Big Spreads or Small? How many cards do YOU like to read with?

[Rock_Joe]

I think 3 to 7 cards is the sweet spot for most situations. I consider 10 cards to be a deep dive. Plus clarifiers as needed that's often plenty.

[gregory]

I like single cards. But basically - the fewest I can get an answer from. It concentrates things.

[Mi-Shell]

My daily reading practice is a 3 card spread.

For deck interviews  I have a 5 card spread and then for more in-depth readings I use 6 cards.

 

I do not like the so called Celtic cross:

From the very beginning of me reading,= over 50 years ago "Celtic" sounded foreign to me, although I now learned to love the culture 🙂

 But "cross" sounds and always felt Christian to me and so I stayed away from the whole idea.

[Misterei]

On 6/10/2024 at 5:54 AM, Mi-Shell said:

I do not like the so called Celtic cross:

From the very beginning of me reading,= over 50 years ago "Celtic" sounded foreign to me, although I now learned to love the culture 🙂

 But "cross" sounds and always felt Christian to me and so I stayed away from the whole idea.

I don't know why it's named that.

Even the French spread Tirage en Croix isn't particularly cross-shaped and has nothing to do with Christianity.

I always suspected the Celtic Cross was the Brits trying to 1-up the French Tirage en Croix.

 

There's various card spreads called Russian Cross, Grand Cross, etc. where you can plainly see the SHAPE of the spread is a cross. I like this shape to show an intersection between past and future, or any other elements that intersect to form the present moment

 

Anyway, I like Celtic Cross spread but always thought the name was stupid as it's neither Celtic, nor a proper cross shape. I suspect it was a marketing gimmick for its time.

Edited June 11, 2024 by Misterei

[fire cat pickles]

I always thought it was called the Celtic Cross because the second card "crosses" the first one, but that's just me.

[Misterei]

1 hour ago, fire cat pickles said:

I always thought it was called the Celtic Cross because the second card "crosses" the first one, but that's just me.

I don't know. You might be right.

It DOES make a cross shape if we take only the first 6 cards--but then cards7-10 make it different. It's almost like 2 different spreads married into one.

[Guest]

I always thought it was called the Celtic Cross spread because like its namesake, the cross formed by cards 1 and 2 are surrounded by the nimbus formed by cards 3 to 6 if one imagines them forming a circle. I would have preferred that cards 7 to 10 form a straight line below the initial sextet so that it will really resemble a Celtic Cross, but it might require a large table and be a pain to photograph with great clarity. 

[Misterei]

8 hours ago, Akhilleus said:

... I would have preferred that cards 7 to 10 form a straight line below the initial sextet so that it will really resemble a Celtic Cross, but it might require a large table and be a pain to photograph with great clarity. 

HA! Then it WOULD undeniably be a Celtic Cross

[akiva]

Theres a Golden Dawn method called "The Divination of the Rose Cross", which is super complex and time consuming. It's possible the Celtic Cross was designed to be a simpler version of it for the layman to use in divination?

 

Here's an image of the spread partially complete:

 

Here it is complete:

 

It's almost like the Celtic Cross was taken from this so it actually fits on a table, and doesn't make you go through 7 different reading steps to get an answer! 🤣

[Misterei]

7 hours ago, akiva said:

Theres a Golden Dawn method called "The Divination of the Rose Cross", ...

OMG! This reminds me of why the Celtic Cross gained traction back in the day. It was easy compared to this stuff.

 

The 18th and 18th century occultists got WAY too crazy, IMO. Meanwhile, the regular folks read with Tarocchi Bolognese maybe using Game of the Hand or TdM using Tirage en Croix.  Nice normal spreads with 5-6 or 10 cards at most. Supposedly the Romany witches read with 21 cards [not necesssarily Tarots] in 3 rows of 7.

 

Back to @Mi-Shell comments, it raised the question for me:  WHY so many "cross" spreads at that time?

 

The cross *does* organically invoke the intersection of elements [past / present / future].

But this Divination of the Rose Cross invokes an occult Christian reference. Hmmm.

 

According to wikipedia, some ppl say the Rose Cross predates Christianity with Cross as a symbol for the human body and Rose as a symbol for an opening heart. But this has little to do with reading Tarots. Again, Hmmm.

Edited June 13, 2024 by Misterei

[akiva]

1 hour ago, Misterei said:

The 18th and 18th century occultists got WAY too crazy, IMO. Meanwhile, the regular folks read with Tarocchi Bolognese maybe using Game of the Hand or TdM using Tirage en Croix.  Nice normal spreads with 5-6 or 10 cards at most. Supposedly the Romany witches read with 21 cards [not necesssarily Tarots] in 3 rows of 7.

Most 18th century cartomancy is super long winded, the GD took it to the extremes though! 🤣

 

Tarocchi Bolognese readers also used a method called the Game of Life (or something like that) which used 7 rows of 5 cards, then multiple pyramids using all 35 cards afterwards. I think they did 3 readings, one for past, present and future. 

 

My theory about the Romany spread is it was adapted from the 7 pile method that was quite popular in the 18th and 19th century. As often the columns in the 21 card spread represent things like home, friends, work, etc. Which is exactly the same as the old pile methods, but they laid it out as a 21 card tableau instead of individual heaps. 

 

1 hour ago, Misterei said:

Back to @Mi-Shell comments, it raised the question for me:  WHY so many "cross" spreads at that time?

 

The cross *does* organically invoke the intersection of elements [past / present / future].

But this Divination of the Rose Cross invokes an occult Christian reference. Hmmm.

This is an interesting thought. There are loads of cross spreads, and you're right there's an intersection energy there. You have the 4 directions, thoughts, actions, what's passed and what's to come, so much variation to how they can be read. 

 

I do think that the main reason they were popular is because of old patience games that used to be played back then. There are a ton of them that are crossed based. Everyone would of known them. They also had cool names like "The Rising Sun" 😁

 

 

1 hour ago, Misterei said:

According to wikipedia, some ppl say the Rose Cross predates Christianity with Cross as a symbol for the human body and Rose as a symbol for an opening heart. But this has little to do with reading Tarots. Again, Hmmm.

I'm not sure about the timeline but there's also the Ankh, Tau, Staurogram (~30BC) and Chi Rho (~300AD Emperor Constantine). The cross shape has this history of being supernatural in nature, no matter the belief system. A lot of folk based magick practices were done at cross roads, especially when working with the dead. There's a common thread here as to why it makes a shape perfect for divination too. 

[gregory]

In this context don't forget about the Rosicrucians (=Red Cross Guys, like !) The Rose Cross was a symbol of theirs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_Cross

 

ANYWAY - Waite referred to the Celtic Cross. I believe that is the actual first reference in Tarot literature. He said it had been in use for a long time, and that it "serves all purposes" - I cannot agree with him there..

 

But here's a whole page about the thing:

https://teachmetarot.com/celtic-cross-spread/

[akiva]

10 minutes ago, gregory said:

ANYWAY - Waite referred to the Celtic Cross. I believe that is the actual first reference in Tarot literature. He said it had been in use for a long time, and that it "serves all purposes" - I cannot agree with him there..

 

But here's a whole page about the thing:

https://teachmetarot.com/celtic-cross-spread/

An interesting read! Chances are he said it's been used for a long time to garner attention. That page states it had been used privately before being published, but to call it a long time? Seems a bit of a stretch!

 

One thing I never realised was the meanings Waite gives for cards 1-6 are very much in line with 18th/19th century positional meanings for other star/cross spreads. Cards 7-10 are very similar to the heaps/piles you'd make when you 'close' an old style horseshoe spread. Though this was all common practice in Waites era, so makes sense to see it.

 

It seems he cut corners and combined a two step reading into one spread 🤔

[gregory]

I'll go have a look in a few of my go-to books...

[Misterei]

22 hours ago, akiva said:

Most 18th century cartomancy is super long winded, the GD took it to the extremes though! 🤣

 

Tarocchi Bolognese readers also used a method called the Game of Life (or something like that) which used 7 rows of 5 cards, then multiple pyramids using all 35 cards afterwards. I think they did 3 readings, one for past, present and future. 

UGH! I vaguely remember reading about 35 card spreads that used basically the whole Bolognese deck [waste not want not?]. I must have blocked the memory as traumatic 🤣. I was SO happy to see the Game of the Hand had only 6 cards ...

22 hours ago, akiva said:

My theory about the Romany spread is it was adapted from the 7 pile method that was quite popular in the 18th and 19th century. As often the columns in the 21 card spread represent things like home, friends, work, etc. Which is exactly the same as the old pile methods, but they laid it out as a 21 card tableau instead of individual heaps. 

makes sense.

22 hours ago, akiva said:

I do think that the main reason they were popular is because of old patience games that used to be played back then. There are a ton of them that are crossed based. Everyone would of known them. They also had cool names like "The Rising Sun" 😁

Do tell. I've never heard of Patience games. I'm trying to Google it but the internet here barely works.

[fire cat pickles]

26 minutes ago, Misterei said:

Do tell. I've never heard of Patience games. I'm trying to Google it but the internet here barely works.

I believe they've come down to us in the form of Solitaire games today.

Edited June 14, 2024 by fire cat pickles

[akiva]

2 hours ago, Misterei said:

UGH! I vaguely remember reading about 35 card spreads that used basically the whole Bolognese deck [waste not want not?]. I must have blocked the memory as traumatic 🤣. I was SO happy to see the Game of the Hand had only 6 cards ...

Tables must of shrunk in modern times, it's easy to get away doing GTs with lenormand, but tarot cards? 🤣

 

2 hours ago, Misterei said:

Do tell. I've never heard of Patience games. I'm trying to Google it but the internet here barely works.

Patience is basically solitaire afaik. Here are a few star/cross based ones from "Illustrated Games of Patience by Lady Adelaide Cadogan" published in 1886:

 

Le Moulin:

 

Empress of India:

 

Les Hemispheres:

 

I've seen Le Moulin in basically every old cartomancy book, and spreads similar to Les Hemispheres (circle spreads were used for horoscope type readings). I also saw a patience game that looked exactly like the Game of Life too, and a Russian spread that uses small fans of cards was also in there as a patience game.

 

Patience was/is used as a form of yes/no divination too. Your wish will come true if you complete the game.

[Misterei]

4 hours ago, akiva said:

Tables must of shrunk in modern times, it's easy to get away doing GTs with lenormand, but tarot cards? 🤣

Ha! I had to buy a mini lenormand for GTs

4 hours ago, akiva said:

Patience was/is used as a form of yes/no divination too. Your wish will come true if you complete the game.

That is *SO* cool!

[Morwenna]

Wow.

 

Well, as for me, I did start long ago with the CC, and the 3-card spread; but after a while I settled pretty much on the astrological houses spread, which is automatically 13 cards. A month-by-month of the coming year would be the same way. I don't know if you'd call that small, but it's at least specific. I'm not averse to pulling clarifiers if the situation seems to warrant it. 

 

I did come across in more recent years a 4- or 5-card elemental spread in a cross formation; sometimes I modify it with 4 more cards in between the first 4. It depends.

I am rather fascinated by large spreads, though. I have tried out a few I found in books. I've also tried out several small-to-medium-sized spreads I found here or on AT; a few I put into my notebook. And I did invent a 25-card spread! Sometimes it's rather fun. 

[xTheHermitx]

I will preface by saying that I never charge for readings. I don't do readings as a profession (I don't feel like I will ever be that good...) I do readings for friends/people as a form of communication and help....

 

I started doing 3 and 5 card spreads for years. Then started to use the Celtic Cross for years. In the end, I felt like I got the best reads from 5 card spreads. As many have mentioned, I felt like the more cards there were, the more "diluted" the read got... I felt like I would get distracted. I even felt like cards would become redundant in some reads...

 

I also dabbled with some of the larger spreads used by the GD, and some of the layouts in the Bohemian Tarot book by Papus. For the most part, I was laying out the cards in these spreads to learn about the cards and systems themselves. 

 

if I read for others, it is definitely 3 or 5, depending on the time we have. I will personally set a time limit of roughly two hours at the most for a single reading. I feel like at the end of that chunk, I am in need of a "palate cleanser".  If the topic we are covering needs more detail, we will do reads in "stages". 

 

 

 

 

[Chariot]

I started out using the Celtic Cross for most readings.  I still use it when I want a detailed overview of something, but I now tend to use fewer cards most of the time.  I never do a single card reading, but on occasion use two.  (One for the central meaning and the second card to modify or clarify the meaning.)  However, my usual number is 5, with each card having a specific purpose.  I always include an 'advice' card in this 5-card layout.

Of course occasionally I try out a layout suggested in either a book or here on the forum.  But 5 cards is my usual number.

I think what's most important is to frame the question carefully beforehand.  Not just something vague, but as specifically as you can.  What EXACTLY do you want to know?  Figure that out, and I think the readings become easier to manage.  Occasionally something will be pointed out in a reading that you didn't expect or don't know about yet, so do be open to readings that 'don't make sense' on first seeing them.  But in general, stick to your question and give the cards the 'room' they need to answer the points you've raised.

I have occasionally tried a 'big' card reading with more than 10 cards, but these have never really worked for me.  I get gibberish or very inaccurate information.  I don't do 'yearly' month-by-month readings for that reason.  If I'm really interested in how a year will go, I use the Celtic Cross, which will not be specific month-by-month, but should reveal the general direction things will go.

[Nemia]

For me, four-card spreads are the best fit. More generally, anything between three and seven, rarely more than that. 

 

I usually design my own spreads for each situation and have some four-card spreads that always served me well: Blind Spot, Four Elements, SWOT and Desire Spread. 

 

For more complex situations, something like a seven-card horseshoe spread is helpful, and for a life analysis, I use the Ikigai diagram. 

 

 

 

 

[katrinka]

On 6/10/2024 at 3:59 AM, gregory said:

I like single cards. But basically - the fewest I can get an answer from. It concentrates things.

I usually use a Line of Three spread with no named positions for whatever I'm reading with: Tarot, Lenormand, Sibilla, etc. It really does concentrate things, and you don't get the ambiguity you sometimes get with larger spreads. BAM, BAM, BAM: answered.

I do prefer crosses and tableaus sometimes. And this 13 card spread I got from MQS's blog is one I've been enjoying lately:

[geoxena]

Hi @katrinka, as someone who generally just uses 3-card spreads, I am intrigued by the 13-card spread in your image.  Is there a particular way you read it, ie., each row in order, front to back, back to front, the whole gestalt, etc.?  I am not familiar with the blog you mentioned - otherwise, I'd look it up there.

 

.

Edited March 23 by geoxena

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, geoxena said:

Hi @katrinka, as someone who generally just uses 3-card spreads, I am intrigued by the 13-card spread in your image.  Is there a particular way you read it, ie., each row in order, front to back, back to front, the whole gestalt, etc.?  I am not familiar with the blog you mentioned - otherwise, I'd look it up there.

It's explained here.

"The cards may be read in rows or in columns, and which direction is the primary one depends on which tradition you come from. Personally I tend to see rows as the primary reading direction, but I will look at columns if there is clear information contained in them. I have found that the columns tend to describe the situation rather than to predict it. But don’t force yourself to read in every direction possible: simply read the information where it is found, and leave the rest."

And coincidentally, today's post has an example reading with playing cards.