Is tarot “deeper” than playing card cartomancy?

[tarotnottaken]

Does tarot inherently carry the capacity to be “deeper” than playing card cartomancy? 
 

I am just getting my feet wet in cartomancy in general, both tarot and with playing cards. I’m curious if, in your experiences, tarot has the capacity of giving deeper, more complex readings than playing card decks because of the major arcana and added court card. People often speak with fondness of the “folky” and “down to earth” nature of reading playing cards compared to using tarot cards, but I’m wondering if it isn’t just a feel, but also a literal limitation of playing cards that they don’t have the major arcana. 
 

I don’t have enough experience to answer, but I am curious from those who have been in this for a while and utilize both. 

[Scandinavianhermit]

If divination is the only activity you plan to do with your tarot deck and your playing-card deck, there isn't much of a difference. The difference is rather along the spectrum of methods reading tarot and along the spectrum of methods reading playing-cards. Some methods for each are "deeper" than some of the other, but which method to chose is very much a matter of personal temperament and preferences. If your experience in any way resemble my own, you will probably find that some methods you try will attract you, and that other methods will leave you indifferent. Perhaps it's also a matter of phases of life, at least for some. 

 

Divination isn't the only possible activity with a tarot deck. You can use the trumps and The Fool for a handful of non-divinatory contemplative practices, if you wish, preferably in tandem with a daily protection ritual. Those contemplative practices aren't necessary for practicing cartomancy with tarot. 

[tarotnottaken]

So it’s more a question of method than the tool being used. 

[Scandinavianhermit]

3 minutes ago, tarotnottaken said:

So it’s more a question of method than the tool being used. 

I would say so, yes, but I also expect someone else to share an opposite or at least complementary point of view in this thread sooner of later. I can only share my own experience. The crucial detail in your original question is the word "inherent". Tarot used with a method focusing on such things as "dark strangers" and "unhappy journeys"* will be more shallow than a playing-card method using 52 week symbolism, elemental symbolism or focusing on self-improvement, for instance. There are deeper and more shallow methods for both decks. 

 

* If I remember correctly, the tarot method from Bologna in the 1750s was of this nature, but I don't have that list in front of me. 

 

[Raggydoll]

4 hours ago, Scandinavianhermit said:

* If I remember correctly, the tarot method from Bologna in the 1750s was of this nature, but I don't have that list in front of me. 

 

 

Tarocchino of Bologna		Meaning of 1750 found by Pratesi
-	The bagatto	Married man
-	Moro (with 3 spears)
-	Moro (with earrings and spear)
-	Moro (with earrings and spear)
-	Moro (with turban and spear)
5	The love	Love
6	The cart	Voyage
7	Temperance	Time
8	Justice _
9	The force	Violence
10	The Wheel of Fortune
11	The Hermit	Old
12	The Traitor (= The Hanged Man)	Betrayal
13	Thirteen (= Death)	Death
14	The devil	Anger
15	Tower
16	The star	Gift
-	The moon	Night
-	The sun	Day
-	The Angel (= The Judgment)	Marriage and Settlement
-	The crazy	Madness
-	The world	Long journey
	King of Wands	an unmarried gentleman
	Queen of Wands	Whore
	Horse of Wands	Door hammer
	Page of Wands	Thoughts of the woman
	10 of Wands
	9 of Wands
	8 of Wands
	7 of Wands
	6 of Wands
	Ace of Wands	Baronades ( sexual adventures )
	King of Cups	an old
	Queen of Cups	Married woman
	Horse of Cups	Accommodation
	Page of Cups	the Woman
	10 of Cups	Tiles ( roof ) of the house
	9 of Cups
	8 of Cups
	7 of Cups
	6 of Cups
	Ace of Cups	the House
	King of Swords	Bad language
	Queen of Swords
	Knight of Swords
	Page of Swords
	10 of Swords	Tears
	9 of Swords
	8 of Swords
	7 of Swords
	6 of Swords
	Ace of Spades	Letter
	King of Pentacles	the man
	Queen of Pentacles	Truth
	Horse of Pentacles	Thought of man
	Jack of Coins	Miss
	10 of Pentacles	Money
	9 of Pentacles
	8 of Pentacles
	7 of Pentacles
	6 of Pentacles
	Ace of Pentacles	the table
	Joker

[Raggydoll]

Some people will be more inclined to project deep and complex meanings onto cards with elaborate imagery, so in that sense, tarot can appear as more inherently spiritual than a playing card. But as @Scandinavianhermit pointed out, this very much depends on the chosen approach of the reader. I am not at all convinced that tarot was viewed as a deeply spiritual tool by those earliest tarot readers. Those old lists of keywords show us that sometimes, a beautiful and elaborately gilded Sun card will simply have meant Day, while a mysterious looking Moon card just meant Night. 
 

Let’s compare this with a divinatory tool that is way less visually stimulating - the runes. If you look at Icelandic manuscripts from the same time period as the Bologna document that I cited above, you’ll see that the runes had a vast array of associated themes and keywords. Some were just as straightforward as the ones used for Bolognese tarot, but quite a few of them were mythological, mystical and deeply spiritual in nature. That is not something you might have guessed by just looking at the rather straightforward design of those runes. 
 

So what I am saying is that the word ’inherently’ is so very dependent on the person and the lens through which they view the thing. 
 

I do not believe thar the western occultists managed to uncover or resurrect a historical truth in their revised tarot decks. But that doesn’t meant that what they created isn’t a spiritual valid tool. Nor does it mean that their deeply spiritual creations cannot be used for more profane and ’shallow’ topics too. It all comes down to the reader and the method! 

[tarotnottaken]

16 hours ago, Raggydoll said:

Some people will be more inclined to project deep and complex meanings onto cards with elaborate imagery, so in that sense, tarot can appear as more inherently spiritual than a playing card. But as @Scandinavianhermit pointed out, this very much depends on the chosen approach of the reader. I am not at all convinced that tarot was viewed as a deeply spiritual tool by those earliest tarot readers. Those old lists of keywords show us that sometimes, a beautiful and elaborately gilded Sun card will simply have meant Day, while a mysterious looking Moon card just meant Night. 
 

Let’s compare this with a divinatory tool that is way less visually stimulating - the runes. If you look at Icelandic manuscripts from the same time period as the Bologna document that I cited above, you’ll see that the runes had a vast array of associated themes and keywords. Some were just as straightforward as the ones used for Bolognese tarot, but quite a few of them were mythological, mystical and deeply spiritual in nature. That is not something you might have guessed by just looking at the rather straightforward design of those runes. 
 

So what I am saying is that the word ’inherently’ is so very dependent on the person and the lens through which they view the thing. 
 

I do not believe thar the western occultists managed to uncover or resurrect a historical truth in their revised tarot decks. But that doesn’t meant that what they created isn’t a spiritual valid tool. Nor does it mean that their deeply spiritual creations cannot be used for more profane and ’shallow’ topics too. It all comes down to the reader and the method! 

Thank you for your insights. One could take a look at the first tarot deck created for divination — Etteilla's — and see a hodgepodge of a ludicrous number of keywords, many of which are surface-level. I also assume that the earliest readers tended to do parlor fortune telling, not the kind of philosophical waxing we see more of today in tarot spaces. See for example the Mainzer Losbuch, which paints a pretty clear picture of what kind of fortunes people were telling and how they told them: x, y, or z will happen or not happen, end of story.

 

If we think of playing cards like runes that anchor us in certain concepts and give us lots of leeway to riff on them relative to what position the cards are in, I think there's an enormous amount of room for depth; far more so than many may give playing cards, from what I can tell. People seem to scoff at them compared to tarot, but maybe I'm hanging out in the wrong spaces and I should post here more.

 

It does indeed seem like it all comes down to the reader and the method.

[RunningWild]

On 12/9/2024 at 5:45 PM, tarotnottaken said:

Does tarot inherently carry the capacity to be “deeper” than playing card cartomancy? 
 

I am just getting my feet wet in cartomancy in general, both tarot and with playing cards. I’m curious if, in your experiences, tarot has the capacity of giving deeper, more complex readings than playing card decks because of the major arcana and added court card. People often speak with fondness of the “folky” and “down to earth” nature of reading playing cards compared to using tarot cards, but I’m wondering if it isn’t just a feel, but also a literal limitation of playing cards that they don’t have the major arcana. 
 

I don’t have enough experience to answer, but I am curious from those who have been in this for a while and utilize both. 

 

I think usage depends on the reader’s intentions.  You can definitely do spiritual/ancestor/psychological readings with a deck of playing cards as easily as with a Tarot deck.  All the correspondences on a tarot deck are superimposed.  

 

I find that playing card cartomancy has a couple of advantages over tarot.  The first being “hiding in plain sight”.  Chances are no one will ever arch an eyebrow over that deck of playing cards sitting on your table.  The second is combined portability, availability, and cost.  A deck of playing cards can fit into a pocket, can be purchased in a wide variety of places, and won’t break the bank when you buy them.  

 

Since you’re just getting your feet wet, as you say, just pick one system and learn it well.  You can decide later whether you want to move on to something else once you’ve learned the one.  Cartomancy has been around a long long time so it’s not likely to disappear.  There’s no rush.

 

[Misterei]

 

On 12/9/2024 at 3:45 PM, tarotnottaken said:

Does tarot inherently carry the capacity to be “deeper” than playing card cartomancy?

Personally, I say YES.

The first Tarocchi triunfi [trumps] were designed with religious and philosophical imagery. Even tho Tarocchi was just a game, it was meant to teach moral virtues or at least give rich people a vehicle for virtue signaling at a time when the Church outlawed playing cards.

Playing cards have no history of moral or philosophical content embedded in their images.

On 12/9/2024 at 10:50 PM, Raggydoll said:

Some people will be more inclined to project deep and complex meanings onto cards with elaborate imagery, so in that sense, tarot can appear as more inherently spiritual than a playing card. But as @Scandinavianhermit pointed out, this very much depends on the chosen approach of the reader. I am not at all convinced that tarot was viewed as a deeply spiritual tool by those earliest tarot readers.

Yes, I agree that the first Tarocchi readers [circa 1500s] were simply telling fortunes with the cards. Just as people had been doing with regular playing cards--possibly from the 1200s. This was the norm for 200-300 years until Occultists like Eteilla set their sights on Tarot.

 

But I *do* feel there is a certain something in the Trumps [which contained spiritual imagery by design] that makes them more suited to deeper or more spiritual readings. This feeling arose as i studied Lenormand. Yes, LN has cards which can reference the spiritual life--BUT--it has nowhere near the number of spiritual images or spiritually themed cards as Tarot. So while playing cards or Lenormands may touch upon spiritual topics, they lack the 22 Trumps which hold spiritual imagery by design. To me, Tarot's trumps give it an advantage when reading deeper or spiritual themes.

Edited December 12, 2024 by Misterei

[tarotnottaken]

On 12/11/2024 at 7:00 PM, Misterei said:

 

Personally, I say YES.

The first Tarocchi triunfi [trumps] were designed with religious and philosophical imagery. Even tho Tarocchi was just a game, it was meant to teach moral virtues or at least give rich people a vehicle for virtue signaling at a time when the Church outlawed playing cards.

Playing cards have no history of moral or philosophical content embedded in their images.

Yes, I agree that the first Tarocchi readers [circa 1500s] were simply telling fortunes with the cards. Just as people had been doing with regular playing cards--possibly from the 1200s. This was the norm for 200-300 years until Occultists like Eteilla set their sights on Tarot.

 

But I *do* feel there is a certain something in the Trumps [which contained spiritual imagery by design] that makes them more suited to deeper or more spiritual readings. This feeling arose as i studied Lenormand. Yes, LN has cards which can reference the spiritual life--BUT--it has nowhere near the number of spiritual images or spiritually themed cards as Tarot. So while playing cards or Lenormands may touch upon spiritual topics, they lack the 22 Trumps which hold spiritual imagery by design. To me, Tarot's trumps give it an advantage when reading deeper or spiritual themes.

 

I hear you. 🙂 I don't necessarily disagree, particularly when it comes to the trumps; but I do have to wonder if it isn't possible for playing cards to synthesize into meanings by playing off of one another in ways that are at least comparable to tarot, even without the trumps. Granted, you're 100%right that the trumps add a whole new dimension when you begin to study their backgrounds and take a deep dive into their various layers that simply aren't there when it comes to your standard playing cards.  

 

That isn't to say that playing cards cannot be as useful or rich for the average practitioner, but if you're looking for religious or moralistic underpinnings, tarot take the cake.

 

Just rambling! I'm still early and exploring so much. it's a lot to take in.