A Brief Introduction to Tarot Cards

7/27/2019 A Brief Introduction to Tarot Cards

1/17

1

Frequently Asked Questions about Tarot and alt.tarot, version 2.3

Written by Jess Karlin, based on the original tarot-faq by Mark Danburg-Wyld.

Last revision: 8 January 1998The web version of this document lives at:http://lonestar.texas.net/~r3winter/tarotfaq.html

1. What is Tarot?

The easiest answer to that question is to describe the basic structure of a tarot deck. There are 78 total cardsin a standard tarot deck. These cards are divided in the following way: 4 sets (called 'suits') of 14 cardseach=56 cards (the 'minor arcana' or 'minors'). The names of these suits have varied from pack to pack over

time but generally suits adhere to some form of the following designations---

Wands (or Rods),Cups,Swords,

Pentacles (or Disks).

Each suit has ten numbered cards, Ace through Ten, plus four 'court cards' [note: the term 'court card'possibly comes from a corruption of 'coat card', 'coat' having once been used to refer to something, such asone's apparel, which would distinguish one's class or profession].

The court cards go by various naming conventions but---

King-Queen-Knight-Page ---is a fairly standard description. One notices that this sequence is identical to

that encountered in the 52-card pack of normal playing cards (the 'Page' being the 'Jack'), with the additionof the 'Knight' in tarot.

Another common scheme, one popularised by the Aleister Crowley 'Book of Thoth' deck is--- Knight-Queen-Prince-Princess

The difference between these approaches points to one of the myriad ideological disputes about names and'meanings' that characterise so much of modern tarot.

In addition to these 56 'small' cards there are--- 22 cards of the 'major arcana', often referred to simply as'majors', or 'trumps'. These cards depict various ideas and persons, the names of the cards are mostly rootedin Medieval or Renaissance religion and culture (particularly that of North Italy). The cards are numberedfrom 0-Fool, to 21-World (or Universe) as follows---

0. Fool [the Fool will sometimes be found stuck between 20 & 21]I. Magus (or Magician)II. High PriestessIII. EmpressIV. EmperorV. HierophantVI. LoversVII. ChariotVIII.

And right there our peaceful little perusal of the trumps rolls right off the tracks---


2/17

2

We should get used to this, it's going to happen a lot.

The problem with '8' is that no one can decide, with ultimate authority, what it's supposed to be. Somepeople say '8' should be 'Strength' while others say 'Justice' (and thus these two cards are locked in a struggleover the number placements '8' and '11'). At the same time, and to muddy things more, there is the wholeproblem introduced by Aleister Crowley, in his influential 'Thoth' deck, who exchanged the attributions (thecorrespondences between tarot trumps and paths on the kabbalistic Tree of Life) of 4-Emperor (yes, weskipped that problem) and 17-Star. Most people, who are not strict adherents to Crowley's Thelemic system,have not followed nor concerned themselves much with the latter change, but many still fight over the 8-11controversy. Based on purely astrological considerations the better choice seems to be Strength in '8' andJustice in '11'. But there's more to it than that---there almost always is in tarot. However, that's somethingyou can ask about on alt.tarot.So, let's continue---VIII. Strength (or Justice)---[note: also, in Thoth-influenced decks these cards will be titled 'Lust' or'Adjustment' respectively.]IX. Hermit

X. Wheel of Fortune---[no, there is no Vanna White turning letters.]

XI. Justice (or Strength)---[again, in Thoth 'Justice' is called 'Adjustment'.]XII. Hanged ManXIII. Death---[the one tarot card almost everyone has seen.]XIV. Temperance---in Thoth this is called 'Art', as in 'alchemical' arts

XV. DevilXVI. TowerXVII. StarXVIII. MoonXIX. Sun

XX. Judgement---as in the 'Last Judgement', in Thoth it is called 'Aeon'XXI. World/or Universe

After establishing these few structural facts, we begin to encounter some more problems, which will explodein all kinds of confusing ways, in our attempt to confidently and conclusively answer the question 'what is

tarot?'. We will discover that the answer does not entirely reduce to 'anything you want it to be' but it oftengets very close to that.

BTW, the name, 'tarot', is supposedly the French derivation of the original Italian, 'tarocchi' (actually, theoriginal Italian name was 'trionfi', but that's another story), referring to the deck and the 'trick-taking' games

played in Italy and elsewhere using these cards. [one theory suggests that since there is a river in N. Italycalled the 'Taro', and since a famous battle was fought there in the late-15th century between French andItalian troops, it's possible that this engagement, and its aftermath, exposed the French to tarocchi-playing

Italians, and the French, being confused about the terms 'tarocchi' and 'taro', adopted the name of the riverfor the cards.]

2. Where can I get one?

Lots of places these days. However, most 'mainstream' bookstores will only offer a limited selection of

decks, although they may be able to order just about anything for you (sometimes at a discount over orderingdirect from suppliers). Occult or 'newage' bookstores should have a wider selection of decks and also booksthat (allegedly) 'explain it all' to you. You can also mail-order decks through several supply houses ANDmany online stores are cropping up all the time who specialise in selling tarot decks and books.

3. How do current decks differ?


3/17

3

First, there are many kinds of cartomantic decks in existence now, and many of them are only loosely basedon any sort of structure (i.e., 78 cards organised according to question #1 answer) that matches tarot. Thereare also a lot of decks that DO match the structure, superficially, but which have questionable links toanything one might describe as a tradition of tarot symbolism. Therefore, I'm going to use a rather arbitrarymethod to answer this, but it is one that will at least make manageable the task of dealing with this question.As you learn more about tarot you will learn how to make up your own arbitrary answers.

There are approximately five historical periods of tarot evolution---obviously there can be more or lessdepending on how you want to slice it, but I'm basing this arbitrary division on the nature of the symbolismon the cards, and the ideologies, if any, they represented:

I. Early or Classical (c.1440-1550) --- Tarot was 'born' in northern Italy c. 1440 AD and was probablycreated to play card games, NOT to read fortunes, and it was NOT brought to Europe by gypsies. The earlydevelopment of tarot was characterised by many different decks and symbologies, many alterations to thosedecks considered the 'first'--- the designs of the Visconti-Sforza tarocchi decks--- but a pretty consistent 22-card foundation is maintained in the major arcana with a 56-card minor addition (no one knows with

certainty whether the minors originated with the trumps or were added later). However, it does seem as

though, contrary to what many people believe, playing cards developed BEFORE tarot cards and not theother way around. Also, the question of whether tarot was derived and developed from an already-existingdeck or was developed independently has not been satisfactorily answered.

II. Middle or 'transitional' (1550-1781) --- one sees a fairly stable but still evolutionary development oftarot symbolism culminating in the many examples of what has come to be known as the 'Marseilles' design(check Kaplan's tarot encyclopaedias for examples of these and other decks mentioned in this FAQ). Acouple of years ago, when this text was first written, I noted that "There is little evidence that tarotsymbolism, during this period, meant much of anything to anyone beyond their surface function as playing-

card illustrations." The evidence has increased a bit, with the discovery of some new documents whichsuggest speculation about the meaning of tarot symbolism began quite early (though whether it continued inany consistent, publicly-discussed arena, we still don't know). Also, it appears that decades BEFORE Court

de Gebelin wrote his ground-breaking occult essay on tarot (in 1781), people WERE using tarot cards fordivination (in Italy), so, contrary to what had been the 'scholarly' view (which was that the French occultists

began the tradition of tarot divination), it now appears that fortune-telling with tarot and with playing-cardsin general may have been more wide-spread and going on for much longer than was previously believed(again, 'believed' by scholars, MANY 'enthusiasts' will tell you that tarot was created by Atlanteans, and so

has a quite 'ancient' history).

III. Traditional or Occult period (1781-1909) --- I call this 'traditional' tarot simply because, while we seethe creation here of an entirely new kind of tarot, it nevertheless rests upon a core of the old traditions and

symbolism, and its symbology is that which, in direct or indirect fashion, is the tarot everyone knows today.In traditional tarot we see, (though very gradually), the evolution of the occult decks that, while still based in

Marseilles-type designs, add Egyptian and Hermetic symbolism to the traditional iconographies. Theevolution is not really as bold and dramatic as some people have made it out to be---and we don't see anyreally radical changes (in real decks at any rate---Eliphas Levi might have made an interesting deck but henever got around to it---publishing drawings of only a couple of cards that were nevertheless, veryinfluential) until the circulation of 'Book T' in the Golden Dawn and the incorporation and further

development of those symbols into:

IV. Modern Period (1910-1983) --- with the publication of the Waite deck in 1910 we enter the modernperiod, where tarot symbolism has become, in any 'traditional' sense, almost entirely the province of GoldenDawn symbolism, and that symbolism's most copied derivation has been the Waite deck (more properly, the

Waite-Smith deck, it was designed by A. E. Waite and painted by Pamela Colman Smith), the most populartarot deck in the world today (especially when one counts the myriad thefts of its designs into other decks).I'm not sure whether one can call Waite the most influential design in history (certainly one might be able tomake that claim for the Marseilles design as well) but its symbolism, and the other Golden Dawn derivatives


4/17

4

(most notably the BOTA and the Thoth decks) have become what most people know (at least superficially)as tarot AND tarot is NOW spreading around the world, so sales of the decks are undoubtedly at a peakpreviously unknown since the creation of tarot, 550 years ago.

However, the story does not happily end there for then we move into our last period---

V. Post-modern (1983-Apocalypse) --- This date assignment is purely arbitrary, since many of themotivations that have led to 'pomotarot' (itself, an amalgamation of diverse but often overlappingmovements and ideologies) started back in the 1960s, when multicultural, gender-conscious, and anti-traditional (the assumption was that IF it was traditional it HAD to be bad) attitudes were infiltrating allmodes of pop and academic culture. I pick 1983 because this is when that bane of traditional tarot waspublished---Motherpeace!! Printed on round cards, treating men like they were a humanoid avatar of theebola virus, and generally promoting a post-intellectual symbology that has nothing to do with traditionaltarot, Motherpeace has become the guiding light for the cartofeminist revisionists. The point was made---one could promote any nonsense he or she wanted on the back of poor defenceless tarot because few peopleknew what the older symbolism was about and there has been no public forum (until the advent of Internet

and alt.tarot) where these pomo decks, or any of the decks, could be easily and widely discussed and

critiqued.

Basically there are three kinds of pomo decks---

I. Cartofeminist --- my own neologism, describing feminist decks in general but particularly those promotingthe concept of the 'Goddess', and which find identity basically in the rejection of what are described astraditional icons of the 'evil patriarchy' (including obviously any traditional occult tarot symbology andinterpretation).

II. True Postmodern --- decks that seek to maintain some link to traditional symbols but which neverthelessignore traditional interpretations of the symbolism often for the remarkable and seemingly absurd reasoningthat occult symbolism is 'anti-egalitarian' by nature and so the meanings of the symbols should be thrown

open to what are often called 'intuitive' methods of interpretation---in other words: make up anything thatsuits your fancy and, if you are a tarot-book writer, make it 'bite-sized' if it all possible. Obviously, it's a lot

easier to design a deck based on this kind of 'thinking' and many of the decks we get here present mereshades of their traditional roots---as if, knowing that what those old (dead?) symbols meant is irrelevant andbeyond a pomo's multi-absurd consciousness, we can therefore add mere hints of what we don't care to knowanyway and then speculate (masturbate) about them to our mind's end. On alt.tarot you will see the merits ofthis kind of tarot, and this kind of tarot 'ideology' debated, in various forms, over and over again. There are

many decks which fall into this category---Morgan-Greer and Aquarian being 'good' examples of the lotalong with (obviously) the PoMo Tarot deck itself.

III. Igno-aesthetic --- as the word suggests --- that which promotes the aesthetic qualities of the tradition incomplete ignorance of its meaning---this is something like #2 except here there is no attempt whatsoever to

claim the artist or designer knew anything about the meaning of the symbols they depict. One ratherimagines, if Rachel Pollack had not invested her 'talents' to his project, Herman Haindl's deck could havegotten away with residing here---amongst some admittedly interesting-looking decks --- instead of in thedump-heap of cartofeminism. Generally, igno-aesthetic decks are done by real artists and, if nothing else, dolook good (not in any way a trivial attribute---especially when you've suffered through some of the 'art' that

continues to claim tarot as its 'templat-ive' victim). Lots of Italian and German decks of the last 10 years fallinto this category.

4. What do the cards mean, if anything?

Different decks will deal with 'meaning' in different ways. The original author of this FAQ suggested, sincehe had no time or interest in trying to tell everyone in a FAQ the ONE TRUE MEANING of the cards, thatpeople should compare the opinions of different authors on the question of tarot meanings. I think that's fine,


5/17

5

but it does not really address the 'why' part of this question---because it's not just WHAT something meansthat should interest us, but also WHY. 'What the cards mean' depends to some degree on what YOU decidethey mean---but then you get into the argument, something like the chicken and the egg problem, aboutwhere the meaning 'comes from'.

If, for example, the artist knew nothing about tarot but simply executed designs 'in the style of' tarot cards (acommon trend in postmodern decks) does that mean his cards are devoid of any meaning? That allegationhas been made against things like the 'Dali' deck, for example---all aesthetics and no substance. The problemis that is one looks deeper, Dali appears to have known quite a bit about tarot, intuitively or otherwise. Or, ifyou've learned meanings according to some non-traditional tarot like 'Motherpeace', will those 'special'meanings, given that they obviously contradict with traditional meanings, still apply if you are using 'Thoth'or 'Waite'? This is a problem that comes up, for example, if you buy some of the newage books on 'Thoth',like that of Angeles Arrien, which has almost nothing to do with 'Thoth' and everything to do with theauthor's ideology about what a modern audience 'ought' to get from tarot. So, if the meanings are not in someway derived from the symbols on the card, where do they properly come from? And, if those meanings areto be derived from the symbols on the card, and if those symbols are poorly understood or not understood at

all by the artist and are merely used as a template for a design meant for its aesthetic (as opposed to

symbolic) appeal, then what kind of 'utility' would those cards have for someone? It is not merely by 'design'that so many pomo decks can be quite charitably described as 'hallmark' cards. It seems the easiest 'rules' onall this would be to select decks that have been constructed with some symbolic paradigm (or paradigms) inmind (and heart and soul)---where the designers had planned out not only the feeling their images might

generate but very much also the thoughts. Most decks have so little thought (about thought) placed into theirexecution that they merit little serious consideration as a 'real' tarot deck, regardless of the lip service theypay to the structure and the superficial elements of tarot symbolism.

Even decks like 'Rorhig', for example, where much thought has been applied to the design of many of the

cards, suffer from the rather obvious fact that the artist was not guided by a mastery of tarot, so that the deckis symbolically insipid and incomplete in many respects. The more you know about tarot the more this kindof obvious shortcoming will serve to annoy you --- especially in a an otherwise attractive or 'pretty' deck.

The thing to remember is that tarot, whatever the intentions for its use by the original designers, has alwaysbeen graphically about the iconization of ideas; some of them very complex ideas, and the more a deck pays

homage to this fact (which involves not just the juxtaposition of a bunch of images but also the systematicforethought to know why certain images should go one place as opposed to another), whatever itsideological bent may be, the better chance the deck will have to reconstruct tarot traditions in a modern

frame. Of course, the first thing someone who is learning tarot should try to do is study as much as possibleabout what the 'old frame' was about.

5. Which deck is the best?

The original FAQ diplomatically answered this question---

"There is no consensus on this issue, and discussions of this question have the potential to start a flame war.Some of the more popular decks include: The Aquarian Tarot, The Robin Wood Tarot, and Crowley's ThothTarot. I see the potential for a whole other FAQ explaining some of the alleged benefits/problems with themost widely available decks."

Actually, we've already addressed some of the inherent problems of answering the 'best' question in theanswer to question 4. The only thing I might add here is that 'best' mostly has to do with you and what youwant to use tarot for. On the other hand, most people who are just beginning really have devoted littlethought (as opposed to feeling) about any specific objectives they may have with it---tarot just seemsfascinating and fun---which it is. Therefore, one looks about in books or from some more experienced

person who may take the role of teacher to provide a bit of guidance on what 'best' could mean. You willalso, on alt.tarot, see much argument about this question, with there being a particular dividing line between:*those who think 'best' should have NO limiting definition at all---thus, one should do whatever he wants toand should never be told that something is a 'bad' idea or application,


6/17

6

---AND---

*those who think some uses of tarot are simply stupid and don't merit any time or consideration as a serioustopic. However you may feel about this question, be prepared, should you start posting about 'best' ways todo and think about tarot, to defend your ideas vigorously.

It is likely some other people will disagree with you, no matter how well-intentioned you may be inenlightening us all about 'best'.

6. Why does the Tarot 'work'?

The original FAQ answered---"There are a number of different theories on this, which is the eloquent way of saying no-one really knows."

Actually, 'no one knows' is pretty eloquent too, since it is succinct and right. The FAQ then went into a

discussion of various 'theories' that have been proposed. None of them have any scientific evidence tosupport them. If you want to know more about them you will have plenty of opportunities on alt.tarot, butadvocating things like 'channelling' and 'synchronicity' is liable to get you into a flame war. Actually,advocating that people should 'have a nice day' is likely to get you into a flame war. However, you should

consider this---not everyone understands the meaning of the word 'work' in exactly the same way.

You will discover the same problem if and when a discussion should occur about 'belief' in tarot. Somepeople seem to think there is something, a power or ability, in which one needs to profess or deny belief.Others think such questions are irrelevant and silly, belief, in their opinion, not being required to make

whatever use of tarot they desire. Ultimately, one may file the answer to this question under---'credo quia absurdum est''I believe because it is absurd.'

7. How do I use a Tarot deck to 'tell the future'?

The original FAQ had the following to say on this one "Study the cards and learn their meanings. Practice a lot, on yourself, friends, or total strangers as suits yourpersonal leanings. Eventually, you should get pretty good."

Well, that's one way to look at it. And certainly one SHOULD take every opportunity to practice. However,I'm not so sure that everyone 'should get pretty good.'

There are many anecdotes we've read over time on alt.tarot about people's experience learning to use tarot as

an oracle.

Again, the original FAQ reminded---"And again, practice, practice, practice."

Yep.

To which I would amend this---

Tarot Novice's Rules and guidelines---

1. DO use formal structured readings, where card positions mean something specific like 'past influences' or'hopes and fears'. You are a beginner remember? Treat this as you would any learning experience---take itone step at a time. You can get creative after you've mastered the basics. Where do you get the structured


7/17

7

layouts? Almost all decks come with an LB (little booklet), that will explain a basic layout, usually someform of Keltic Cross (see Keltic Cross layout explanation at the end of this section). And you can find manylayout suggestions in tarot books and also in the Layout FAQ, posted frequently to alt.tarot and otherwiseavailable on the net.

2. DO ritualise (at least a little bit) what you are doing --- it will help you remember what is supposed to begoing on. By this I mean---light candles, evoke your favourite spirit guide, or simply be very methodical andcareful about what you are doing---some of the worst readers I've seen are sometimes the ones whose basictalents are superior to others. They get so convinced they've 'got it' after a year or so of reading (sometimesafter a week or so) they get sloppy and careless, thinking it is all so 'obvious'. Their innate talents never areallowed to evolve beyond 'sloppy and careless' and they soon tire of reading altogether.

3. DO trust that the cards will work for you---this does not have to be active 'faith', just trust, like you wouldtrust that the rollercoaster is NOT going to fly off the tracks. Trust aids your self-confidence, the importanceof which we will discuss below.

4. DON'T act like some kid with a watch or a fly, prying things loose to see how and why they work. Peoplefrequently can not get their tarot skills back together again after smashing them to see how or if they 'work'.The fact is that reading is a skill based on talent, knowledge, experience and the I-word, intuition. You either

got it or you don't. And I might add one additional component --- courage or self-confidence. To the degreethat reading is a performance-based medium of 'spiritual' exchange one does need to have that trust elementmentioned above and the self-confidence that they can 'do it' perfectly as well, if not better, than the nextperson. Bottom line, if you want to learn how to read cards, then study the symbolism, learn the meanings,and---

---practice, practice, practice.

I'm including here a basic guide to the Keltic Cross layout, which is the one most people first learn. This

layout uses the same principles or assumptions that you will encounter in almost all layouts---the cardposition acts similarly to an astrological 'house', providing the context (past influences, foundations, future

influences, etc.) in which the card energy will be read. The card that one reads in that position will then actas the 'planet', shading the position according to the card's symbolic meaning (sometimes, depending on thereading, one will also consider the effects of surrounding cards on each position).

Here are the basic positions of the Keltic Cross (based mostly on the version given in 'The Pictorial Key to

the Tarot', by A. E. Waite)---

1. Significator---(the card representing the querent or person asking the question---traditionally, one chooses

an appropriate card from the pack before shuffling and dealing the other cards; however, a new tradition hasbegun of 'allowing' the deck to reveal the proper card by dealing this position 'blind' along with the other

cards of the layout.)

2. Covering card---(the card representing 'general' influences or the 'atmosphere' affecting this question---note: lots of tarot-speak is vague)

3. Crossing card or the Cross---(the card representing obstacles or problems affecting this question---if thecard is 'positive', then the problem may not be that great or perhaps the 'problem' will work to the querent'sbenefit OR, maybe the 'good' stuff won't be so good in this situation)

4. 'That which is above' or the Crown---(the card indicating either the highest hopes of the querent for this

question or the best that can expected for him in the outcome --- similar to the MC in astrology)

5. 'That which is below'---(the card indicating the 'foundation' or 'nadir'---similar to the IC in astrology, notethat the relationship between the 'Above' and the 'Below' cards is this---the 'Below' is the birth point of the


8/17

8

question and so represents aspects or events that have come into definite being and which, Waite says, thequerent has made 'his own'. In practice, the card often represents the TRUE point of the question, and thequerent may not be consciously 'owned up' to it yet. Compare this then to the 'Above' card, which representsa point of fulfilment in the circle, and so, according to Waite, is not something that has been made 'actual'.However, the querent may be very aware of what this card represents, since he supposedly will be trying to'actualise' it).

Deal all cards face down (no, you don't have to do this but it's more fun to turn them up one at a time). Card2 is placed on top of card 1. Card 3 is placed horizontally over card 2 (so it makes a cross over it). Card 4 isplaced directly above the 'cross'. Card 5 is placed directly below the 'cross'.

OK, at this point we need to decide where we will put the 'past' and 'future' influences cards. According toWaite, if you are using a Court or 'picture' card (King, Queen, Knight, Page) to represent the querent in theSignificator position, then deal the 'past' card to the side AWAY FROM that which the 'Sig' is facing (i.e., ifthe 'Sig' appears to be looking to the left, deal the 'past' to the right). Then deal the 'future' influences cardtoward the direction the 'Sig' is facing. In Knight cards this directionality stuff is pretty easy. If you don't

want to mess with it then simply deal the past-future cards in the same places every time. Just remember

which is which. I generally use Left=Past, Right=Future.

So, to continue---

6. That which is behind---(the card showing events affecting the question that the querent will know, i.e., thepast).

7. That which is ahead---(the card showing events affecting the question that the querent will NOT knowyet, i.e., the future---but NOT the final outcome). Now you have the basic Keltic Cross---a circle about a

cross. The last four cards of the layout are dealt in a vertical line from---8 (on bottom) to 11 (on top) to theright of the Keltic Cross.

8. Personal Position---(the card representing the querent/different than the significator, this card shows thequerent in action, for good or ill, in the question)

9. Environment---(the 'other' of the question, similar to the Personal card, but this represents the environmentin which everything unfolds, so it is family, friends, work, etc.)

10. Psychological---(hopes and fears and dreams of the querent)

11. Future---(if what is shown in the other cards remains 'true', this is how the question will resolve)

If you have questions about this or other layouts, or specifics about how to read cards, enquire on alt.tarot.

8. What are 'reversals' and how do I get them into my readings?

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away (called France) this guy named Etteilla decided to do card readings

with something called a 'piquet' deck (32 cards, plus, for purposes of reading, a blank card, called the'Etteilla'). Etteilla provided TWO different meanings for these cards, one for the normal (or 'upright') card,and one for when the card would be turned upside-down (that is, with the 'top' inverted to the 'bottom'). This'tradition' has been maintained ever since, and almost ALL tarot books and decks will include meanings bothfor the 'normal' card and also for the 'reversed' card. And, it is the method A.E. Waite stuck in his highly

influential book on tarot (which was mainly a copy of Etteilla's work that comes down to the present day)and THAT book has pretty much been copied by everyone ever since.


9/17

9

Surprisingly, to me, there have been a number of people posting to alt.tarot who have expressed confusionover how to 'get' reversals to show up in their readings---YES, you do that thing which seems so unnaturalfor so many people --- you turn the cards upside-down MANUALLY (what did you think? that elves did itfor you??).

Now, there are a number of ways in which to get 'there' as well. Here are a few suggestions---(note---allthese directions assume you are holding the cards face down, but that's up to you of course---you WILL haveto make sure you are holding the deck in an upright position before you begin your manipulations, by whichI mean make sure the cards are all pointing the same direction which you will assume is upright for purposesof achieving 'reversals'.)

I. After shuffling (it seems to get a little confusing for people if they try it BEFORE shuffling), just invert(turn upside-down) a few cards. FEW means like 5-7 or whatever 'few' means to you. Then deal your layoutand interpret any upside-down cards according to the 'reversed' meanings. You say you don't HAVE any'reversed' meanings. Well, go get some. You can't do your 'reversals' if you don't have any reversedmeanings. And those meanings are generally supplied either in your LB (the 'little booklet' that comes with

most decks) or in whatever book which explains your deck. You can also, if those options are not available

to you, simply 'reverse' the upright or 'normal' meaning (again, assuming you've got one) before anyreversed card you encounter in your reading.

II. PRIOR to shuffling (uh-oh), you split the deck (no, not with an axe) into two equal stacks (NO, they don't

have to be PERFECTLY equal), and then you simply turn one of the stacks so that its cards are now facingin the exact opposite direction from the other stack. Now shuffle the cards. Depending on your dexteritywith this task, and the number of times you shuffle (is 3 enough, is 6 too many??), you will get a nicely'inverted' deck, just crammed with all sorts of 'reversed' cards that you will still be utterly hopeless in'dealing' with unless you have some of the aforementioned reversed meanings.

III. Put your deck on the table (or whatever), and pretend you are three years old again (for some of you nogreat pretence shall be required). Now, simply 'mess' the deck up---you know, just make all the cards go

every which way until they are a big mess on the table in front of you. NOW, put the mess back togetherinto a nice regular-looking deck (but don't worry about getting the card tops to point in the same direction---

just let 'em fall where they may). And there you have it. Unless you are amazingly unlucky or incompetent,you will now have a deck full of 'reversed' cards.

9. Can I read my own cards?

Simple answer: YES!

Ignore people who tell you that you'll be too prejudiced to read clearly, or that the 'energies' won't be right orwhatever the excuse is supposed to be. You CAN read cards for yourself.

Of course, you're advised to READ the cards, and not merely force them to say what you want (but thatadvice applies regardless of whether you are reading for yourself or someone else).

10. What's the difference between 'reversals' and 'dignities'?

When you 'reverse' a card, you are attempting to supply your deck with the some possible 'alternative'meanings, that is, something different from the norm. With reversals, what you are going to get is prettymuch of an 'either-or' situation, although there are usually several different meanings for both the upright

and reversed position. However, there is another way of generating these alternative meanings that does notuse reversals at all, and that is a system called 'elemental dignities', which seeks to analyse a series of cardsbased on their elemental relationships to each other, and therefore, ALL readings using this method should


10/17

10

provide opportunities, without recourse to manual inversions of the cards, to get sometimes very subtleranges of meaning with all the cards. To find out more about how elemental dignities work, refer to:http://lonestar.texas.net/~r3winter/edig.html

11. How do I use a Tarot deck for meditation?

Since I don't meditate much, in the conventional sense (if there is such a thing), I will take the opportunityhere to discuss a few ideas about meditation that seem to me reasonable and simple and which, I believe, canbe productively applied to one's contemplation of tarot cards. Osho (the 'artist' formerly known as BaghwanShree Rajneesh) says---"Mind moves in a line, a simple straight line. It never movesto the opposite---it denies the opposite. It believes in one,and life believes in two."

Yeah, so?

Well, meditation is often described as a search for some sort of perfect 'silence'.

To which Osho again properly notes---

"A dead man is absolutely silent. Nobody can disturb him, his concentration is perfect. You cannot doanything to distract his mind; his mind is absolutely fixed. Even if the whole world goes mad all around, hewill remain in his concentration."

So, if we are not in search of a 'dead' silence, what should we be looking for from meditation?

"Silence must happen while you are absolutely alive, vital, bubbling with life and energy. Then silence ismeaningful. But then silence will have an altogether different quality to it. It will not be dull. It will be

alive."

So, what 'live silence' is to be gained from looking at tarot cards?

First, we should recognise that merely staring obliviously at the cards, hoping something spills into our brain

from the shapes and colours OR, on the contrary, hoping to use the card as a harlequin monad, that will helpus shut out the noise of life, is only likely to move us into the 'dead' form of silence, since we are not really

trying to come to grips with the meaning of the card in any absolute or even personal way, but are trying tomanipulate it for some external and, to my way of thinking, 'dead' application.

We should rather be interested in, as Osho says, making the cards 'bubble' with life and energy.

Whose life and energy? Well, you think about it.

So, what I'm getting at here is that meditation first involves a preparation and this is largely a mentalexercise with tarot. Fill your mind with as many facts (and thoughts and feelings about the facts as you can)---in other words, learn what the cards mean. In the beginning you will not know much, but that's OK, the

more you learn about tarot. the more productive the meditation becomes.

When the preparation is done, then you will be ready to exercise this knowledge in myriad forms of'meditation', which, as you can see, don't necessarily take any particular form or function---life is ameditation in this view. However, if you wish to formalise your experience, you can find many guides to

teaching you proper breathing and postures by looking to books, newsgroups and websites devoted to yoga.

Oh, and what is it you are supposed to be getting from this meditation?


11/17

11

A living experience of the cards.

If that seems vague, ask about it on alt.tarot.

Plenty of people will offer ideas on what that means.

12. How do I use a Tarot deck to play a game?

Many games have been invented to play with tarot or tarocchi. Tarot cards were originally created to playgames, not to read fortunes or to represent occult philosophies, so it is with the games of tarot that one isreally using the deck in its oldest and (some would say) 'purest' application.Numerous variations exist, mostly bridge-like games involving trick-taking. See Michael Dummett's book,"The Game of Tarot" (see question 20 below), for more explanations of this material than you couldprobably ever care to hear.Also, there are some tarot web sites that include different versions of tarocchi rules.

13. What is the history of the Tarot?

The original FAQ answered this question---

"No-one knows the 'true' origin of the Tarot."

And could have added---"so everyone has just made it up as suited their agendas."

And that would have pretty much answered the question.

As with most terse truths of tarot, saying 'No-one knows the 'true' origin of the Tarot' is not entirely accurate.It would be better to say that very few people are acquainted with the history, such as we know it, of tarot. It

is true that no one can say with certainty where the motivation came to create the first tarot deck althoughone can arrive at a partial estimate by examining the best evidence for that origin, the symbols on the cards.

From such an examination, historians of tarot (of which there are only a few 'good' ones) have determinedthat tarot arose in North Italy some time between 1425-1450. Its symbolism is filled with ideas and personsthat reflect that North-Italian birthplace. There is NO evidence that tarot originated for any other purposethan as a gaming device. On the other hand, it is fair to say that no one can reasonably speculate about whatthe people who used tarot in the beginning (or prior to 1781) either thought about it, nor how they may have

used it, in addition to gaming. As some people have pointed out, gaming is itself an 'imperfect' form ofdivination, and it is not difficult to imagine fortune-telling growing as a practice with the cards fairly easilyand early. As mentioned above (see under '3. How do current decks differ?'), there is more evidence beinggathered all the time that suggests the 'social' history of tarot usage is more varied than merely as a deck ofplaying-cards and that this has been the case probably from the time of tarot's invention.

The original FAQ continues---"The most common myth is that it was brought to Europe by the Gypsies---but this myth comes from thefact that very early occultists who used the Tarot fancied that it came from Egypt. They were as wrong aboutthat as they were about the homeland of the Gypsies."

And, all kinds of legends, like the Gypsy myth, have developed to explain all kinds of things about tarot thathave no easy or obvious explanation---like the fact that it has 22 trumps. Why 22?

Is the number arbitrary? Or does it mean that there is some mystical connection between tarot and other

systems containing 22 elements, like kabbala?

If you refer to the timeline (again, see answer to question 3) you will see that MANY of the tarot legends ortraditions developed only recently, and in response to the growth of a general popular interest in tarot as an


12/17

12

oracular, instead of a gaming, device. One of the first questions a novice will ask is 'where did tarot comefrom' and most writers don't feel comfortable addressing a first question in a book with 'beats me'. So, manymythologies, appropriate to certain schools of occultism or politics, have been created to deal with theannoying lack of knowledge possessed by most tarot-book writers.

In short, in the absence of any real answers about tarot, they tend to make them up. This has been a time-honoured tradition in tarot since 1781, when Court de Gebelin first looked down at tarot cards and, in arevelation similar (in arrogance and audacity) to that of Joseph Campbell almost 200 years later,immediately intuited (manufactured?) that the cards were the lost leaves of the Egyptian 'Book of Thoth',containing the secret and 'universal' wisdom of the ages and weren't we ever lucky HE saw it.

Almost everyone since 1781 has based at least some part of their tarot shtik on de Gebelin's 'work', or atleast upon his gall. And, in all fairness to him, one needs to explore his ideas in context to the time and placein which they developed. Revolutionary France was a tolerant place for kooks of all sorts (political andoccult---one might almost call the attitude at that time, 'postmodern'). Also, the 'kookiness' of that period'soccult speculations was highly influential in determining the nature and mood of much 19th-century art and

literature, so it can not be easily dismissed without losing an important part of the Euro-American cultural

story, nor without losing much of the basis for the occult interest in tarot which has developed ever since.

14. What are the symbolic 'roots' of tarot?

In the original FAQ this question asked---'Is the Tarot related to Kabbala?'

To which we answer---Yes. But a better question is to ask 'was it always so?'

And, again, no one knows the answer to that with certainty.

However, the question about the proper place of kabbala in tarot drops us nicely into the middle of the largerquestion about what the symbolic roots of tarot REALLY are. It may be instructive, before looking at

possible answers to the larger question to answer the smaller one---

Is the Tarot related to Kabbala?

The first thing we notice, as have so many before us, including, obviously, the people who first publicly

claimed a tarot-kabbala link, is the 'happy accident' of the deck having 22 trumps, which people have triedbravely over the years to hammer and squeeze into some 'true' relationship to the 22 Hebrew letters (whichare the basis of kabbalistic doctrine). However, what is important to us is that the occult tarot, of which theWaite deck is the most influential, DOES relate kabbala in a critically important correspondence to tarotsymbolism.

While early occult commentators hinted at the link between tarot and kabbala, Eliphas Levi (French 19th-century occultist) is the person principally responsible for making this link stick as the primary symbolicmodel by which modern tarot would be interpreted and developed. His ideas, whether historically justifiedor not (he assumed the kabbalistic link was there from the 'beginning'), have formed the basis of some of the

most complex, and, in many places, most interesting, speculations about the meaning of tarot symbolism.Levi believed, as have most of the occultists, before and after him, that tarot could not have been designedmerely as a game, but that its true purpose must have been wisely hidden in that form by those who wishedto do a sort of millennial knowledge transfer through, in essence, sewing the pearls of wisdom theypossessed into the seams of a vulgar jacket called 'tarot'.

That such a marvellous ruse, if found to be true, would represent one of the colossal historical discoveriesever, goes without saying. That there is NO (documentary) evidence whatsoever to support the assertion that


13/17

13

any such ruse occurred, may require saying, but say it we must. Levi, while creating a wonderful andinteresting system by which to interpret tarot, did almost certainly CREATE it, and not DISCOVER it.

So, in tarot, a symbolic 'root' is not always what it appears. It may have gone through many graftings beforeending up in the form we may see in any particular deck, and yet, typically, the promoter of this or that 'root'ideology will declare to us that the root is SO ancient it might be dangerous to behold (mental cryptbacteria?) if it were not for their 'expert' guidance in revealing the thing to readers 'just so'.

In the midst of all the dissembling about roots one also will encounter a sentiment endorsed by certain tarotpolitical parties that we MUST NOT, CAN NOT, AND WILL NOT accept any theory, no matter how welldocumented, that seeks to fix the origin of tarot symbolism into any particular interpretation. Many peoplehave built careers by maximising the 'mystery' of tarot and they will not, by the gods, have anyonedemystifying a vein that has not run out.

All this is to say that when you start messing with the politics of tarot, you can rapidly be declared a hereticby all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons. At least they can't burn you at the stake (so far).

If you really want a good start on learning about the symbolic roots of tarot, get The Tarot Cards Painted byBonifacio Bembo, by Gertrude Moakley. I'm not claiming Moakley's theory is entirely correct, but she hasshown the 'way' to those who wonder if tarot symbolism can be deciphered without recourse to newagenonsense.

Answer, yes it can.

15. How is the Tarot related to other forms of divination?

If one buys into the theory that tarot is supposed to be some sort of magical/mystical encyclopaedia, then itwould certainly have the potential of being related to just about any other form of divination one could think

of.

There is an interesting theory, one discussed by Gertrude Moakley, that tarot may have been originallyderived as a gaming replacement for dice. If that's true, then it is reasonable that, as in dice, tarot may havebeen used as a means of divination quite early, but again, there is no written documentation to support that

theory.

There are some specific similarities between tarot and astrology, particularly in the way some systems oftarot divination are performed. Also, given a certain creativity in the formulation of layouts, tarot can bemade to simulate the superficial structures of all kinds of other systems. For example, one of the most

popular reading layouts is the Astrological or Zodiac spread, where each position represents either a sign ofthe zodiac or a house of a horoscope.

16. Is there a Tarot reading program for IBM/Mac/Unix/Whatever?

Yes.

As pointed out in the last revision of the original FAQ, this subject is so large that a separate FAQ could andshould be written about it.One question that frequently comes up concerning computer-tarot is---does it 'really' work?

The answer is no more approachable than is the similar question for tarot in general. People who tend todistrust computers and technology in general seem to think that only a human-spirit link can power the tarot(reading) mechanism. On the other hand, some computer programmers, especially ones who pain themselvesabout the creation of some 'perfect' randomising agent (algorithm), also refuse to believe that a computer


14/17

14

generated reading could be as 'natural' as that conducted by a human. This latter concern raises an interestingphilosophical point---one that has been discussed occasionally on alt.tarot---is the randomisation of the cardswhat we are actually trying to achieve by shuffling?

17. What about those extra 'Magi' cards in the Thoth deck?

We are including this seemingly narrow (single-deck) question and answer simply because SO many peopleask about it and because another one of those post-intellectual 'traditions' has developed about 'what theymean', which we will take the opportunity here to address.

First, you need to understand that tarot cards are printed in sheets of 80 cards---SO, you always will havetwo extra cards in a typical 78-card printing. People put all kinds of things on those extra cards, ads, readinginstructions, magical emblems, you name it. One of the things you can do with the extra cards is to print---extra tarot cards.

Now, it's also necessary to understand that Aleister Crowley had Frieda Harris paint several versions of the

Magus, before he settled on the final one (which is the one illustrated in 'Book of Thoth', the guidebook forthe deck). You might note that in 'Book of Thoth' Crowley does not talk about THREE Magus cards, butonly one.

However, when it came time for A. G. Mueller, the Swiss company that prints one of the versions of theThoth deck (U. S. Games is the other), to print the two 'extra' cards, they decided to include these 'draft'magi in the printing. So, all 'Swiss decks' have two extra Magi.

Over time, because people were basically ignorant of these facts, and given the natural newage tendency to

'make it up' first, and ask questions---well---never, people have created extraordinary 'theories' about thepresence and significance of these extra cards and MANY people have ignorantly assumed that they wereintended to be used in the deck and that Aleister Crowley designed it that way. He didn't.

So, just pull out your extra Magi, admire their artwork, note how they represent a clear evolution in the

development of the imagery, but realise that they are provided as a kind of 'gift', or 'extra', and are notintended to be used in the deck.

Of course, if your interest in tarot is to assist you in breaking all the rules, then you'll certainly WANT to usethese extra Magi, and be sure to make up some baseless theory about why Crowley intended the deck to

have three Magi. However, if you post your creation on alt.tarot, in anything other than an attempt at jest,you are warned to expect some severe 'correction' (some of you may be looking for that too---but in that caseyou might try alt.spanking or something).

[NOTE---subsequent to the writing of this, ANOTHER newage tradition, caused by this same kind of

problem (ignorance about the nature of 'extra' cards), was brought to our attention concerning the US Gamesversion of Thoth, wherein one receives the Unicursal Hexagram card (spooky!!), and a blank card as the'extras'. Some people apparently have decided that THESE cards also were intended for use with the deck. Inthis case they may have been aided in their confusion by US Games, which even includes in its salescatalogue a note about the '80-card Thoth deck'. This phenomenon is just one more example of how

complete ignorance is translated into a postmodern 'wisdom tradition' about which people crave 'answers'.Certainly, the pop tarot book writers are happy to keep supplying those answers as long as people keepasking these really dumb questions.]

18. What is alt.tarot?

It's a Usenet newsgroup devoted to the discussion (or fight) of tarot. More sites carry this group all the time.If you don't get alt.tarot, then ask your news administrator to carry it for you.


15/17

15

19. What are the 'rules' of alt.tarot?

There are no rules.

There are some obvious concerns and considerations that will keep you' out of trouble' (if that's a concern toyou).

Feel free to post whatever relevant thing you have to say about the tarot. 'Relevant' means about the topic---'tarot'. 'Relevant' does NOT mean a daily or hourly (or even weekly) dose of advertising about some tarot (orother) product or service.

NOTICE: not all posts about all topics (even tarot topics) will be received warmly by any or most otherposters.

If you are looking for a place to 'share' newage ideas and experiences, there are many 'nicer' places to go to

do this than alt.tarot, where the nonsense tolerance can be VERY low. On the other hand, if you want tolearn about tarot, there is no better place to go than alt.tarot. But remember, no one owes you the education.Some of the most knowledgeable tarot people in the world write on alt.tarot. Most of them are more thanhappy to field your questions. Some of them are, however, a little bit 'difficult' to deal with, and some of

them are self-admitted curmudgeons.

In the same way, however, no matter how silly other people may think your ideas or questions are, you arealmost certain to find other people on alt.tarot who will think that they are interesting and will want to talk toyou about them.

So, as with most things in life, you get nowhere on alt.tarot if you don't take a chance.

20. What books might I read if I wanted to learn more about Tarot?

Someone once asked me what they should read to learn tarot.I said---'everything'.

In a way that includes the many things that are not right too. To learn by negative example is still to learn.

However, since I like Thoth, and think it is still the most interesting tarot deck there is, I have to recommendfirst and foremost---

1. The Book of Thoth, by Aleister Crowley

Contrary to what some people have suggested you do not need any background in AC's writings to take onthis book. In many ways his personal views on the cards are not even the point here (the book is a very goodgeneral introduction to occult tarot) and he supplies you with all the additional references re: his writingsand 'Thelemic' interpretations to go do further study---this is not however true of much of the mythologicalmaterial he cites and that's part of the reason many people are intimidated by what they read in Thoth. If you

arm yourself with a good mythological encyclopaedia or guidebook you can make out just fine. If you havethe Thoth deck there is no substitute for this book.

2. The Encyclopaedia of Tarot, in 3 volumes, by Stuart KaplanStuart is an OK historian and not in any obvious way an occultist (read Dummett and Moakley for historical

insights---Crowley, Waite and Case for the occult stuff), but he is a great collector and presenter andprovides more decks per volume to look at and compare than anyone. If you are taking this subject seriously

at all you MUST have these books.


16/17

16

3. The Game of Tarot, by Michael DummettThis book is out of print and pretty hard to find. It is, however, the most substantial and detailed study of thehistory of tarot ever written. Since Dummett was, and IS, convinced that 'TRUE' tarot is only that whichpreceded the 'occult revolution' of 1781, and is therefore zealous in attacking the historical claims and meritsof occult tarot, he should be read with a number of grains of salt handy. While you will learn everything youcould possibly EVER wish to know about how to play card GAMES with tarot, and no small amount aboutthe historical arguments which have fascinated tarot nerds (these are the people who study tarot purely out ofa scholarly interest in its origins and development), you'll also learn that virtually all of the people whoinvented the modern version of tarot were frauds and kooks. While that is unquestionably true in some cases,the question religiously begged by Dummett is whether this fact kept occult tarot from ending up aphenomenon worthy of serious and balanced study---he simply dismisses that possibility and with it, anypossibility that most of the people presently interested in tarot, would give a damn about reading his book.And that's too bad, because there is much in it (in the fine print) that is worth reading.

[NOTE: In an effort to popularise his doctrine of the 'evils' of occult tarot, Dr. Dummett teamed up with acouple of other fellows (Ronald Decker and Thierry DePaulis) and produced in 1996, 'A Wicked Pack of

Cards', which was a focused study on the origins of occult tarot. Dummett's narrow vision of the value of

occult tarot, which harms the otherwise excellent, 'The Game of Tarot', is promoted as a kind of side-showact in the 'pop' presentation of 'A Wicked Pack of Cards'. The latter book will be a dull read, at best, to mostpeople, and will be a disappointment to anyone looking for a balanced 'history' of occult tarot.]

4. The Tarot Cards Painted by Bonifacio Bembo, by Gertrude MoakleyBack in the 1950s Moakley was a librarian at the New York Public Library. She decided to use the subjectof tarot as a test to see how useful and efficient the library might be to a prospective researcher. In the courseof the test she came to the realisation that very little serious work then existed exploring the historicalorigins of tarot cards. The product of her continued work into these origins became this very influential (but

seldom-read) book. Moakley put forward a theory concerning the development of the symbolism of earlytarot that matched tarot symbols to 'players' in the dramatic carnival which preceded the observance of Lentevery year. Her theory, while based mostly in her imagination of how such an event would have yielded the

characters on tarot cards, nevertheless pointed to the generally ignored (in 'pop' tarot books) influence uponearly tarot of Renaissance Italian cultural themes. While some of her theory tends to beg questions of logic

and coherence, the book is well worth reading for the questions it raised in respect to what the symbolism ofearly tarot REALLY meant to the people who created the first cards.

5. The Pictorial Key to the Tarot, by A E WaiteFor a long time I truly hated this book, even though it was the first tarot book I ever read. It is so heavily

veiled that it is nearly useless to a novice---in fact, it is a far more useless book to a novice than is Book ofThoth. Nevertheless, a novice SHOULD read the book to get a taste of the historical flavour of occult tarot,and also of the general nastiness that has always surrounded the debate over what is 'true' about tarot. And,for a student that has learned something about Christian and Masonic and Golden Dawn symbolism throughfriendlier sources, suddenly the Waite deck and the book will start to unveil itself in many interesting and

surprising ways. Waite also includes a good bibliography describing HIS sources, most of which will beunavailable to most of you, but some (particularly the works of Eliphas Levi), you should eventually find

and read.

6. The Qabbalistic Tarot, by Robert WangI include this mainly because it is a good introduction to the many original sources one should pursue whenstudying the Hermetic and Kabbalistic influences on tarot. However, the little card descriptions and analyses

are not really useful at all unless you are completely ignorant of the subject (which some of you are). Thegeneral warning provided at the end of this list is particularly applicable to this book.

7. The Tarot: History, Mystery and Lore, by Cynthia GilesI have many reservations about this book, but it does provide a concise introduction to the subject, although

the back part of the book where she sinks into Jungian and pseudo-scientific justifications and explanationsfor tarot is entirely silly and can be beneficially avoided (although, if you want a good concise introduction


17/17

17

to the kind of inane mumbo-jumbo that occurs in most modern tarot books you could read this stuff andavoid everything else). She also has a detailed review of many other tarot books.

8. The Tarot, A Key to the Wisdom of the Ages, by Paul Foster CaseThis book should probably be read along with Waite's 'Pictorial Key', for comparison and contrast. Casebased his own deck, and many of his tarot ideas, on those of Waite, but he often criticises 'Ed' for being tooquick on the 'blind' (that is, too ready to conceal the 'pearls' from the 'swine'), and then, presumably, P.F. willkindly turn about and reveal that pearl to us hungry pigs---except, it does not always quite work out like that.Case will tell you much more than Waite, he will do it more clearly (like who wouldn't) than Waite, but youshould recall that Case IS AN OCCULTIST, and he does suffer from the occultist disease---meaning heloves to occult things. However, I often find myself agreeing with the tarot insights of Paul Foster Case,even though he is a bit too 'newagey' for my blood. He wrote another book, 'Book of Tokens' , which is aseries of kabbalistic tarot 'revelations', offered in verse form, complete with commentaries. From amnemonic standpoint, I suppose these poetic devices are a good way to learn some of the kabbalisticcorrespondences, and the commentary sometimes offers some good ideas.

9. The Tarot of the Bohemians, by Papus

You want to read a book that makes A.E. Waite look clear and concise, read this.Actually, this book is required reading from an historical perspective---Papus was the last 'great link' in thechain of French occult tarot evolution that had begun with Court de Gebelin. Papus was a student of Levi, agreat influence on Waite, and this book includes a lot of bits and pieces of tarot lore and ideas you will

probably be unable to find anywhere else. It also has a lot of tedious drivel. However, his justification forincluding a fortune-telling section is alone worth the price of the book.

Here's a sample of his 'progressive' reasoning---"Still, since it is customary for the Tarot to be used for 'fortune-telling', we have touched upon this subject,

and rendered it as attractive as possible. We have tried to simplify the systems used, so that a woman of evenlittle intelligence can easily and with little exercise of memory amuse herself with this art."

10. Tarot Symbolism, by Robert V. O' NeillO'Neill's book is a quite useful overview of the myriad ideas and cultural influences which affected the

creation and selection of the symbols used in the first tarocchi decks. His interest is in providing analternative view to Dummett's anti-ideological 'it's only a card-game' analysis while at the same time he haslittle interest in (at least in this book) reviewing the validity or value of the later occultist speculations abouttarot. This book is NOT likely going to interest the casual reader, nor especially those whose interests areembedded in pomo-isms of the newage, but for serious students of tarot (or those who would like to become

one of those) 'Tarot Symbolism' is an important read, providing a nice balance against Dummett's rathernarrow take on the significance of early tarot history. 'Tarot Symbolism' is not easy to find (it's been out ofprint for years now)---however, it's author is available (via e-mail anyway), and if you wish to purchase acopy of his book, write to Dr. O'Neill at [email protected].

A final note on all this book-reading stuff---ALWAYS READ SKEPTICALLY!!!

There, you've been warned.End of FAQ

Documents

A Brief Introduction to Tarot Cards