarding. 

I was probably a bit triggered by "piece together a historical mindset" thing. But now I guess it's just my misunderstanding. My English does get rusty sometimes.

 

Nothing that you've posted here made me go "Hey! No!"
I do disagree with people using RWS meanings to read pip decks, unless it's this one, lol:
https://www.usgamesinc.com/tarot-decoratif-deck-and-book-set.html
(Ciro's "Marseilles" actually has little RWS style illustrations on the pips.) But other than that, why use TdM to read RWS? Why not just use RWS? And I'm curious about what other method your friends were using to read the Old English. That's why I mentioned it not fitting any number and suit meanings I'm aware of. I'm a bit of a geek with this stuff and there are things I consider "not quite proper" but there may be a good reason for them that I'm not aware of. And if not, well, there's no cartomancy police coming to kick their door down!

None of that was intended to call you out, or say "You're wrong!" or "I'm offended." There's no reason to apologize.

Peace?



 

1 hour ago, Sadewa said:

As for esoteric systems like Kabbalah, my main point is just that there is no problem with digging into esoteric associations, and there is absolutely merit in all that, but esotericism don't necessarily need to be actively present in your everyday readings. 

I agree, it doesn't.

Moon in Scorpio, Netzach to Malkuth, Water, Qof, the back of the head, 18, etc. are just different expressions of the same thing the Moon is an expression of.
You can read the Thoth without any of that.
Someday, though, I hope to know the Thoth. Like this guy:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showpost.php?p=4312387&postcount=17

That looks VERY useful! 😁

 

 

[gregory]

Where IS Zephyros these days - he's quite brilliant. Does anyone know ?

[katrinka]

2 hours ago, gregory said:

Where IS Zephyros these days - he's quite brilliant. Does anyone know ?

This. True brilliance is taking some tough concept and putting it in clear and relatable terms, like he did with that sandwich post. There's been entire books written that convey much less information than that post.

If anybody's in touch, I hope they invite him here, or at least let us know he's still around and doing well.

[Sadewa]

10 hours ago, katrinka said:

Peace?

Peace for sure!😁 I just wrote that in case I caused any confusions in my original response. Nothing you said offended me, really. 
 

 

10 hours ago, katrinka said:

That looks VERY useful! 😁

Useful and impressive, indeed. 
I never really got into all those esoteric systems. But if I ever do......this level of knowledge and flexibility is really something to aspire to. 
 

 

[Guest]

14 hours ago, katrinka said:

You can read the Thoth without any of that.
Someday, though, I hope to know the Thoth. Like this guy:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showpost.php?p=4312387&postcount=17

That looks VERY useful! 😁

That is the clearest and most relatable explanation I have seen. Brilliant .