...life can be translucent

Menu

Any interest in Tarot?

Brendon

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2014
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
i have got a question like i have seen an ample of pictures in every tarrot card, what does that indicate, does it have any specification and why those pictures are so ancient and mythological :bows:
 

bradford

Senior member
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,600
Reaction score
28
i have got a question like i have seen an ample of pictures in every tarrot card, what does that indicate, does it have any specification and why those pictures are so ancient and mythological :bows:
The pictures aren't ancient, at least be Yijing standards. The cards we know began in the mid 1400's and were all in place by the mid 1600's, but they continue to evolve, with an unending parade of competing and alternate versions. The best known dates from 1909, which also has the first lasting set of vignettes for the 40 pips. Most of the early histories, as of Egyptian origins, are delusional. It was also not based on Kabbalah, although later it absorbed a number of Kabbalistic ideas by way of Western European versions. Kabbalah is just a couple of centuries older, even though this, too, has a delusional 'history' that goes way back.
 

Brendon

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2014
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
unfortunately no body gave any appropriate information about the question
 

weiwuwei

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2012
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
I bought a Rider-Waite deck and used Tarot cards every month (plus a few for specific situations) for about a year, then gave up. It was way too difficult for me to understand. Not so for the I Ching, I know it's less "famous" but I can connect to it (both the Wen/Zhou written material and the Shuo Kua hexagram imagery) a lot better. Maybe it's because I'm one of those people who prefer audio and written material over television and video games.
 
D

deflatormouse

Guest
Hi Bradford,
I am wondering if you have read Gertrude Moakley's book on the Visconti decks, I noticed it is missing from your bibliography. My background is in fine art and art history, and medieval art a point of interest; we may not know who the parents are, but we have the egg; though these decks may have been an evolution of an earlier form or cosmology, it seems to me that scholarship of the tarot has suffered from an absence of attention from art historians who are expert in the (Christian) iconography of that period. Astoundingly, Moakley remains the only person who has bothered to approach it from this perspective to the best of my knowledge.
I read your introduction describing the symbolism and its history as progressive rather than fixed, an evolution that is ongoing- while this is undeniably true, diviners would benefit from the kind of exhaustive iconographic analysis of the earliest decks that art historians have given the Unicorn Tapestries or the Magius Beatus. Other than Moakley 50 years ago, I don't think anyone has even attempted this; probably because the decks are not stylistically or formally noteworthy or exceptional to an art historian.
I only have a cursory interest in the tarot myself, and have't divined with it much, though I own a very nice reproduction of the Sforza deck I much prefer the Zhouyi.
 

bradford

Senior member
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 30, 2006
Messages
2,600
Reaction score
28
I saw Moakley's work discussed a bit in some of the histories i read, but the book was too pricey for my budget.
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top