In the essay entitled "The Major Arcana"
I emphasize that "something happened" to the Tarot in the late 1600s,
when a new trend emerged in the images of the Major Arcana. I point
to the Marseilles family of decks and the Etteilla Tarots to illustrate
my point. The images shown by Antoine Court de Gebelin in his book
Le Monde Primitif further validates this idea. The remainder of this
essay is about exploring "what happened."

Let's review the situation of Tarot in the first half of the 1600s.
Since the early 1400s, both handmade and woodblock Tarots showed a
remarkable constancy of internal structure even though some packs
were either edited or expanded to meet the needs of the various games
for which they were created.
Tarot appeared in 72-card form in Italy around 1450, although this
model may represents "splice" between preexisting symbol sets: the
twenty-two Hebrew alphabet-keyed set called the Major Arcana, and
the Turkish Mamluk cards of unknown provenance, a 15th century version
of which can be seen in Volume 2 of Stuart Kaplan's Encyclopedia of
Tarot (see essay on the Minor Arcana).
Kaplan also explains that the numerical order the Arcana appear in
now is carried over from the French pack by Catelin Geofroy, published
in 1557 (Vol. 1, p. 65). Some earlier fragmentary Tarots show Roman
numerals on some of their Major Arcana, but not all of them, and not
in the order we are now familiar with. Those very old woodblock decks
tend instead to follow the list enumerated in a sermon written by
an Italian friar in the late 15th century (see illustration opposite
page 1 in Volume 1 of Kaplan's Encyclopedia of Tarot). There is also
another order derived from the Charles VI pack that keeps Temperence,
Fortitude and Justice together in a group. A very small minority of
Tarots follow this order, including Etteilla's Tarots. Many of the
earliest decks did not show either Roman or Arabic numerals, titles
or astrology sigils. Some of the images do, however, utilize traditional
scenes and characters from the signs of the zodiac, the personae of
the planets and other traditional mythic themes familiar to the culture
of the times.
A look at these oldest packs reveals images from the persecuted Cathar
movement as well as Hebrew, Greek and Gypsy occult symbolism. The
vehemence with which the Church attacked the cards and their makers
only reinforces the evidence that Tarot was the repository of heretical
wisdom preserved in imagery. Close study of the excellent book called
Tarot Symbolism by Robert O'Neil exposes the falsity of the belief
that there were no esoteric associations with Tarot imagery before
Eliphas Levi.
The Marseilles family of Tarots began to appear in the late 1400s
or early 1500s, slowly evolving and becoming more distinct as versions
were reproduced and a their popularity spread. The deck we are featuring
from this family is based on the classical Italian-Piedmontese tarot
of Giusep Ottone, first published in1736. Dr. Lewis Keizer considers
this family of decks to be the best reproduction of the earliest Arcana
to have survived the Inquisition (see "The
Esoteric Origins of Tarot: More than a Wicked Pack of Cards").
O'Neil suggests that the Marseilles Tarots were actually the original
"folk" pattern, but since most copies were woodblock-print "catchpenny"
decks, not expensive works of art like the handmade decks of the Milanese
ducal families, they more easily became worn and were dis-carded and
replaced. (I agree to the extent that I too think the earliest extant
Tarots are probably not true to the sources that originally inspired
Tarot.) This helps explain the uniqueness of the Visconti Sforza and
related Tarots, which have more in common with the Mantegna Tarots
that the Marseilles. Most of the differences from one pack of Marseilles
Tarots to another were simply local details entered into the standard
image to identify the maker and the region in which the given version
was produced.
But in the early 1660s, two decks appeared that permanently changed
the look of several Major Arcana. Subsequently, those changes "leaped
out" of the Marseilles mold, appearing in the works of de Gebelin
and all the Etteilla variants of the following century, effectively
obliterating the older versions of these cards except in the case
of a nostalgic few Tarot makers who preferred the archaic form. The
two Marseilles-style decks that date this telling change in the Tarot
canon are the Tarots by Jacques Vieville and Jean Noblet, both Parisian
cardmakers in the Marseilles tradition.
A Glance At the Cards in Question
Two defining characteristics of the oldest
Tarots were a Lovers card that shows "The Union of the King and Queen"
theme, and a Devil card that shows the image of a traditional werewolf
or lamia from European pagan antiquity. After the change in the late
1600s, those two cards are drawn to entirely different models, called
the Two Paths and Typhon (or later Baphomet).
These amendments to the Arcana can first be seen in the aforementioned
two French Marseilles Tarots which appeared in the early 1660s. A
century later these same amendments appeared as illustrations in Le
Monde Primitif by Court de Gebelin, and Etteila's Tarot also fol-lowed
them faithfully. By the beginning of the 19th century, all schools
of Tarot used the "new" models despite their other differences. Adjustments
were made at the same time to several other Major Arcana, but the
Lovers and the Devil serve as perfect "markers" in Tarots that accepted
this new influence.
In Volume 2 of Stuart Kaplan's Encyclopedia, we have an excellent
illustration of the development of these two "new" Arcana as they
appeared in 1660 in Jacques Vieville and Jean Noblet's decks. Kaplan
was kind enough to put them on opposite pages, and we can actually
see the ideas developing. Apparently Vieville liked the new version
of the Lovers, but rejected changes to the Devil, while Jean Noblet
went all the way and changed them both. It is uncanny how they form
the line of demarcation--before them, only the old forms appear, but
after them, entirely new images take over. It's hard not to wonder
"what happened here?"
Introducing Athanasius Kircher
One way to answer the above question
would be to ask the parallel question, "What else was happening in
Europe during the second half of the 1600s that might cause a ripple
of change in the Tarot?" This question is easier to answer.
In a general way the answer is "the closing years of the Renaissance."
But the more specific answer, very relevant to Tarot, is "Athanasius
Kircher." One has only to find a copy of Joscelyn Godwin's wonderful
presentation Athanasius Kircher: A Renaissance Man and the Quest for
Lost Knowledge from Thames and Hudson to realize that this German
Jesuit scholar is a key to many riddles in the history of esoteric
Tarot.
In the essay "Kabbalah/Cabbalah,"
an entire section is devoted to Kircher's Christian Cabbalah paradigm.
It is he who adapted the paths of the Tree of Life into the form that
modern magicians and Tarot practitioners are familiar with. It is
also Kircher who was so convinced of the Egyptian source of the ancient
mysteries, and so learned and literate in the exposition of his ideas,
that the sheer force of his certainty impregnated esoteric thought
for centuries afterward. And I think it is he who, either directly
or indirectly, affected the look of the Tarot forever after.
As you gaze upon his illustration of Pan or Jupiter, it is difficult
to miss how closely the "new" Devil image that appears in the 1660s
resembles Kircher's conception. A shift in gender in evidence by Levi's
time (late 1880's), in which the Devil gravitates from a masculine
form, through a form with attributes of both genders, to the final
female form, gives us the Baphomet image favored in the esoteric schools
all over Europe (see chapter on The Major Arcana).
If we accept this resemblance as relevant to the changing of the Devil
cards of Tarot, then we can see the process by which we might find
evidence in Kircher's work or that of his contemporaries for the shift
in the Lovers card, and possibly other details as well. Unfortunately,
my catalog of Kircher's work is not extensive enough to let me point
to such a striking parallel image in the case of the Lovers. But even
partial exposure to his ideas and images serves to convince us that
Kircher's voracious mind made itself an expert on whatever it contemplated.
Meanwhile, the article by Dr. Keizer points to the mid-1700s as a
pivotal time in the history of Tarot, because that is the time of
the Fratres Lucis or Brothers of Light.
In essence, Dr. Keizer says that the books published by de Gebelin
and Etteilla, lauding the Egyptian origin of the Tarot Arcana, were
not original in their ideas at all, but were "already common understanding
in French occult circles, which were essentially Freemasonic" (p.
12). Keizer sets forth that the "Egyptian Initiation" manuscript that
was translated and published by Paul Christian (aka Jean Baptiste
Pitois) in 1870 is actually a Fratres Lucis initiatory document from
before the French Revolution (which started in 1789). Keizer does
not say at which point the Fratres Lucis got the document or when
the images were created for it. Upon exmining the book Dr. Keizer
refers us to, called Egyptian Mysteries, anonymously published by
Weiser in 1988, we find in its foreword "... Egyptian Mysteries was
probably translated into French by Christian, though not from the
original manuscript....but from a handwritten copy, many of which
had been circulating in the occult world from the Middle Ages up to
the 19th century."
These ideas in mind, we can now see a theme emerging: In the late
Renaissance Kircher amalgamates the Ari version of the Sephir Yetzirah
with the Pythagorean astro-alphanumeric code, and the basis for Christian
Cabbalah is born. Kircher may have also been exposed to the Fratres
Lucis document, which by then was available to occultists in Europe,
and which also reflects the Hermetic astro-alphanumeric varient. He
declares in no uncertain terms that the entire occult canon of the
Renaissance comes from Egypt. The stream of Marseilles Tarots shows
sudden and characteristic changes that could easily reflect the mammoth
catalog of sacred art Kircher both created and commissioned. The Freemasonic
community either picked up or were bequeathed Kircher's works, stimulating
the enhancement of the already existing Gnostic-inflected folk Tarot
with his fabulous and extremely occult images. Secret initiatory documents
would then have been created to further illuminate the teachings contained
in the images. Court de Gebelin and Etteilla (both Freemasons) each
publicized the story of the Egyptian origin of the Arcana just as
Kircher asserted it. However, the resulting initiatory document, which
became associated with the Fratres Lucis by the time of the French
Revolution, was not revealed publicly until 1870, by Paul Christian.
Meanwhile, the descriptions of the Arcana in that manuscript match
exactly the changes which appear spontaneously in the Marseilles family
of Tarots during the first half of the 1660s. I draw the conclusion
that the inspiration for those changes is to be found in the Fratres
Lucis manuscript, traveling through the underground stream of the
Secret Societies. And if Kircher himself did not have a hand in mirroring
the Fratres Lucis images into the Major Arcana of Tarot, then the
Rosicrucian and Masonic community who followed in his immediate footsteps
did.
Tarot historians have never seen the original models for the changes
that appear in the Vieville and Noblet Tarots, but that may be just
because we are not studying athe Renaissance magi carefully enough.
The telling fact that the images first appeared on Tarot cards two
centuries before Paul Christian's publication of the Fratres Lucis
document means that we have to reevaluate the current theory that
the "Egyptian-style images" on some Tarots are late developments in
Tarot art.
The very first of these Egyptian-style Tarots to emerge after Christian's
publication was the Falconnier/Wegener Tarot of 1896. Gareth Knight,
in his fascinating book The Treasure House of Images, tells us "Designs
for the Falconnier Tarot were taken from original frescos and bas-reliefs
in the Louvre and the British Museum, but they nonetheless retain
a very French flavour" (p. 20) In the article written about this
deck in Volume 2 of the Encyclopedia, Kaplan says "Interestingly,
he [Falconnier] cites the 1760 Tarot of Marseilles by N. Conver [see
Vol. 1 of the Encyclopedia] as one that is closest to the 'traditional'
Tarot." Perhaps now we can understand why Falconnier would make such
a comment!
The catalog of Egyptian-style Tarots, matching the Fratres Lucis manuscript,
also includes the Papus Tarot, the St. Germaine Tarot, the Ibis, the
Brotherhood of Light Tarot, Egypcios Kier, Tarot of the Ages and a
few others. The information accompanying these Tarots all create the
impression that their images come to us from sources far anterior
the first historical decks of the 1400s, and yet each shows the Two
Paths and Baphomet rather than the earliest "European" images. We
cannot prove such an early date as the origin of the manuscript or
the images that have become associated with it. But it's clear that
those who say it's "proven" that Pitois/Christian made that manuscript
up for his book are simply not looking at the cards themselves.
Dr. Keizer also reminds us that the images that have become associated
with the Fratres Lucis document might be influenced by the Isaian/
Serapian cult that existed in Italy during Alexandrian times (until
the 400s AD). The Italians were excavating and studying Serapian temples
by the 10th century (see the essay "The Esoteric Origins of Tarot").
Kircher spent the later decades of his life in Italy, and was known
as an omnivorous thinker and student of the world. Can we really imagine
that he missed out on visiting one of those Serapis temples during
his decades in Italy, when Egypt was his pas-sion? To summarize, although
the temptation for modern historians has been to look at the pivotal
19th century and the work of Eliphas Levi as defining the epoch of
esoteric Tarot, upon closer examination, the situation is not so easy
to characterize.
A Bit of Secret Society History
The term Secret Societies is used to refer
to an underground affiliation of esotericists deemed heretical by
the Catholic Church since the 1100s, made up of pagans, Jews, Arabs,
Gnostics, Gypsies and other people of minority beliefs in Christian
Europe. The Church's abuses drove them into each other's arms over
time, and by the earliest publication of Tarot there were sophisticated
international organizations within which mystically and philosophically
inclined people, including Christians of a tolerant ilk, could associate
and cross-pollinate their ideas.
A particularly important group in the history of Tarot is the Rosicrucians
(having their beginning in Germany in 1614), whose membership was
always kept secret, and who were dedicated to keeping aspects of ancient
wisdom alive despite the Catholic overthrow of pagan Europe. Over
time the Rosicrucians created various Masonic Orders to serve as a
doorway through which to attract new menbers. Masonry became tolerated
as the only legitimate non-Christian "religion" in Catholic Europe,
providing a haven of refuge for alternative thinkers who were spiritually
inclined but would not bind themselves to the Pope and all he stood
for.
The Order of Elect Cohens (established in the second half of the 1700's
by Martines de Pasqually) is the more recent origin of a lineage whose
members have included many esoteric scholars pivotal to the history
of Tarot, including Court de Gebelin and Etteilla. A century later,
this lineage produced The Martinist Order, named after the philosophical
stream of Martinez de Pasqually and Louis Claude de St. Martin and
started by Papus in 1891. So we can confidently assert that, from
the time of Etteilla, the first to popularize a Tarot with overt esoteric
content in the 1780s, virtually all the pivotal writers and makers
of esoteric Tarot decks in Europe have been Secret Society members.
It may prove true that the Tarot is itself a Secret Society creation,
although the conditions of persecution under which it origi-nated
make that assertion difficult to either affirm or deny.
It is possible to find many books of Tarot "expertise" professing
to recount the known history of Tarot but that entirely gloss over
the Secret Society connections of the people who have been most pivotal
in the history of Tarot. This results in a view of Tarot development
with holes big enough to swallow an entire esoteric lineage! Thus
I am infinitely grateful to have in my possession, due to a simple
twist of fate, a three-volume restatement of the history of the European
lodges, (called The Book of Rosicruciae, published in 1947) which
puts an entirely different spin on the situation.
The author, E. Swynburne Clymer, also asserts that many of the people
whose names are intertwined with the 18th and 19th century Tarots
were members in the remarkable, multi-layered web of connections linking
the mystical intelligentsia of Europe. In his giant Book, he starts
with the publication of the seminal docu-ment "Fama Fraternatis" in
Germany, around 1614. From that event he moves forward in time with
biographies of all the leaders through the generations who were willing
to have their names go down in history (many more are mentioned, but
anonymously).
I have been greatly enriched by reading the esoteric biographies of
St. Germaine, Cagliostro, Stanislas de Guaita, Eliphas Levi and Gerard
Encousse/Papus. All these names are familiar to students of Tarot,
but the public record on these people is in some cases scant, in others
distorted. Clymer's information has given me a less lopsided perception
of these dedicated and cultivated persons. Although some have felt
that Clymer is a less than unbiased source and therefore his word
is not taken as gospel, we cannot correct his excesses or gain perspective
on his contribution unless his work is repub-lished in accessible
form for all.
When I looked for confirmation of Clymer's excellent volumes, I found
Isabel Cooper-Oakley and her book The Count of Saint-Germaine, (as
derived from the Masonic Archives, with all sources cited). Cooper-Oakley
affirms that a whole cohort of magical personalities-- St. Germaine,
St. Martin, Etteila, Mesmer, Cagliostro and others--collectively represented
the French at the Masonic Convention in Paris in 1785 (see pages 108-9).
By the end of the chapter she has supplemented that quote with similar
remarks from other contemporary sources. As in the previous paragraphs,
we are seeing the names of people who have featured heavily in the
history of the Orders, in the history of occultism, and in the history
of Tarot.
I find it fascinating to imagine just what the chemistry of those
times and this group was like. Some of these people were tremendously
controversial in their times, in particular St. Germaine and Cagliostro.
It has piqued my interest that in this century, Tarots have emerged
bearing the names of St. Germaine and Cagliostro. Subtle details on
these Tarots point back to this exciting moment in history when Etteilla,
Cagliostro, St. Germaine and their Brothers were fanning the flames
of the Tarot revival begun in the previous century.
The Older Alexandrian Stream
In addition to the revolutionary reemergence
of the Fratris Lucis-style images of the Devil and the Lovers (among
others), the European Lodges also revived the traditional astro-alphanumeric
correspondences of the Alexandrian Hermetic system set into place
by Pythagoras around 600 BC and revived during the flowering of Alexandrian
culture after 300 BC. These correspondences, slightly different from
those given in the Sephir Yetzirah of the Jews, are the only other
version of the letter/number/Arcana correspondences we can be sure
are truly authentic and founded in antiquity.
Etteila taught these correspondences in his books published in the
late 1700s, but the correspondences printed on his decks are a blind.
Levi made subtle modifications in the late 1800s, and all the European
Rosicrucian and Masonic lodges used them, with the exception of the
English, right up to the 20th century Etteilla's Tarot became the
most famous deck in Europe in the century after its inception. Its
offshoot, the Catalan Tarot, became the first 78- card Tarot deck
published in Spain in 1900, according to Fournier's playing card encyclopedia.
Etteilla-style Tarots became more ornate in the 19th century (see
Kaplan's Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, p. 141-144 and Vol. 2, p. 400-410).
A shortened version was also printed in France at the end of the 19th
century to simplify it for fortune telling. In Italy, the 19th century
Cartomancia was the homegrown response to Etteilla, and that Tarot
has made it considerablly easier to unscramble which of Etteilla's
images go with which Arcana of the usual Tarots, as both of the sources
mentioned below have only partial information in their lists, and
over two centuries of reprinting in various countries, the Etteilla
cards began to show considerable corruption in the letter/astrology
corresponcences, making a confusing situation even more difficult
to unravel.
The two lists I am citing to detail Etteilla's astro-alphanumeric
correspondences are the one given by Papus in the late 1800s, and
Stuart Kaplan's versopm in Vol I of his Encyclopedia. Athough I cannot
read French to confirm those earlier connections, I know that Papus
was the recognized expert of his time and was cited by all English,
French and Spanish Tarot writers of his day. I trust his reporting,
although his information only goes so far as to link Etteilla's Arcana
to the more usual versions from the Marseilles Arcana. Stuart Kaplan
shows a differently organized version of the same set in his Encyclopedia
of Tarot, Vol. 1, having taken the trouble to supply the astrology
correspondences from Etteillašs books. These correspondences became
standard for all of Europe's Secret Societies and their Tarots by
the time of Levi.
That would make Etteilla the harbinger of the late-appearing Egyptian-style
decks, which include the Falconnier/ Wegener Tarot, its modern cognate
the St. Germaine Tarot, the Ibis, the Egypcios Kier and the Brotherhood
of Light Tarot. All these Tarots bear Egyptian-style images (which
I stated earlier could be Serapian-inspired, reflected through A.
Kircher's synthetic genius). The texts of these decks reference, to
a greater or lesser degree, the Fratres Lucis text translated and
published by Paul Christian in his History of Magic.
Again, the numbers and signs printed on Etteilla's' cards exist in
their own little universe, as they are purposefully rearranged compared
to any previous Tarot ordering. This body of attributions is a blind.
What is true to the Alexandrian stream are his astro-alpha-numerology
connections.
The hypostasis is a detailed recitation of the stages that The Creator used to step down universal power so it can be organized into a time-space world peopled with creatures. The Kaballah Tree is one hypostasis narrative, evident when you follow the angles of the Lightning Bolt as it descends through the planetary Sephira into matter. Such presentations are a recognizable feature of a Mystery School format. This is the classic "how the world came to be" narrative (see A Wicked Pack of Cards by Dumett et. al.).
Etteilla's Tarot assimilated the seven days of creation theme directly from The Poimandres (or "Pymander"; there are several spellings). This is one of the manuscripts the Moors saved when it was taken from Alexandria in the sixth century. It was later returned to Europe in the 1500s. By so explicitly detailing a seven days of creation theme that is not the Judeo-Christian version, he is waving a red flag, stating without words that "this is not the folk Tarot that can be passed off as Catholic." Perhaps the workings of demo-cratic groups like the Fratres Lucis emboldened him to tell his truth, if only in veiled form, and only in the pictures. In hindsight, he was getting away with a lot!
Along with referencing the Greek and Hermetic stream of Gnosis as the source of his Arcana, Etteilla also reintroduced certain themes that were present in the earliest handmade and woodblocked Tarots but which had been sup-pressed through the efforts of the Church. Etteilla put back the earliest Goddess images that had been replaced by male figures like Hercules (Strength), Mars (The Chariot), the Hanged Man (Prudence), not to mention any extra Popes and Emperors.
To my eye, Etteilla attempted to revive the more blatant representation of the Sophianic, Hebrew Goddess-based suppressed Gnostic and Holy Grail mythos so threatening to the Church five centuries earlier among the Cathars. Gershem Scholem asserts this very theme in many places in his excellent works--that the Gnostic religion of the Cathars was by no means a purely Christian phenomenon, but instead was imprinted by the Jewish Gnosticism fermenting locally at the same time. Remember, the earliest handmade Tarots (from the mid-1400s) prominently feature the Popess card as a woman in full ecclesiastical garb, intimately identified with the Cathar heresies. Perhaps by clothing these oldest Gnostic images in Hermetic garb, he hoped to cement the link between Alexandrian culture and Gnosticism in Tarot tradition. It is too bad that the layers of veiling he applied to his Arcana have obscured them for so long!
Etteilla also put the signs of the zodiac on his first twelve Arcana, although again following no previous traditional ordering system, but super-imposing his own logic, then claiming it was from the Hebrew. However, as we have seen above, he was, in fact, working with the Hermetic/ Alexandrian variation, which dates back to the Pythagorean corrections to the Greek alphabet in the 7th century bc.





