One of the most striking of the characteristics of the word Tarot is its analogy with a somewhat particular language, the so-called Language of the Birds. Here is the description of a renowned alchemist of the XX century, known by the pseudonym of Fulcanelli:
“...Language of the Birds, mother and doyenne of all others, language of philosophers and diplomats. Jesus reveals it to the apostles, sending them his spirit, the Holy Spirit, who teaches them the mystery of all and unveils the most hidden truths. In the medieval times of alchemy, it was called the Gay Science or Gay Knowledge. Language of the gods, Goddess-Bottle (...) Today, if we exclude the argot, we find it in some local languages, as Picard, Provencal, etc, and in the language of gypsies.1”
Essentially, this language is a system of codes reclaimed from the ancient Alchemists and used also by poets and troubadours. It is a system based on a sort of Synchronicity2 of words founded on the precept that God, Unity, the One, is at the origin of all. Although not claiming true scientific value, it reflects an elevated and spiritual logic, which, when it reveals itself, astonishes beyond any possible rational interpretation.
In the specific case of the word Tarot, we may comprehend a deeper significance only by accepting the idea that, in order to reveal its hidden message, which likewise conceals the parameters of the Unity, it is indispensable to have a suitable decryption system. To confirm this, in fact, we may observe the manner in which traditional literature, in order to explain the root of the term, has always been rich in interpretations similar in dynamics to the Language of the Birds.
For example, experts have found that, analysing the term TAROT we obtain ROTA, in Latin, Wheel, namely the astrological wheel at the centre of the Way of the Tarot. This, by its nature, is characterized by a circularity expressed as well by the two “T”s at the beginning and end of the word itself. They have also pointed out that in TAROT is contained the word TORA(H), the sacred text of the Jews, which has a close affinity with these figures; or that TAR-RO in Egyptian, means” The Royal Way”, a definition which corresponds precisely to the deepest meaning of the Tarot, being, as we will demonstrate, a true path, road or way. Even if we admit the partial validity of all these inferences and of their adherence to the principle of Synchronicity, our purpose is different. In effect, that which we wish to underline through this comparison is that, in order to understand the term “Tarot”, as to comprehend the profound essence of that which it defines, it is fundamental to use keys of decodification: the Tarot are in fact characterized, as is the Language of the Birds, by an orderly system of Codes which represent the only instrument for understanding their deepest sense. Champollion, the decoder of hieroglyphic writings, wrote to Baron Joseph Dacier, secretary of the French Royal Academy of inscription:
“I have arrived at the point where I have a complete vision of the general structure of this form of writing, signs and rules of their combination...thus there are the bases of the grammar and the vocabulary of these writings which are to be found on the greater part of the monuments.3”
Fig. 1
Lettre to Mr. Dacier, 1822
The example fits perfectly: it is obvious that we will follow a similar path in order to arrive at a complete and comprehensive vision of the whole.
The term Tarot is neither arbitrary nor subjective, but an integral part of a precise, strict and codified system. The five letters of which it is composed, however much re-elaborated in a modern language, express and at the same time conceal a sort of hieroglyphic, an ancient symbol of sacred meaning, of whose complex analysis we shall occupy ourselves later. Clearly, nothing of this is contained in the Italian term Tarocchi, which remains, independent of any conjecture, totally lacking in any intrinsic or occult meaning. Based on these data, let us be allowed one last premise.
This new and surprising vision that we propose, is a work of syncretism of diverse fields of knowledge: history, philosophy, mathematical thought, science, etc. The necessity of this manner of proceeding derives from the incontestable value of rigor and legitimacy that characterize these disciplines when applied with discernment, logic and equilibrium. However, neither shall we exclude religious doctrines of esoteric matrix, as its support may allow us to shed light on the unique sense of certain declarations. In this case, as well, in order to avoid doubt and obscurity, we will limit ourselves to deduction evident and accessible only through well-founded thought. Our intention, in fact, is not to request from the reader a blind acceptance of certain reflections (which would thus risk remaining mere postulates) but rather to allow him the possibility to follow a coherent and systematic reasoning leading to true understanding of the meaning of the Tarot.
Fig. 2
Visconti Sforza Temperance 1440
1.2 Study of the Tarot: which model?
It seems relevant to ask some general questions regarding the manner in which these remarkable images have been studied over the course of the last two to three centuries. What might be indeed the correct approach to understanding this mysterious subject? Is there only an historical-documentary perspective? Is the alternative the esoteric perspective? Are there additional paths? These are only a few of the numerous questions, which, according to us, deserve attention.
The historical model
One of the modes of research best known to the general public is that which observes the theme of the Tarot from an historical point of view, concentrating on documents, of whatever nature, that regard the subject. Here is an example of one of the many citations concerning their origin:
“We owe the invention of the Triumphs,4 almost certainly, to the duke’s passion for card games. Unfortunately we have no documents which attest to this, but a group of splendid cards have been handed down to us, the most ancient deck of Tarot known, whose analysis strongly sustains a Visconti origin: they are the so-called Cary-Yale or Visconti di Modrone cards, conserved today in the United States of America.5”
The duke in question is Filippo Maria Visconti (1392–1447), the last of the Dukes of Milan, who is presumed to be the promoter of the invention of the cards known today as the Tarocchi, having commissioned their creation by an artist of the Court, perhaps the Monzese painter, Francesco Zavattini. This deck, according to historians, was created between 1442 and 1447, and was probably not the only one commissioned by the duke. Others may be added to this deck, in fact, one known as the Brambilla Deck, named for the modern location of the Milanese Pinoteca di Brera and the deck known as the Visconti-Sforza Tarot, divided between the Gallery of the Carrara Academy of Bergamo, the Pierpont Morgan Library of New York, and a private collection belonging to the Colleoni family. Among the many card decks of the 1400’s, this last is certainly the most complete, 74 cards remaining of the hypothetical 78.
Apart from this single citation, we may say that, overall, the historical approach maintains the following:
1. The Tarot is of Italian origin.
2. It was created in the mid-1400’s.
3. Its original function was of a recreational-artistic nature.
Therefore, they who begin their study of the Tarot from an historical perspective, in substance believe them to be of an artistic and decorative, or at most a didactic and cultural nature. In practice, they exclude any esoteric function and, postulating that it was created, although with some uncertainty as to date, for ornamental reasons, eliminate the possibility of investigation in other directions. Despite some exceptions, this is the general position among the experts.
However, as things now stand, we must remember that these theories lack any certain and definite basis or decisive historical surety: they are mere suppositions.
The credibility that they enjoy derives from two principal reasons: the first, that the most ancient deck of Tarot known today is that of the Visconti. The second is that researchers, more or less knowingly, have been content to follow slavishly an already predefined line of research. What then would occur, shou
ld another, more ancient, deck be discovered?
This would be sufficient to cause the immediate and total collapse of all modern hypotheses. Regarding this, let us refer to the paintings of the V-IX centuries found in 2001 in the Afghan grottoes of Bamiyan after the terrible destruction of the two colossal statues of the Buddha by the Taliban. Scientists demonstrated, thanks to tests carried out at the ESRF (European Synchrotron Radiation Facility), that a part of the caverns had been painted in oils hundreds of years before the date which had been hypothesized in history and art texts, according to which this technique had been born in the XV century. The discovery of one single work of art sufficed to alter radically the general conviction. May not the same be true of the Tarot, which, for that matter, possesses more amply indeterminate temporal margins? To trust implicitly in the historical model cannot be an exhaustive and complete solution, owing to the current fragility of documentary proof and the significant weakness of sources, which render unstable any conclusive consideration. Furthermore, precisely because of the particular nature of the subject under examination, there is another relevant aspect to consider. Observing the cards, we find in them something profound and inexplicable, which has attracted the interest of thousands in all epochs, including those who have passed into history for their prolific intellects (it is enough to mention, in the 1900’s only, the winner of the Nobel Prize for literature William Butler Yeats, then Salvador Dalì, Karl Gustav Jung etc). Were the Tarot merely a game, from where would come this propensity for philosophical, psychological, creative and esoteric in-depth analysis by such outstanding experts in artistic and cultural circles? Might they, then, be unworthy of trust or esteem, or else grossly misled? It seems to us that the promoters of the historical model, presuming the superiority of their own affirmations based upon an intellectualistic and pretentious modus operandi, treat any other approach in a superficial and summary manner. We believe these, quite evidently, to be their limits.
Fig. 3
Diary of William Butler Yeats, Nobel for Literature1923:
illustration of the XXI card, the World, Irish National Library.
The occult model
In the last two centuries, another mode of research has developed, which we may define an esoteric and occult model. Already at the end of the 1700’s this current of thought, although with diverse interpretations, maintains that the Tarot is a Book of Wisdom from the remotest of times, attributing its origin to ancient Egypt. One of the first to declare this was the pastor and scholar Court de Gèbelin, who in 1781 was the Royal Censor under Louis XV, an unusual role for a Protestant in Catholic France. De Gèbelin, also president of the Muséè, a noted Parisian literary society of the times, was a prominent figure in certain French circles, friend to the encyclopaedists Diderot and D’Alembert, the scientists Franklin and Lalande, the revolutionary theorists Danton and Desmoulins, the hero of the American Revolution, Lafayette, initiates, as was he, in the Masonic Lodge The Nine Sisters, of which he was Venerable Master for two years. For these reasons, differently from what might happen today, what de Gèbelin wrote regarding the Tarot in those days, of which we offer a brief summary, was judged to be of great interest, without causing derision or being considered extravagant:
“If we were to announce that there exists today an ancient Egyptian Work which escaped the flames of their marvellous Library, a Work that contains the purest Egyptian doctrine, who would not be impatient to know a Book so precious, so extraordinary! In addition, if we added that this Book is well-known in all of Europe, that for centuries it has been passed from hand to hand by everyone (....) regarded as a group of strange, senseless figures? Who would not think that we are joking, or want to take advantage of the gullibility of our listeners? And yet, that which we maintain is rigorously true: the Egyptian Book, the only one left from their marvellous libraries, exists in our days and, an amazing fact, it is so common that no one before us had guessed its illustrious origin... this book is the card deck of the Tarot.6”
Fig. 4
Le Mond Primitif, Court de Gèbelin, 1781
In fact, the contemporary academic world ridicules this assertion, judging it an unacceptable foolishness or else a ploy for attention, totally lacking in reliability: even they who do not doubt the validity and intellectual honesty of the author, ask themselves whether to give credence to such apparently rash conclusions. It is a fundamental question, which, far from being an isolated case, may not be summarily dismissed, as it seeks to arrive at sure knowledge through use of the model of esoteric analysis. What is, generally, the weak point of this model? If we reflect attentively, we discover that all those who adhere to an occult explanation of the Tarot, have been unable to objectively and unassailably demonstrate the veracity of their affirmations. This is a pitfall connected to the subjective, interpretative, in way personal, empirical, and interior traits inherent to this approach. Whoever is sincerely interested in the Tarot, has certainly followed a similar path and should be perfectly familiar with it. In effect, reading over the many esoteric tracts dealing with the Tarot, indeed we consistently find ourselves facing the same insuperable problem: the opinions of the various authors are often contrasting and indeed prevent the one who desires to learn, from understanding which considerations are correct and which instead are to reject.
This is owing to the fact that the occult model, especially in the last two centuries, has pursued recognition of every possible form of the Tarot and the ancient Books of Wisdom of multiple traditions (the Cabala,7 Alchemy,8 Astrology, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc...), seeking to extrapolate the meaning of the first through the second. However, since this sort of research has always lacked a critical objective reference point, that is, an autonomous orientation as guarantee of the correctness of the acquired deductions, a jumble of exegeses has been created, which has led to total confusion.
Fig. 5
The Chariot, Levi Tarot
Among the many examples we might mention, we remember one, particularly indicative and which had a great influence on the following generations of scholars; it is of the famous French occultist Eliphas Levi. In the first decades of the 1800’s, Levi established a direct connection between the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet and the 22 Triumphs of the Tarot, by him re-baptized “Arcana.”
Concentrating almost exclusively on the Major Arcana, he depicted them according to the Cabala, arriving at the point of considering them universal keys of access to all the ancient religious dogmas. Passing over the veracity or not of his judgements, our wish is to point out that this author incarnated the general inclination of the occultists of the 1800’s and 1900’s who, although each with peculiar singularity, acted in the same manner, presuming thus to illustrate the meaning of the Tarot. Actually, the vision of each occultist always follows his own ideas, his personality, his education, even despite the Tarot themselves. It is as if the individual cultural and initiatic preparation were an indispensable condition for interpreting and explaining these images, because personal prejudice induces one to find the desired answers, at times irrespective of the real ones.
Yet, at the same time, with this sort of conduct we deny the principle of independent knowledge intrinsically present in the Arcana themselves.
The esoterists defended themselves from the criticisms against this modality of research, replying that, the uninitiated to certain mysteries and those without deep esoteric knowledge could not comprehend the hermetic and profound sense of the Tarot. Is this true? Frankly, the very existence of a vast and multifaceted literature seems more than enough evidence that this model of analysis has not been particularly efficacious, nor able to offer definitive and indubitable answers. Their difficulties also seem to be connected to certain principles adopted as prerequisites of research, which have only served to widen the distance to truth. A brief summary follows:
1. The esoterists hypothesized that the original deck, the Visconti-Sforza Tarot, were im
perfect and therefore necessitated alterations and improvements. This idea has led to attempts to “perfect” their symbolism over the generations and has caused the creation of an incredible number of Tarot decks, of presumed esoteric value, redesigned in the last centuries.
2. Particular attention has never been given to the figures themselves, but principally to their symbolic value. Briefly, it was not so important how a subject was drawn, but the meaning that could be attributed to it. Thus, a notable divergence of opinions was created regarding the symbolic meaning, together with a disinterest towards the manner in which features, colours, and the figures in general should be or had been rendered artistically.
The Tarot Code Page 2