Yves Releases a Marseille Deck Said To Have Mlle Lenormands Handwriting On It

[katrinka]

18 hours ago, gregory said:

 

94 ? Makes no sense. But if 54 - why underline it to suggest the old this is a 9 not a 6 thing.... So is it a 5, then ? - as I am now assuming for purposes of this examination... back later with a full list !

Whoever marked this deck wrote some pretty basic keywords on it. It was a learning deck. 

So why assume the numbers relate to the other cards at all? They could be page numbers in a book with more detailed information. Or maybe something else we haven't thought of yet.

[Decan]

Interesting! Well I don't know myself if the deck really belonged to Mlle Lenormand of course but to someone a bit sloppy with her cards (when we look how the words are striped on the cards, it's no neat, but it can just be a learning deck indeed and possibly for the Etteilla if the owner had just a copy of the Marseille).

I nevertheless suspect that the owner was a woman (with a catholic background) because of the Devil card. Look at that one it's funny, the owner has crossed off the devil's genitals, I don't think a man would have done that, lol.

 

Otherwise, I can translate the major cards with the 4 Aces for the second deck annotated if you want, hoping that all the words are decipherable, likely the majority of them I guess; but I feel too lazy for the whole deck at this point, lol.

Edited August 2, 2019 by Decan

[Raggydoll]

I created a new thread for the translation and discussion project of these two decks:

 

 

If anyone (like perhaps you @gregory, with your list of numbers) want to copy any of your interpretations or documentations/comments over there then please do!

 

[Marigold]

Raggydoll: Please don't take back your Tigger hug, but I don't have time today to do any deciphering. Unexpected stuff has cropped up. And then I'll be more or less offline for about 10 days. But if one my return, there is still some deciphering to do, I'll be happy to contribute whatever I can.

 

[devin]

2 hours ago, katrinka said:

Whoever marked this deck wrote some pretty basic keywords on it. It was a learning deck. 

This is a very, very, almost definitive, good point.

[Decan]

9 minutes ago, Marigold said:

Raggydoll: Please don't take back your Tigger hug, but I don't have time today to do any deciphering. Unexpected stuff has cropped up. And then I'll be more or less offline for about 10 days. But if one my return, there is still some deciphering to do, I'll be happy to contribute whatever I can.

 

I hope it isn't because I offered to translate the second deck Marigold, it would be too bad.

I understood you would like to translate the first deck handwriting by Mlle Lenormand, the reason I offered some help for the second. Do I understand properly?

Edited August 2, 2019 by Decan

[Raggydoll]

16 minutes ago, Marigold said:

Raggydoll: Please don't take back your Tigger hug, but I don't have time today to do any deciphering. Unexpected stuff has cropped up. And then I'll be more or less offline for about 10 days. But if one my return, there is still some deciphering to do, I'll be happy to contribute whatever I can.

 

No worries, I won’t 😀 Have a good time away! 

[Raggydoll]

11 minutes ago, Decan said:

I hope it isn't because I offered to translate the second deck Marigold, it would be too bad.

I understood you would like to translate the first deck handwriting by Mlle Lenormand, the reason I offered some help for the second. Do I understand properly?

I don’t think that’s the case. Real life happened, I believe 🙂 So you and anyone else who can and wants to help out - please do. The more the merrier, and less work for each person too ❤️

[gregory]

Sure it was a learning deck. But the numbers only (seem to) go up to 78. I still think whoever wrote them intended them to "align" the cards for some reason.

[Marigold]

36 minutes ago, Decan said:

I hope it isn't because I offered to translate the second deck Marigold, it would be too bad.

I understood you would like to translate the first deck handwriting by Mlle Lenormand, the reason I offered some help for the second. Do I understand properly?

Goodness no ! What an idea !!! The more we are for translating the merrier ! I just have an unexpected busy day and then I've got my granddaughter coming to stay for ten days. No time for the internet. I'll be too busy climbing trees and swimming and playing school and mama/papa with her 15 (!!!!) dolls !! When I get back to "normal" life, I'll see if there's still any translating to do. There's time. The cards won't go away ! I always say we have eternity ahead of us... 

[Raggydoll]

22 minutes ago, Marigold said:

and then I've got my granddaughter coming to stay for ten days. No time for the internet. I'll be too busy climbing trees and swimming and playing school and mama/papa with her 15 (!!!!) dolls !! 

How precious! Enjoy your time together ❤️

[Raggydoll]

55 minutes ago, gregory said:

Sure it was a learning deck. But the numbers only (seem to) go up to 78. I still think whoever wrote them intended them to "align" the cards for some reason.

It’s possible that she wanted to work on a theory or a vision she had about the bigger structure of the deck. Or a system for predicting dates/specific numbers -like “it will come to pass in about 67 days from now” 😁). Maybe we should list the majors in the order they now are in? To see if something becomes clearer. 

[gregory]

OK one moment.....

 

6 Lovers	2
5 Pope	6
3 Empress	8
8 Justice	9
1 magician	10
2 HP	12
0 Fool	15
17 Star	16
13 Death	17
7 Chariot	18
11 Strength	26
21 World	28
9 Hermit	30
4 Emperor	33
12 Hanged Man	54
18 Moon	56
19 Sun	62
10 Wheel	65
16 Tower	67
20 Judgement	69
14 Temperance	70
15 Devil	72

 

Make of that what you will !

[Raggydoll]

12 minutes ago, gregory said:

OK one moment.....

 

6 Lovers	2
5 Pope	6
3 Empress	8
8 Justice	9
1 magician	10
2 HP	12
0 Fool	15
17 Star	16
13 Death	17
7 Chariot	18
11 Strength	26
21 World	28
9 Hermit	30
4 Emperor	33
12 Hanged Man	54
18 Moon	56
19 Sun	62
10 Wheel	65
16 Tower	67
20 Judgement	69
14 Temperance	70
15 Devil	72

 

Make of that what you will !

It’s obviously a classic storyline (with a really sad/dark ending)!: A couple is getting married, they are having a baby, then getting divorced due to a flirtatious juggler. The woman stops speaking to her husband (he must have been the one who had the affair with the juggler), and now he feels like an outcast and a fool because divorces aren’t really allowed. The woman finds new hope and is finally able to let the failed marriage go - for good. Her ex-husband takes off in a new direction while she stays put and conquer herself. It’s a time of bliss, when suddenly  —-  (not to be continued, by me anyway, need to grab a lunch and do something more productive 😁)

[gregory]

.................... and finally burn in hell 

[Raggydoll]

5 minutes ago, gregory said:

.................... and finally burn in hell 

[Eric13]

I am finding the development and flow concerning this deck and the questions around are fascinating as far as the discussion is concerned her. Thank you.

[Flaxen]

72 makes me think of ‘72 names of God’. Eliphas Levi did something with that and tarot although I don’t think he attributed them to the Trumps? Perhaps someone more knowledgable can share Levi’s approach.

 

The keywords do give it a feel of a learning deck and seem more focussed on practical matters than the esoteric though. 

[_R_]

23 hours ago, KevinM said:

Hello, _R_

 

I was not aware, thank you.

 

I am intrigued; the four of coins is not included and though the said card usually bears initials, I fear that your hints are lost on me: I do not recognise the significance of the said card being absent, whether when considered in relation to the rest of the pack or otherwise.

 

I do hope that you will enlighten me.

 

Regards

Kevin

Hello Kevin:

 

What is the deck in question? Consider its relationship to Marteau's own deck. 

- It is a Grimaud reprint of the Arnoult (or Arnoux)-Amphoux deck, Marteau later used this as the model for his deck - but not the colour scheme.

 

Then, consider the differences between the card which is missing, and Marteau's version. 

- Along with The Chariot, the 2 of Coins and the 2 of Cups, it is one of the cards which were used to place a name, initials, or heraldic marker.  Marteau modified this in his deck so it no longer bears a royal fleur-de-lys, but a rather neutral tulip.

 

It is quite possible that this was the very deck from which he worked to create his own, and that one of the cards which was most noticeably modified went astray somehow.

[gregory]

1 hour ago, Flaxen said:

72 makes me think of ‘72 names of God’. Eliphas Levi did something with that and tarot although I don’t think he attributed them to the Trumps? Perhaps someone more knowledgable can share Levi’s approach.

 

The keywords do give it a feel of a learning deck and seem more focussed on practical matters than the esoteric though. 

 

But there are 78...

[katrinka]

5 hours ago, gregory said:

Sure it was a learning deck. But the numbers only (seem to) go up to 78. I still think whoever wrote them intended them to "align" the cards for some reason.

It's also possible that they were trying to work their way through a tableau using the entire deck, and needed the table for something else. So they numbered the cards as they fell (making a couple of mistakes) in case someone decided to use them before they could get back to the reading. Occam's could well be relevant here, as it often is.

I do agree that those figures that look like 9's are actually 5's, though.

[Guest]

On 8/2/2019 at 3:57 PM, _R_ said:

Hello Kevin:

 

What is the deck in question? Consider its relationship to Marteau's own deck. 

- It is a Grimaud reprint of the Arnoult (or Arnoux)-Amphoux deck, Marteau later used this as the model for his deck - but not the colour scheme.

 

Then, consider the differences between the card which is missing, and Marteau's version. 

- Along with The Chariot, the 2 of Coins and the 2 of Cups, it is one of the cards which were used to place a name, initials, or heraldic marker.  Marteau modified this in his deck so it no longer bears a royal fleur-de-lys, but a rather neutral tulip.

 

It is quite possible that this was the very deck from which he worked to create his own, and that one of the cards which was most noticeably modified went astray somehow.

 

I might never have reached the same conclusion; thank you for providing such an informative answer 🙂

 

Regards

KevinM