I will start where Papus starts, which means with the last few paragraphs of Corodil’s previous section:
Quote:
| Ignoramuses operate badly in all that they do; but it is not the same
for instructed people: thus the Egyptians took the Book of Thoth,
shuffled it in every way without looking at the Hieroglyphs; they had
their Enquirers cut this Book in two, and then they took the first Card
[Carte], and put it there on B; the second on A; and the third they put
again on B. (Like this: B. A.) The fourth went to B; the fifth to A,
and the sixth to B. Then the seventh to B, so on until the end. In this
way, on [pile] A there were 26 sheets [ or cards], and on [pile] B, 52. With the 52, they began the first operation again (on D.C.), and there were on C 17 sheets [or cards: lames], and on D 35; they put 17 aside; and with the 35 remaining, they repeated the process on FE; in that way there came to E, 11 leaves [cards]; and to F, 24. It turns out that A=26. B=0. C=17. D=0. E=11. F=24; but these last ones [F] were not interpreted (*23). ________________________________ *23. Note that in every operation, one must always mix right side up with upside down, and cut. |
Quote:
| Therefore, taking A, they read the sheets [or cards] one at a time,
(from right to left, as the meaning of the whole [of the reading[ is to
be found in its individual parts), announcing what they portended; and
next, they took the first card, and interpreted it in relation to the
26th card. When they had finished doing that [or reading A] , they
interpreted C, and finally, E. Read Cartonomancie, third Edition, 1782; it will give you the whole procedure, although I admit that the Etteilla [Stockman: Etteilla’s work] is only a copy after the Egyptians, as also the Steganography of Trithemius, likewise the Theory of Raymond Lull, all copies, I say, of the Book of Thoth, or to speak to everyone, of the Cards called the Tarot. |
Quote:
| Their second procedure was to draw three times 7 leaves [cards], which they arranged as follows: 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. A. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. B. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. C. If A did not answer their questions, they would place below them seven other sheets [or cards], 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. A. [Stockman omits “A”] If that still gave no answers, they would draw another seven sheets [or cards], 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. A, and would do as much for B and C, [Stockman has, after “answers”: “they would draw another seven cards, 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. A through to C”], if they had not found a solution, or a positive prognosis. If these repetitions said nothing, they advised their enquirers to pray to the Gods, to alter their conduct, and to come back the next day or several days later. |
(1)Papus, or perhaps Stockman, has Etteilla saying that one tries up to three times, using rows A-C, to get a reading that answers the questions. It is the same number of rows that he has, more clearly, in a later method he gives with five cards in a row.
(2)Based on “Julia Orsini” in the c. 1840 book (p. 44), the interpreter would be laying out five rows, each below the one preceding, and one reads the top row first, and if it doesn’t make sense, one goes to the next, etc. (Actually, that book has the interpreter lay out six rows; but the point is that there are more than three rows of seven each being laid out. In the Dusserre booklet, which is a heavily edited version of the c. 1840, this is pictured on p. 7.)
(3) What Etteilla says literally: first you lay out three rows, then you try for a reading with the first row. If that doesn’t work, you lay out seven more cards, below the other three rows; if that doesn’t work, you lay out seven more; if that doesn’t work, you go to rows B and C that you’ve already laid out. The result is five rows, but the second and third tries at readings are laid out after the other three.
I emphasize this part, however many rows there are, because in modern books on cartomancy, almost all of which derive from Etteilla, it is usually not said to start over when you get a reading that doesn’t make sense; and the Etteilla decks' booklets, except the Dusserre, are the same. You are apparently expected to use your “intuition” to make the interpretation of the card part of a coherent reading. At the most, a book will advise you to put down one or more cards to clarify one that is obscure. And you will usually not be given examples where such a procedure is appropriate.
I have found only one historical source that does give an example of an incoherent reading, requiring one to go to start with a completely new interpretation using another row. It is in the c. 1840 “Julia Orsini” book (omitted from Dusserre's edited version), pp. 44-45. Here are the relevant pages, followed by a summary of what is being said.
63..30..64..77..44..13..42....8, with cards 44 and 63 reversed.
The 8 is there automatically in this book, because the reading is for a female. From right to left, it comes out: In relation to the querent (8) (she happens to be a blond girl), a blond girl (42) has marriage (13) in the future (44 reversed) with happiness (77) with a dark-haired man (64) with fortune (30) and there will be pregnancy (63 reversed). All of this makes sense and hopefully is good news. But if instead of 64, “brown-haired man”, the sixth card (out of eight, or fifth card not counting the 8) was 33, “woman of the country”, the reading would be contre-sense, i.e. nonsense (at least in 18th century France where women did not marry each other). In any case, it is not clear what such a person has to do with the rest of the sentence formed by the cards. So we start over, using the second line.
I resume:
Quote:
| Their third procedure was considerable, and [called for] considerable thought [& à considérer]. After having shuffled and cut the 78 leaves [cards], they formed from them two columns and a capital that they laid out across the top [i.e. a row at the top]. Then without reshuffling the leaves [cards], they laid out a circle, taking care in this operation to remove the 1 or the 8, according to the Sex of the querent; When that came up, they placed the first or eighth Hieroglyph in the center, as one sees [in] the whole configuration [figure] below. |
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibQbb8HByIkBXUvWtYOt2a9VRh6-caDgYNSbyUXh-vuJ9IGwy4S7d4nWjZ8pWeqs8SCMOhI8lGxK1rgl-Ud2XMx-_Jj9vhlmiEr_fyjyEZ2AwxzFaoZ7k3f82bgWC6eC_3OSYcvD3lFOXJ/s1600/IMG_0510a.jpg
In case you can’t access this link, here is a detailed description of the diagram: Etteilla uses numbers to indicate how the cards are to be placed. As I read it, first one lays out eleven cards in the column on one’s right, going from the bottom up; then come eleven more in the column on the left, also going from the bottom up; then eleven more in a row at the top, from right to left. Then a circle in the middle is formed in three parts: the first section, with the label “Past” between it and the right-hand column, is on the reader’s lower right, but laid out from the side of the enquirer, from right to left, 11 cards; the next, with the label “Present” between them and the “capital” row on top, from the reader’s perspective, 11 more cards, from right to left from the reader’s perspective; then 11 more cards on the reader’s lower left, but laid out from the enquirer’s perspective, from the enquirer’s right to his or her left, with “Future” between them and the left column. The top of each card, as it comes off the deck, faces inward in the circle.
I resume:
Quote:
| The first Card [Carte] was placed in position 1, continuing up to 11.
They put the twelfth Card [Carte] at number 12, and so the others up to
22, etc. 1, 11, 34, 44, were the past [Stockman has “1 to 11 and 34 to
44”]; 12, 22, 45, 55, were the future [Stockman: “12 to 22 and 45 to
55”]; and 23, 33, 56, 66, [Stockman: “23 to 33 and 56 to 66”] were the
present. If the 1 or the 8, according to the Sex of the enquirer, did
not appear, they would take it from the remainder of the Deck, and
place it in the middle, as you see, 8, Supposing that the reading is
for a woman; for 1 would be for a man; in as much as it is true that
the distance between man and woman is seven degrees; that caused Mohammed to commit an error, when he said that women are of Ouris
[Stockman: “houris”; I think Etteilla means Horus], who will not enter
into Paradise but will guard its door; having not understand that this
difference of seven degrees existed only in the physical world. The Egyptians read all the sections one after the other, beginning with the Past; then the Present, and last the Future; they took then for the past 8, 34, and 1; and following this procedure up to 8, 44, and 11, and likewise for the Present and the Future. I think one must read Etteilla (the price is only 1 livre 16 sous), if one wishes to understand how to read this spread, three cards by three cards and always using the ones [celles] of the center [Stockman: “three cards in relation to one another and always using the middle card”]. |
Quote:
| Sometimes the Egyptian Sages would open their Operations with 12 leaves [cards]; but that was always for remarkable things [objets], such as harvests, decisions, battles; or also for the Sovereigns of the Nation, or foreign ones; or for their principals [commettants, I think prime ministers; Stockman has “constituents”]. But having completed the three operations that I detailed, they would do a fourth; even five or six if they wished, or if directed by the numbers; example: in placing the Cards [Cartes], if they saw a number well or badly placed among [Stockman: a number particularly well or badly placed in relation to] the others, they remembered it, and after this spread they placed as many leaves [i.e. cards] as the well or badly placed number, etc., had indicated to them. |
Quote:
| If it happened that a man had only one question to ask, and it was a
legitimate one (for they were enemies of all that was vicious, or could
lead to become such), then they would simply draw five leaves [i.e.
cards] e.d.c.b.a., going from a to e as usual; if that did not give an
answer, they drew 10 more leaves [cards], and they arranged them thus: 5 4 3 2 1. E D C B A. 10 9 8 7 6. And they read the cards going from 1 to 5, from A to E, and from 6 to 10; and then, as I have already said, if the cards still said nothing, they would have the querents come back [remetter] another day, adjure them to worship the Gods ever more strongly, and to love their fellows [sembables; Stockman: fellow human beings] or their neighbor. |
Quote:
| You must not believe that the Divination practiced by the Egyptians was of the same kind as that practiced by other idolatrous people, particularly the oracles of Delphi, Dodona, Trophonius, Nymphos, or Claros - and others - as some of those were changed due to political reasons, or because they were misunderstood; because they muddled the minds of men, rather than enlightening them. |
Quote:
| All the Oracles only existed by the infamous imaginations [vues] of the
idolatrous Priests; I will not enter into any details, but with regard
to these so-called Diviners [Devins], no one can speak better than I. The Science, coming from long and painful work formerly created by the Diviners [Devins], or if one wants, Astrologers, Physonomancers, Palmists, Geomancers, Cartonomancers, and even Savants, in all the branches of Divination or the science of results [resultats]. Today it is ignorance, laziness, poverty, and drunkenness that create the so-called [prétendus] Diviners [Devins] and Divineresses [Divineresses]. For 30 years there is little that I have not been acquainted with [connus], I say not only in Paris, but in the major part of Europe. Both arose on the same pivot; some, who are by no means Diviners, take a road so as to seem such to their Consultants; because all the rest of Society, describing them, makes them absolutely nothing. A feature common to some that I am going to report does not hold in the copy [rapporter ne tient pas à la copie], because I am not a demonographer. When a naive person goes to the homes of these ignorants, his manner very determined to discover whether or not they are Diviners, he will not realize that this is already the beginning of insanity; for it is necessary, in going either to a savant or an ignorant, not to be preoccupied: to put oneself on one’s guard before one’s enemy arrives, I say, so as to fight one on one [seul à seul], is the nicolade [perhaps rigolade, joke] that announces the loser, or at least the childish fear of not being victorious. Arriving at the so-called Sorceress’s, my skillful ignorant receives abruptly the thoughtful Man, and puts him between two fires: on one hand, she says to him: Sir, before three days have passed you could very well go to prison; and on the other hand: Sir, if you conduct yourself skillfully, there is a rich fortune which cannot avoid you. Is my Savant strong enough to support these shocks so opposite one to the other? He is offered the third means to overcome them. Someone of interest to you is going to die suddenly.. Let us see, says our Champion with little order, what you say to me: 1. Do I have enemies? 2. Shall I succeed? 3. The person who is to die: is it my wife, my sister, my son, my daughter, or just the only aunt left to me? Without going any further, we can see that the poor man has already said too much; the Deviner is not a sorcerer, no, it is our poor naive who has not been alerted by his (the Diviner's) body language, and has first pronounced that he is frightened by his enemies, and so reveals his train of thought; and then secondly, that he is ambitious; this is the pivotal point. Thirdly, he hopes for an inheritance. He should have said, whatever may come, I am unconcerned! He then withdraws into himself, and wishes he could also withdraw his words; he will not notice then that there will be no more divining, but that he is being taken in by his weaknesses, and he will be told that all he wishes for will happen; and at the same time, the diviner will rap his knuckles a little, as one would a child, to make him talk more, even though he has sworn to himself he will not say another word; I have several times seen this being played out, and been quite amused by the facial contortions of the sitter, in his effort not to speak. But in good faith, let us return to - reason; is it the Devil who comes to blow in the ears of the so-called Diviner, the whole history of our life? It would be stupid to think that way: it is, says a devotee of our madnesses [amateur de nos folies], the science that makes them speak; but these so-called Diviners and Divineresses are so ignorant as not to know even the letters which appear in their names [entrent dans leurs noms]. Finally, shall we say, how, and by what means do they forecast the things that happen? Listen to the truth; it is our ignorance that makes them learned, and not the science, which communicates only on critical points of the previous day [points aigues des veilles] and the fatigue. All the Sages of the ancient peoples who applied themselves to the abstract sciences, or the high sciences, needed nothing, took no tribute; the Nation considered them as its true Sages; it sustained them, foresaw their slightest physical needs, and it got from them salutary advice in everything it required; because in fact nobody was wiser and and more learned than these Mages. Their house, or their Temple, was indeed one of the Oracles; but it was not one of offerings, as with the Priests of Jupiter-Amnon, Apollo-Clarien, and all the others. When our so-called Diviners have the Book of Thoth in their hands, or some other object that was formerly used for Divination--even this scientific book, where the whole Universe is contained--so as to tell, speaking in the vulgar, fortunes [la bonne aventure], they originally are not concerned with studying the spirit of every Hieroglyph: Lack of order, Usury, Calumny, each of these words has in their ears only one sense, or one sound. Four Hieroglyphs will give us the intelligence of the 74 others. |
A too-severely edited version of Etteilla’s methods in laying out the cards, including a variant of the 67 card spread using all 78 cards and one other method not mentioned by Etteilla in the 3rd Cahier, is at http://www.sacred-texts.com/tarot/ftc/ftc21.htm. We are fortunate to now have Etteilla himself—or at least I assume it’s Etteilla!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete