Philippe Camoin on Numbers and Tarot origin
Christian Joachim Hartmann
"Les magazine des Amoureux du Tarots", called
"Origine et Histoire du Tarot de Marseille? (1e partie)" by
Philippe CAMOIN.
<http://www.camoin.com/camoin-mag/fr/archives/origine_et_histoire.htm>
First I'd like to thank Mary Greer for pointing me to this link.
--
The page is in French, but at the very top is a note which says
"We are looking for a human translator from french to english."
I won't translate this page, since I don't consider it worth to,
but I will address some of the things discussed there:
One of the reason for not translating that page is that it is
little more than a content page for future articles yet to be
posted. No point about the history of Tarot is developed on
this page, everything is postponed to future articles.
The page begins with a comment of Mr. Camoin regarding
Tarot historians and his own take on the subject. Camoin
affirms that many historians point to Italy as the birthplace
of Tarot because the oldest known decks date from there.
Camoin and Jodorowksy are however of the opinion that
the Tarot originated nowhere else than in Marseilles, even though
Mr. Camoin says he is aware the the Italian tarot decks are
older by 3 centuries than the earliest Marseillian decks.
Camoin asks:
"But, if tomorrow one were to discover an old
box containing still older cards in another country, would
these same historians change their opinion at once, and so forth ...?
We prefer to rely on more scientific methods, all of which point us
to a better source of data, which was once centered in and around
Marseilles."
Here Camoin makes it look like that the only indication of the Italian
origin of Tarot would be the still extant early decks. He prefers not
to refer to any other considerations for placing the origin of Tarot
in one of the upper Italian cities.
I particularly like his last sentence, in which he claims to use "more
scientific methods" by not relying on the extant historical sources.
This makes me wonder whether Camoin understands the science of
history, and whether he was per chance educated in the science rather
than in the arts department.
[Addition: Hah! I was right, look here,right at the bottom of this page:
<http://www.camoin.com/philippe_camoin_fr/index.htm>
Philippe is indeed brought up in Mathematics, Medicine and
Informatics. Can't I just smell those number-crunchers?! What
do I need the Tarot for if I'm clairvoyant just like that! :-D ]
Also, I'm reminded of many other similar sentences I've read on this
forum concerning the historical methods that should be used in Tarot
research.
Furthermore, the list of promised articles makes it clear that there
will be no attempt to evaluate other theories about the origin of
Tarot. Everything will center on "prooving" new and unheard of
facts about the Tarot de Marseille, but there seems to be no interest
in comparing them to the results of over researchers, or even of
correctly referring their position.
For example, an article on the arithmological structure of the Tarot
de Marseille is announced, to be written by Alain-Jacques Bougearel.
It will connect a link between this structure and those of the Cheops
pyramid.
Now, apart of this being apparently crackpot, I don't see how a
purely numerical, arithmological structure of the Tarot de Marseille
cards can be in any way different from those of other decks with
exactly the same composition, like the Visconti-Sforza deck, the
Sola-Busca, or (in later centuries) the Belgian Tarot. I'm already
anxious to see if this problem will be addressed at all, but I fear
that all these investigations will be based exclusively on the Tarot
de Marseille, and no attempt will be made to clarify whether any
of the claims made about *this one* deck can be equally true for
other, non-French decks. I furthermore forsee that this turning-
the-blind-eye-to-non-French-decks will much enlarge the patriotic
believe of the writers that the Tarot de Marseille, and only the
Tarot de Marseille, is the repository of all wisdom and indeed the
oldest Tarot deck in the world.
In this way, decks "from other countries" (meaning Italy) are
referred to as "more simplistic".
--
Need I say more? -- Wait, I didn't tell you what claims are being
made! :-o
Well, the Tarot de Marseille is the only deck that contains on
the whole of its cards, and shown explicitly in the precise
designs, the geometric constructions used by the builders of
the cathedrals.
This sacred geometry employs the "golden number" which
can also be found in the Cheops pyramid.
Said geometry is such an integral part of the precise design
of the Tarot de Marseille type that it couldn't possibly have
been imposed on a still earlier deck without this feature.
Therefore the Marseilles Tarot must be the original!
There's not much of proof offered so far, but an image is linked
from which you can get an idea of the method Camoin will
apply to the cards:
<www.camoin.com/camoin-mag/images/VALET_DE_BATON_et_nombre_d'or.jpg>
So get out your rulers and square and begin analysing the old
decks!
Next, a most recent discover of two Roman period sphinges
<http://www.camoin.com/camoin-mag/images/actualite%20sphinx%20orange%20L
=780p.jpg>
in Orange proves that one does not need to go to Egypt to
explain the detail of the creature on the top of the Wheel of
Fortune.
Camoin silently assumes this creature to be a sphinx and to
have been an original feature of the Tarot. We will see if he
dares to question those two silent assumptons.
Next there's the claim about the *arithmological*
connection of the Marseilles Tarot to the pyramid of Cheops.
So this must be different from the *geometrical* approach,
I'm, well, not *really* anxious to see what constitutes this
difference.
Lastly, and on top of it all, Camoin seems able to deduce from
all of the above that there existed an "authentic initiatory
tradition" in and around Marseilles, which took its sources in
Egypt but was fully integrated in the Western environment.
This "initiatory tradition" is reflected in the Tarot de Marseille
deck "in a manner unique to Europe".
All in all, the upcomming articles are sure to be -- like much of
the "Maison Camoin" website -- a product of Marseillian
local patriotism. While I affirm that the Marseillians can justly
be proud of their home town, and while I understand that
a local pride is in high need against a population black hole
such as the capital Paris, I also think that this local pride should
not mingle with history, such as Tarot history.
---
[Small note concerning the "builders of the cathedrals": Camoin
calls them "Bâtisseurs romans (les constructeurs de cathédrales)".
This would translate to "Romanic builders (the constructors of
the cathedrals)". However, the 'cathedrals', as one usually refers
to them, are the *Gothic* cathedrals of France. How can romanic
builders construct Gothic cathedrals I ask? If Romanic builders
would construct a cathedral, wouldn't it result in a Romanic
cathedral then?
Or maybe Camoin *really* meant cathedrals in Romanic style,
i.e. from 10 to 12th century? But why should he single out this
period, since cathedrals (meaning seats of bishops) have been
build at all time with about equal frequency -- except of course
for this remarkable ushering of building activity during the
*Gothic* age?
Mysteries upon mysteries! Maybe Philippe should stock up
on Art History. Or maybe he is aware that the great Gothic
cathedrals were a product of Northern France, not his native
Marseilles, which lay but at the fringe of the Gothic influence.
So maybe this is the reason to refer to the earlier period of
Romance art?
In any case, only the future full articles will clarify this point.
--
* Christian Joachim Hartmann
* <luk...@Null.net>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Morpheus
>[Small note concerning the "builders of the cathedrals": Camoin
>calls them "Bâtisseurs romans (les constructeurs de cathédrales)".
>This would translate to "Romanic builders (the constructors of
>the cathedrals)". However, the 'cathedrals', as one usually refers
>to them, are the *Gothic* cathedrals of France. How can romanic
>builders construct Gothic cathedrals I ask? If Romanic builders
>would construct a cathedral, wouldn't it result in a Romanic
>cathedral then?
Read Fulcanelli (the early 20th Century French Alchemist) - translations are
available in English and German.
Gothic Art - Art Goth - Argot: the argot of the initiates is known as the
Green Language too.
Again - Read Fulcanelli (or his Biographer, Kenneth Raynor Johnson)
>Or maybe Camoin *really* meant cathedrals in Romanic style,
>i.e. from 10 to 12th century? But why should he single out this
>period, since cathedrals (meaning seats of bishops) have been
>build at all time with about equal frequency -- except of course
>for this remarkable ushering of building activity during the
>*Gothic* age?
Read Fulcanelli - the 'informed' amongst the French audience will clearly
understand the allusions the author is making here. I believe Fulcanelli's
only other book 'The Dwellings of the Philosophers' is only available in
French, despite being a best seller there.
>Mysteries upon mysteries! Maybe Philippe should stock up
>on Art History. Or maybe he is aware that the great Gothic
>cathedrals were a product of Northern France, not his native
>Marseilles, which lay but at the fringe of the Gothic influence.
>So maybe this is the reason to refer to the earlier period of
>Romance art?
Read Fulcanelli
But - I'll try to dig out something I posted last year on alt.tarot which
touches on this issue.
--Morpheus
Christian Joachim Hartmann
"Morpheus" <guildofn...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote in
reply to my comments on Camoin's use of the phrase
"Bâtisseurs romans (les constructeurs de cathédrales)":
>Read Fulcanelli ...
>Again - Read Fulcanelli ...
>Read Fulcanelli ...
>Read Fulcanelli ...
Hmm, maybe you could tell us what point Fulcanelli is
addressing specifically? Architectural history? Tarot origin?
Masonic fables?
What will I find there if I read his works?
>- the 'informed' amongst the French audience will clearly
>understand the allusions the author is making here.
Could you give us a short hint as to what is alluded to here?
A quick translation from "green-languish"?
>But - I'll try to dig out something I posted last year on alt.tarot
which
>touches on this issue.
Yes, please do that. Just the date this or these of your posts
were made on would suffice ...
**
A quick note about the original page in question:
An English version of it has now been provided. However, this
is still being worked upon, but for now, look to:
<http://www.camoin.com/mag_en/archives/origine_et_histoire.htm>
Morpheus
Christian Joachim Hartmann wrote in message <8ekbae$dlq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <GfZO4.9445$802.8...@news3.cableinet.net>,
> "Morpheus" <guildofn...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote in
> reply to my comments on Camoin's use of the phrase
>
>Hmm, maybe you could tell us what point Fulcanelli is
>addressing specifically? Architectural history? Tarot origin?
>Masonic fables?
>What will I find there if I read his works?
(Quote from earlier post):
Anyone interested in how the underground development of these Triumphal
carnivals manifested throughout Europe from Milan, might do well to
consult Kenneth Raynor Johnson's *The Fulcanelli Phenomenon* (You might
still get a second hand copy).
The French writer (formerly known as Fulcanelli) wrote two books on
alchemy before disappearing (See Pauwels and Bergier's *Morning of the
Magicians* for the background on this). One of these books - the
Mystery of the Cathedrals - details the iconography employed by the
master masons who built the great European cathedrals; may of which
appear to detail such carnival processions (of a ribald and pagan
nature) as Moakley's/Petrarch's Triumphs seem to depict.
That such similarities continue to be ignored by so called Tarot
scholars is really baffling to me.
>
>>- the 'informed' amongst the French audience will clearly
>>understand the allusions the author is making here.
>
>Could you give us a short hint as to what is alluded to here?
>A quick translation from "green-language"?
(Quote - from earlier posting):
I did make the point concerning the divine fool earlier - the caps and
bells _Jester_ is someone elses. I still think that it would have been
more 'authentic' even though the debased Jester archetype, admittedly,
retains only the fragment of his historical antecedent.
From: The Fulcanelli Phenomenon,Johnson K.R. 1980, Neville Spearman,
Jersey, page 47)
(Quote) The solitary , wandering Sufi teacher ... often wore a patchwork
robe and carried a staff. He made paradoxical statements which,
superficialy, might have seemed mere buffoonery and clowning to the non-
initiate. But they were in fact designed to trigger alternative thought
processes and frames of reference, rather like the seemingly illogical
koans of Zen Budhism.
(Quote) The patchwork robe, carefully stiched, and the wooden staff,
eventually evolved into the quartered, colourful costume and the
bladder-stick of the Harlequin and Jester. The name Harlequin itself
derives from an arabic play on words signifying "great door" and
"confused speech". It is "aglaq", plural "aghlaqin" and pronounced
"arlakeen". The arabic for patch also stems from a root which has the
alternate renderings of "fool" - "arqu'a", nonsensical, "raqua'", and
chessboard, "rua'at". (unquote)
--Morpheus
ro...@swlink.net
>
>(Quote - from earlier posting):
>
>I did make the point concerning the divine fool earlier - the caps and
>bells _Jester_ is someone elses. I still think that it would have been
>more 'authentic' even though the debased Jester archetype, admittedly,
>retains only the fragment of his historical antecedent.
>From: The Fulcanelli Phenomenon,Johnson K.R. 1980, Neville Spearman,
>Jersey, page 47)
>(Quote) The solitary , wandering Sufi teacher ... often wore a patchwork
>robe and carried a staff. He made paradoxical statements which,
>superficialy, might have seemed mere buffoonery and clowning to the non-
>initiate. But they were in fact designed to trigger alternative thought
>processes and frames of reference, rather like the seemingly illogical
>koans of Zen Budhism.
>(Quote) The patchwork robe, carefully stiched, and the wooden staff,
>eventually evolved into the quartered, colourful costume and the
>bladder-stick of the Harlequin and Jester. The name Harlequin itself
>derives from an arabic play on words signifying "great door" and
>"confused speech". It is "aglaq", plural "aghlaqin" and pronounced
>"arlakeen". The arabic for patch also stems from a root which has the
>alternate renderings of "fool" - "arqu'a", nonsensical, "raqua'", and
>chessboard, "rua'at". (unquote)
While reading the dictionary tonight, damn my life is exciting, I came
across the word Morosoph. From the french, morosophe dated 1693,
from the Greek meaning foolish + wise. It also says in Rabelais
(meaning I would assume Francois Rabelais): A 'wise fool', jester.
b. A foolish pedant.
Now to retire in Gargantua and Pantagruel.
Where else would it be?
Morpheus
>While reading the dictionary tonight, damn my life is exciting, I came
>across the word Morosoph. From the french, morosophe dated 1693,
>from the Greek meaning foolish + wise. It also says in Rabelais
>(meaning I would assume Francois Rabelais): A 'wise fool', jester.
>b. A foolish pedant.
Damn - got me sussed.
>
--Morpheus
ro...@swlink.net
Mere coincidence -
Morbidezza
>
>--Morpheus
>
>
J. Karlin
> This post is an reaction---
---but not much of a critique.
You know, there is something interesting in all that (or this),
for one thing YAMtian obviously can't read French (or English) worth
a merde, that or he's conveniently editing the arguments of the
defendants, but beyond that, there's an ideological continuity being
promoted in the Camoin site and its various enthusiastic claims for
tarot. I rather prefer it in fact, the bold and bald absurdity of it
(graced after all by the consultations of an infamous cinéaste), to
the newdullage peddled by the tarotspammatiers.
You all should take a (critical) look, if you've not done so already.
(jk)
**********************************************
Read the alt.tarot FAQ:
http://lonestar.texas.net/~r3winter/tarotfaq.html
More tarot resources available at:
http://lonestar.texas.net/~r3winter/alttarotqa.html
**********************************************
Rhianna
wrote:
>YAMtian YAMchim YAMmann wrote:
>
>> This post is an reaction---
>
>---but not much of a critique.
>
>You know, there is something interesting in all that (or this),
It would be even more interesting if I knew who the heck
Yamtian Yamchim YAMmann is: who is he? The problem is that
you call all of us the same name.
I was one of six grandchildren and whenever Grandma wanted
one of us, she'd just call out one of our names and expect all six of
us to respond. My cousin was the wise one, he said, "I only know my
own call."
~Cheers~
Rhianna
http://www.pipeline.com/~rhianna/index.htm
http://hammer.prohosting.com/~rhianna/
Christian Joachim Hartmann
r3wi...@texas.net wrote:
> > This post is an reaction---
>
> ---but not much of a critique.
The same old story! What Jeff hasn't written himself, he does not like.
However, I think that it's hardly a coincidence that the Karlin made
his post only *after* I posted the link to the English translation of
that page.
>... bold and bald absurdity of it ...
So maybe Jeff wants to undertake a "critique" of his own making.
Or should I assume that he's now banded with Camoin?
> You all should take a (critical) look, if you've not done so already.
This means that Karlin will need another week to get together anything
readable about this page. Whether he dares to post it is another
question ...
J. Karlin
> In article <39102C5D...@texas.net>,
> r3wi...@texas.net wrote:
>
> > > This post is an reaction---
> >
> > ---but not much of a critique.
>
> The same old story!
You're right, you're still an idiot.
Will that be changing any time soon?
Probably not, huh?
J. Karlin
> >
> >> This post is an reaction---
> >
> >---but not much of a critique.
> >
>
---were not a chimp?
Most likely, but we have to play the cards we get dealt.
Christian Joachim Hartmann
"Morpheus" <guildofn...@cableinet.co.uk> wrote:
> >What will I find there if I read his works?
>
> (Quote from earlier post):
Your input is appreciated.
> The French writer (formerly known as Fulcanelli) wrote two books on
> alchemy before disappearing (See Pauwels and Bergier's *Morning of the
> Magicians* for the background on this). One of these books - the
> Mystery of the Cathedrals - details the iconography employed by the
> master masons who built the great European cathedrals; may of which
> appear to detail such carnival processions
I guess that said masons also found some nooks and ingles to squeeze
Christ and his apostles into ...
>(of a ribald and pagan
> nature) as Moakley's/Petrarch's Triumphs seem to depict.
> That such similarities continue to be ignored by so called Tarot
> scholars is really baffling to me.
Oh I'm sick of that! All those people wailing about their pet theories
not being sufficiently well considered by those "Tarot scholars"!
Are these "Tarot scholars" somehow an institution that extends a
guarantee for research upon all things connected to Tarot?
I say everybody is a Tarot historian to himself. There is sufficient
material about the French cathedral sculpture, get yourself some of
them and see how their explanation compares to "Fulcanelli"'s.
However, if you want to discuss this in public, you might want to
tell us more about Fulcanelli's theories and how they relate to
Tarot.
Does Fulcanelli himself mention Tarot?
You are free to scan the images his book comes with and make them
available to us, and the same for some longer quotes from crucial
passages of the book.
Maybe no Tarot historian pays attention to Fulcanelli's ideas about
Art because the proper people who are dealing with this matter, the
Art Historians already dismiss it?
> (Quote - from earlier posting):
> From: The Fulcanelli Phenomenon,Johnson K.R. 1980, Neville Spearman,
> Jersey, page 47)
> (Quote) The solitary , wandering Sufi teacher ... often wore a
patchwork
> robe and carried a staff. He made paradoxical statements which,
> superficialy, might have seemed mere buffoonery and clowning to the
non-
> initiate. But they were in fact designed to trigger alternative
thought
> processes and frames of reference, rather like the seemingly illogical
> koans of Zen Budhism.
> (Quote) The patchwork robe, carefully stiched, and the wooden staff,
> eventually evolved into the quartered, colourful costume and the
> bladder-stick of the Harlequin and Jester. The name Harlequin itself
> derives from an arabic play on words signifying "great door" and
> "confused speech". It is "aglaq", plural "aghlaqin" and pronounced
> "arlakeen".
According to my Etymology, the French "Harlequin" derives from the
Old French phrase "maisnie Hellequin" (approx.: "devilish hunt").
TarotHrmt
>Maybe no Tarot historian pays attention to Fulcanelli's ideas about
>Art because the proper people who are dealing with this matter, the
>Art Historians already dismiss it?
What makes you think that art historians are the *proper people* to make
pronouncements about tarot history. Their input is important, but not the final
word.
Tarot Hermit
Morpheus
>Art because the proper people who are dealing with this matter, the
>Art Historians already dismiss it?
Who dismisses Fulcanelli's ideas about art? Be specific.
>> (Quote) The patchwork robe, carefully stiched, and the wooden staff,
>> eventually evolved into the quartered, colourful costume and the
>> bladder-stick of the Harlequin and Jester. The name Harlequin itself
>> derives from an arabic play on words signifying "great door" and
>> "confused speech". It is "aglaq", plural "aghlaqin" and pronounced
>> "arlakeen".
>
>According to my Etymology, the French "Harlequin" derives from the
>Old French phrase "maisnie Hellequin" (approx.: "devilish hunt").
You're not getting the idea, are you?
Maybe you should read some Idries Shah ...
--Morpheus
Morpheus
TarotHrmt wrote in message <20000505221537...@ng-bk1.aol.com>...
>>: Christian Joachim Hartmann luk...@Null.net wrote:
>
>
>
>>Art because the proper people who are dealing with this matter, the
>>Art Historians already dismiss it?
>
>pronouncements about tarot history. Their input is important, but not the
final
>word.
I think he might be one of those guys who listen to the Critics - rather
than forming his own opinion ...
Another point - when did Historians ever agree about anything?
--Morpheus
Christian Joachim Hartmann
taro...@aol.com (TarotHrmt) wrote:
> >: Christian Joachim Hartmann luk...@Null.net wrote:
>
> >Maybe no Tarot historian pays attention to Fulcanelli's ideas about
> >Art because the proper people who are dealing with this matter, the
> >Art Historians already dismiss it?
> What makes you think that art historians are the *proper people* to
make
> pronouncements about tarot history. Their input is important, but
> not the final word.
Well, if you'd read the sentence you quoted above, or the preceeding
discussion, you would have noticed that Fulcanelli makes observations
about sculptures on French cathedrals.
This is art, so ask the Art Historians!
I don't know yet if Fulcanelli drew any connection to the Tarot, but
since Morpheus refrains from addressing this point, I believe that
this is not the case ...
Morpheus
Christian Joachim Hartmann wrote in message <8f4hks$1tj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>In article <20000505221537...@ng-bk1.aol.com>,
> taro...@aol.com (TarotHrmt) wrote:
>> >: Christian Joachim Hartmann luk...@Null.net wrote:
>>
>Well, if you'd read the sentence you quoted above, or the preceeding
>discussion, you would have noticed that Fulcanelli makes observations
>about sculptures on French cathedrals.
>
>This is art, so ask the Art Historians!
No - this is Architecture - so maybe we should ask the Architects. Read on
...
>
>I don't know yet if Fulcanelli drew any connection to the Tarot, but
>since Morpheus refrains from addressing this point, I believe that
>this is not the case ...
C.J., you really must start to think a little more laterally. You should
have a look at Fulcanelli's work yourself, rather than remain in ignorance.
You posted something itneresting about Cathedral designs, etc, and I thought
I might point you in a direction which might inform your interest further.
If you're not that interested, fine - someone else may benefit should they
care to look into the matter.
The connection with Tarot is one of iconography. Medieval Gothic cathedral
design and architecture may predate the Tarot (except where the Gothic
design was revived in later periods - also interesting) but that notion is
inclusive of the concept that some of the figures on the Tarot may be
inspired by the same. You pointed this out yourself in an engraving you
referenced last year - the High Priestess/Sybil figure.
Let me quote from the Fulcanelli Phenomenon (again) (page 167/168):
According to Ambelain, Schemit (Fulcanelli's publisher) told him that during
the early part of 1926, he was visited by a shortish man with a long
moustache which swept across his cheeks in the 'Gallic fashion'. This
stranger, who did not give his name, engaged Schemit in conversation about
ancient modes of architectural design and embellishment, inparticular the
Gothis style, which he claimed ws a kind of code. This code, he said, was
none other than the old 'argotique' or old slang, still known s 'lague
verte' (green language). Green, he informed Schemit, was the colour of
initiation. He went on to speak of the profound , philosophicla depth of
cant, play on words, of ambiguities of years gone by which had passed into
the idiom superficially as puns. In reality, he said, it constituted the
ancient Hermetic language, the mysterious Language of the Birds, the genuine
'cabale solaire' - solar cabal - of the Initiates. He then took his leave."
(So - from this - figure that *I* am not going to spell it out for you. You
should maybe loosen up and dare take a peek at Fulcanelli's book.
It has often been remarked that the figure of Prudence is missing from the
virtues depicted in the Tarot trumps.
Have a look at the below illustration of Prudence drawn from a figure
adorning Nantes Cathedral (from Fulcanelli's 'The Mystery of the
Cathedrals').
You might draw your own connection ....
http://www.tarotcards.fsnet.co.uk/prudence.htm
Maybe that book might be worth reading after all .....
--Morpheus
Charles VI
www.e-groups : Tarot-L
TarotHistory
TarotDeMarseille
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com