In 1989 Franco Pratesi reported on a
sheet he had found in the
University of Bologna Library, with a list of words recognizable as the
titles of 35 cards out of the 62 total of the traditional tarocchini
deck of Bologna (a shortened deck, with the 2-6 of each suit removed but
with all 22 cards characteristic of the tarocchi). Next to each title
was what appeared to be a divinatory
meaning for that card. (Franco Pratesi, “Tarot Bolonais et
Cartomancie,” L’As de Trèfle, no. 37, May 1989, pp. 10-11. Online at http://naibi.net/A/22-BODIVADT-Z.pdf).
The library housing it dates it to 1730-1740. If so, it would be
the earliest document known pertaining to cartomancy with a tarot deck.
But what justifies so early a dating? And what is its relationship to other documents on this subject?
Contents:
1. Dating the Sheet
2. The Cartomancy Sheet and Etteilla, 1783 and 1770, compared
Contents:
1. Dating the Sheet
2. The Cartomancy Sheet and Etteilla, 1783 and 1770, compared
3. The 1802 Le
Bohémien and its reportedly 1771 (or 1757) "Petit Etteilla"
4. Did Etteilla's work inspire the Bologna document? Problems and responses
4. Did Etteilla's work inspire the Bologna document? Problems and responses
5. Summary and Appendix
1. Dating the sheet
Pratesi reported that the sheet was included among pages of a diverse
nature dating between 1760 and 1783, with an important part of them
specific to 1772-1773. Among them were several letters and notes of a
Masonic ambience, and in certain cases, specifically linked to France
(“d’ambiance maçonnique et, dans certains cas, précisément liés à la
France”), although not the sheet in question.
Such papers and dates correlate well with the known milieu of French cartomancy of that time, specifically the publication of Etteilla’s first book on cartomancy in 1770 and then the 1781 essays by de Gébelin and de Mellet. As far as Freemasonry went, Etteilla denied belonging to any Masonic lodge and held their degrees in some contempt (Decker, Depaulis and Dummett, A Wicked Pack of Cards, 1996, p. 89, although he was invited to speak at the “Philalèthes'"second congress of 1787). They at least were interested in him, and de Gébelin certainly was a Mason.
Moreover, since Etteilla was a reseller of old prints (DDD p. 80), it is
a reasonable possibility that Etteilla might have had, through his
business, a Masonic informant who wished to be kept confidential, for
which purpose Etteilla would have asserted other sources of information
(i.e. an "Alexis Piemontese" and 3 old people arrested 1751-1753).
So
Pratesi's find naturally raises the question as to the relationship
between the Bolognese document and the writings of Etteilla. Could the
sheet represent an early application of Etteilla's methods to the
Bolognese deck, or, if it was early enough, a tradition originating in
Italy before Etteilla?
Pratesi in fact
argued that, whenever the sheet was produced, two of the card titles
suggested a date for its set of meanings earlier than 1760. The sheet
lists a
Fantesca di Denari and a Fantesca di Coppe, that is
to say, female pages in the two suits of Coins and Cups. These cards
were ones that tarot historian Michael Dummett had in his 1980 Game of Tarot said had appeared only for a brief period of some decades, in the period before 1750. Dummett
noted that that the non-standard pack by Mittelli, 1664, had only male
Fanti, and that “accounts of the game in 1753 and 1754 refer only to
Fanti (Jacks) and not to Fantine or the like.” These accounts are Il Guioco Pratica, by R. Bisteghi, 1753, and Istruzione necessari per che si volesse imparare il dilettevole giuoco dei Tarocchini, written anonymously but by Carlo Pisarri, 1754. The latter is now online, and the occurrences of "fante" can be seen at https://www.google.com/books/edition/Is ... ni%20fante.
For Dummett it was especially telling that in giving the order of cards by
trick-taking ability in Coppe and Denari, in contrast to Bastoni and
Spade, he uses the word Fante rather than Fantesca or Fantina,
terms for which no occurrences are found in this book. So by Biteghi
and Pisarri's time, he reasoned, such cards were no longer in use, so
likely not even later than 1740.
Dummett knew of only two decks with Fantine, one “in the Bibliothèque
Nationale in Paris, from the end of the 17th century”, and “a single-ended
one made after 1725 in the British Museum.” He suggested 1690-1730
for the period in which the Fantine would have been in the deck. Pratesi more generously suggested 1650-1750.
In
a 2003 article (uploaded at viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1760&p=22186#p22186) Dummett revisited the subject and said "first half of
the 18th century,"
for the same reason as before. This time he also noted that a certain
group of cards unique to Bologna, the four Mori (Moors) or, in a deck
produced before 1725, the four Papi. The change from white-faced figures
with papal or imperial features to black-faced ones with arrows, is
well documented to have been done in that year, to mollify the
dissatisfaction of the papal legate. For Dummett the lack of cartomantic
meanings suggests that the list of titles and meanings were from after
1725, because there was more likelihood of cartomantic meanings
for papi would be more likely than fo Mori ("Tarot Cartomancy in
Bologna, The Playing Card 32:2, pp. 79-88). The Bologna University library's dating of the sheet at 1730-1740 (May 2020 personal communication from Andrea Vitali, who wrote on the subject in 2005), consistent with Dummett's opinion.
The date of 1770 is derived from a notation on the shield on the Fante of Spade that starts with "Bonia", an abbreviation for "Bononia", the Latin word for Bologna, and ends with "1770". Next to it I have put the Fantesca of Denari. These are on pp. 52-53 of Vitali and Zanett's book. The Fantesca of Coppe is
on p. 54.
It was not I who noticed this date. I had asked Andrea why, since the deck had fantine, he
did not in his book date it "1725-1750" or "1725-1740" for the deck, as
opposed to what he did say, "sec. XVIII".. He
said, "One of the cards has the date 1770 on it." He added that perhaps
it was a reprint of something earlier. But if so, that only shows that
there was a market for such decks in 1770, for whatever reason (I mean,
whether for feminine purchasers or fortune-tellers).
So we must ask: although Dummett's conclusion, and Pratesi's after that,
were reasonable, is it definitive? It seems to me that the mere fact
that Bisteghi and Pisarri do not mention Fantesche/Fantini explicitly
does not exclude their presence in decks of tarocchini or tarocchi at
any time. They were talking about the rules, and for that
purpose it makes no difference whether the cards in question were of
males or females; only the suit was relevant. Fante might merely have been used generically.
Nor can we draw any conclusion about when the practice of having
female fante started from the Mitelli deck, as Dummett did. It is
non-standard, no doubt co-existing with decks with the traditional
Bolognese designs, of which some survive from the early 16th century. If
both types of deck were produced, with and
without fantesche, the presence of one type does not exclude the other.
And while the surviving
Bolognese cards from that time only include triumphs, i.e. examples from
the 22 special cards, there were decks with female pages in nearby
Ferrara or Venice, for
example in the sheets of the Budapest groups, in particular https://www.printsanddrawings.hu/search/prints/5045, which has a female page of coins in the top row. On the same website we can see another sheet with all four as male, http://printsanddrawings.hu/search/prints/5050/. It is possible that this last is not a tarocchi; but there is another, https://www.printsanddrawings.hu/search/prints/5044,
with the same cup-drinking male fante of cups on a sheet that clearly
is a tarocchi, as is the one with the female fante of Coins. These of
course are from a deck of a different regional pattern. But
evidently there was no problem printing decks of both types (i.e. all
male or half and half) at the same time,in the same region
So
I am left with the conclusion that the "pre-1750 Bolognese cartomancy
sheet" is more likely to be from
the period 1760-1783, the dates on all the sheets it was found with,
than from any time before 1750. If so, the question remains as to its
relationship to cartomancy elsewhere of that period, in particular
Etteilla's first book of 1770. That does not, however, make it any less
interesting for the history of cartomancy.
UPDATE: I posted a draft of the above on Tarot History forum, at http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1759. I was gratified to see that one of the writers who had previously accepted the "pre-1750" argument immediately wrote back and agreed, saying that he had simply never noticed or made the connection to the 1770 evidence before. Another writer I consider an expert, Steve Mangan, wrote to second the motion, adding that the British Museum had a similar tarocchini they dated to 1810, and that the Cary Collection at the Beinecke Library had one they dated 1760 (I have not found these in my searches of these sites myself). Since there has been no further dissent, I decided to go ahead with this blog.
2. The Cartomancy Sheet and Etteilla, 1783 and 1770, compared
The operative part above reads, in translation:
As you can see, there are more correspondences than Dummett identified. In Kings, here is "man" by itself, not an obvious choice, given that the suits were readily and often associated with various professions, i.e. the clergy, country lords or peasants, the nobility or military, and commerce. It is the same for Femme by itself as Queen of Batons, linking with Donna in the Page of Cups; there is also "Table" in the Aces. The preceding 4 plus these 3 equal 7, out of 17, a not insignificant number.
There are others that could be a basis for the Bolognese cartomancer. "House tiles", Coppi della casa, is a variation on the previous "House", adding Coppi, the plural of Coppo, Roof Tile, which is spelled thsimilar to the word for Cups, Coppe. Cartomantically what it means, at least as Terry Zanetti understands it (personal communication from Andrea Vitali), is "secrets under the roof".
Then in Pages, we can see that it is a simple matter to take two of
Etteilla's meanings, for boys, and identify them with women instead,
since that is what the Bolognese cards have. You just take the meanings
for the two suits of Valets who, in their French tarot versions, lack
weapons, namely Hearts/Cups and Clubs/Coins, instead of boys, and of
course forget about hair color,
These adjustments for the visual differences between French and Bolognese suits add a total of 6 to the 7 correspondences. we had. 13 out of 17 is not bad.
Only four of the Bolognese meanings are left out: Evil Tongue, Truth, Thought of a Woman, and Vexations. Evil Tongue pertains to the nature of Swords, i.e. wounding. The other three perhaps pertain to some local custom or partiality of the cartomancer, easy to remember. For example, there might have been a tradition in which the Page of Batons, with his "stick", might have been identified with a particular womanizer. Also, there might have been a saying, relating to Coins, similar to the English "Put your money where your mouth is", i.e Truth instead of talk. Or again, to the specific meaning of the Queen of Coins, femme d'amour, a truly loving wife. I do not know about "Vexations".
In Kings there is a connection between Bologna and Etteilla that wasn't
there before: between Bologna's "evil tongue" (mala lingua) and
Etteilla's "evil man" (homme mechant).
In Queens we see a stronger connection between "whore" (P--ana) and the Queen of Swords, who is here not a "woman of the world" but a femme gallante, which means "woman of loose morals". Etteilla substituted femme du monde in 1770. But in Bolognese cartomancy we see the term again in the 19th century: the King of Cups is Gallantuomo P and the King of Coins (these are the two older men in tarot depictions) is Gallantuomo. But of course an older male gallant is not the same as a young female one. I also do not think it is the same as a femme d'amour, which I interpret as "wife of love". For these later occurrences of gallant see my list of all the Bolognese meanings, from the sheet and also the handwritten words on three later decks, spanning 1820 to 1920 (in my Appendix).
In Pages/Jacks we see Bologna's piensiero da donna cropping up in Etteilla's Jack of Hearts as Pensée d'un homme blond (thought of a blond man). This term "pensée de" never turns up again, although we do have "pensée" by itself for the 7 of Hearts in 1770. In Bologna pensiero di... appears numerous times. In the document there is precisely piensiero della donna for the Knight of Hearts., and in later Bolognese cartomancy, the Page of Bastoni;s Bastone in pensiero (as opposed to Bastone in personne for the Queen) and Suo pensiero. The Knight of Swords later gets Piensiero di spadina (thought of the dagger) and the Knight of Batons piensiero della Regina and Pensiero di lui. These later occurrences could not be due to Etteilla's writings, because by 1770 he had removed them everywhere. All that remained was Pensée for the 7 of Spades.
In the Tens we see the words courreaux and colere, both meaning anger, which is just a strong version of vexation. Neither word ever appeared in the Petit Etteilla. Yet oddly it does appear in his Tarot, in the same reversed meaning.
The only Bologna meaning not accounted for is "Truth", for which any connection to Etteilla is remote. One can speculate about a relationship to femme d'amour, as somhow meaning "true love", but that is all it is, speculation. But a 95% corelation, 16 out of 17, is not bad, even if some take some imagination. That is more than I would expect if the medium was simply word of mouth from practitioner to practitioner over decades. Even within Bologna, over a fifty year period, there isn't such a match.
The 1771/1757 document also explains one important difference between Etteilla's 1770 book and the Bologna cartomancy sheet. The 1770 book had Reversed as well as Upright meanings for almost every card. The Bologna sheet has no reversals. In the 1771/1757 document, there are reversals in only one suit, Piques. It is easy enough to understand why someone using the 1771/1757 as inspiration for the Bolognese sheet would neglect such reversals, as they are the exception rather than the rule.
This booklet also accounts for another difference between Etteilla 1770 and the cartomancy sheet. Etteilla had a special significator card, standing for the consultant, called "Etteilla", a 33rd card. Normally it was just one of the court cards. But there is no such card in 1757/1771.
Another feature pointing to the 1771/1757 booklet rather than the 1770 book is that the two meanings that have the closest match - gallant and pensiero de... - continue to be used in Bologna long after they have disappeared from French cartomancy. In fact they do not appear in any of Etteilla's books, only the 1771 booklet. But how could that booklet, of quite limited circulation, have managed to get to Northeastern Italy in the very decade in which it had been produced in Paris?
4. Did Etteilla's work inspire the Bologna document? Problems and responses
How could the 1757/1771 document in Paris of quite limited circulation have influenced a document in Bologna in the same decade? Here is one scenario. The very person who had asked Etteilla's permission to distribute it more widely, even though only 15 years of age, suddenly found himself removed from Paris in precisely what is now Northeastern Italy, in a cosmopolitan milieu that would likely have been very intrigued by what he had to offer.
Jacques Saint-Sauveur's father was a career diplomat who, after years of suffering disgrace, even prison, in Paris was suddenly given a position as consul to Trieste, in March of 1772 (I get this information from the entry for Saint-Sauveur in an 1826 biographical dictionary that Steve linked to at http://tarotforum.net/showpost.php?s=38 ... ostcount=9). I would expect that the father would have gone first and then, perhaps at the end of the school year, his family would have followed, including 15 year old Jacques. If he acquired the booklet in 1772 as he says, he would have had it with him going to Trieste. Even though then Austrian, the city was quite close to Venice, then an independent city-state to which doubtless his father and he would have had numerous occasions to visit. If he ever reprinted it, it would have probably been in this new milieu. And since his father was in the process of grooming Jacques for a diplomatic career himself, the necessary introductions would have been made, including, as would be likely for a person of his class and profession, an entry into Freemasonry. Venice was also the nearest cosmopolitan city to Bologna. It is not hard to imagine someone from there interested in exotica picking up a copy, whether from a friend or in a shop.
However this scenario raises other problems. For one, why would the meanings have shifted so much from the cards designated by Etteilla to those of the cartomancy sheet? While it is true that the same meanings wander among cards as we go through the history of cartomancy in Italy, these shifts are decades apart and probably due to errors in oral transmission rather than deliberate reinterpretations. On the other hand, after Etteilla's first cards in 1789 much the same keywords appeared in much the same places on Etteilla decks ever since (not counting those since 1977 by Cartes France). In an age when the written word is the primary means of transmission, variability is much less.
So we have to ask, why would there be so many shifts in card assignments, even if the meanings stayed more or less the same? One answer might be that the person constructing the list had enough to do getting the meanings to fit the Italian cards. That will perhaps explain differences among the court cards. But what about the number cards?
2. The Cartomancy Sheet and Etteilla, 1783 and 1770, compared
Dummett asked, "Is there any connection between French and Italian tarot
cartomancy?" (p. 80 of his 2003 article)?, adding, "If so, it could
only have come through Etteilla." (again, it is uploaded at viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1760&p=22186#p22186).
If I may put to one side for the moment his discussion of Etteilla's claimed source, an Italian named Alexis, Dummett's next comment (p. 81) is
The other ten meanings in Bologna are far from what Etteilla says. Five out of fifteen is not nothing, but neither is it much, especially since Bologna's are mostly obvious. It is conceivable that Etteilla would have met Italians in his work as a print dealer, or Freemasons with Italian connections, some of whom we know had an interest in cartomancy. One of them might have known about Italian cartomancy - but all he could remember correctly were the obvious ones. Or Etteilla thought them up himself; with such suggestive cards, it is not hard to hit near the bullseye a few times, coming up with the easy ones. No systematic relationship is demonstrated, no information from a special source.
On the other side, it is clear that the Bolognese cartomancer couldn't have gotten those six meanings from Etteilla. His book wasn't published until 1783, and the papers with which the sheet were found end in 1782. But there is no reason why he should have.
Regarding the suit cards, of course it is a different story, since Etteilla had published his book on those in 1770, which is just about right for Bologna, considering the mass of papers there from 1772-1773. Could the Bolognese cartomancer have used the 1770 book as his basis for the suit cards; meanings?
Here we have to bear in mind, as Dummett does, the suit correspondences between the French Piquet deck and the French Tarot deck: Etteilla took Hearts as Cups, Diamonds (Carreaux, literally tiles) as Bastoni, Clubs (Trefles, literally Clovers) as Coins, and Spades (Piques) as Swords. This can be seen by comparing Etteilla's tarot assignments in 1783 with his Piquet assignments in 1770. It is also stated, preced by a discussion of the corresponding Tarot suits, by the Comte de Mellet in 1781 (on p. 403 of Monde Primitif, Vol, 8, in Gallica, translated by Steve Mangan at).
If I may put to one side for the moment his discussion of Etteilla's claimed source, an Italian named Alexis, Dummett's next comment (p. 81) is
This is not totally true. First, since Dummett's chart did not reproduce very well at the link just given, here are the Bolognese 1760-1782 document's trump meanings (Vitali and Zanetti 2005, p. 80):Certainly there is no correspondence between the meanings given to the trumps in the XVIII-century Bolognese list and those which Etteilla assigned to his trump cards when he began to practise Tarot cartomancy.
There are actually six meanings in the Bologna document for trumps that correspond more or less to meanings in his 1783 3rd Cahier (see my translation at http://thirdcahier.blogspot.com/): Folly for the Fool, Death as a reminder of one's mortality, Voyage for World, Marriage for the Love card (as opposed to love; well, we know about Etteilla's unhappy marriage); Day for the upright meaning of a card of his own invention showing a sun above a moon, and Night for the Reversed of this same card. In Bologna those were the meanings of the Sun and Moon respectively.Angelo - Sposalizio e Accomodamento (Wedding and Arangement)
Mondo - Viaggio lungo (Long journey)
Sole- Giorno (Day)
Luna - Notte (Night)
Stella - Regalo (Gift)
Diavolo - Rabbia (Anger)
Morte - Morte (Death)
Traditore - Tradimento (Betrayal)
Vecchio - Un vecchio (An old man)
Forza - Violenza (Violence)
Tempra - Tempo (Time)
Carro - Viaggio (Journey)
Amore - Amore (Love
Bagattino - Uomo maritato (Married man)
Matto - Pazzia (Craziness)
The other ten meanings in Bologna are far from what Etteilla says. Five out of fifteen is not nothing, but neither is it much, especially since Bologna's are mostly obvious. It is conceivable that Etteilla would have met Italians in his work as a print dealer, or Freemasons with Italian connections, some of whom we know had an interest in cartomancy. One of them might have known about Italian cartomancy - but all he could remember correctly were the obvious ones. Or Etteilla thought them up himself; with such suggestive cards, it is not hard to hit near the bullseye a few times, coming up with the easy ones. No systematic relationship is demonstrated, no information from a special source.
On the other side, it is clear that the Bolognese cartomancer couldn't have gotten those six meanings from Etteilla. His book wasn't published until 1783, and the papers with which the sheet were found end in 1782. But there is no reason why he should have.
Regarding the suit cards, of course it is a different story, since Etteilla had published his book on those in 1770, which is just about right for Bologna, considering the mass of papers there from 1772-1773. Could the Bolognese cartomancer have used the 1770 book as his basis for the suit cards; meanings?
Here we have to bear in mind, as Dummett does, the suit correspondences between the French Piquet deck and the French Tarot deck: Etteilla took Hearts as Cups, Diamonds (Carreaux, literally tiles) as Bastoni, Clubs (Trefles, literally Clovers) as Coins, and Spades (Piques) as Swords. This can be seen by comparing Etteilla's tarot assignments in 1783 with his Piquet assignments in 1770. It is also stated, preced by a discussion of the corresponding Tarot suits, by the Comte de Mellet in 1781 (on p. 403 of Monde Primitif, Vol, 8, in Gallica, translated by Steve Mangan at).
The Hearts, (the Cups), anounce happiness.The Clubs (the Coins), fortune.The Spades (1), misfortune.The Batons, indifference & the countryside.
It is also a reasonable set of correspondences, independently of the
actual derivation of French suits (from German ones). The suit of Coins
in the Tarot de Marseille tended to have a four-petaled flower in the
middle of their coins, and diamonds in the middle of the cards where the
sticks crossed (Chosson, 1736, is below, together with the equivalent cards in the 1770 tarocchini).
Dummett then observes that there is one "striking coincidence": Bologna's 10 of Swords and Etteilla's 10 of Spades both have "tears" as their meaning. He reports three other correspondences. In two of them it is among cards of the same rank, not of the same precise cards. The Ace of Swords and the Ace of Diamonds both have the meaning "letter"; and the Ten of Coins means "gold" while the 10 of Diamonds has the similar "money". Another correspondence is between an Ace, that of Cups, and a Ten, that of Clubs, both meaning "house".
Dummett rightly points out that we should not be surprised if meanings wander from card to card; they do the same if you compare the sheet with the meanings in later Bolognese sources. Dummett says he is uncertain whether Etteilla got his meanings from Italian cartomancy or not. He offers the possible hope that Decker's forthcoming book (which finally did come out 10 years later) would offer some defense of the idea that Etteilla's were derived from the Bologna (I don't see any). He does not consider the reverse question, apparently thinking that the sheet was too early to have been derived from Etteilla's book.
In 2005 Vitali and Zanetti repeated the four correspondences identified by Dummett, as well as giving most of those on the Cartomancy Sheet (they leave one out, supplied by Pratesi) and no one has looked at the two lists since. It is time to revisit the two lists.
Dummett then observes that there is one "striking coincidence": Bologna's 10 of Swords and Etteilla's 10 of Spades both have "tears" as their meaning. He reports three other correspondences. In two of them it is among cards of the same rank, not of the same precise cards. The Ace of Swords and the Ace of Diamonds both have the meaning "letter"; and the Ten of Coins means "gold" while the 10 of Diamonds has the similar "money". Another correspondence is between an Ace, that of Cups, and a Ten, that of Clubs, both meaning "house".
Dummett rightly points out that we should not be surprised if meanings wander from card to card; they do the same if you compare the sheet with the meanings in later Bolognese sources. Dummett says he is uncertain whether Etteilla got his meanings from Italian cartomancy or not. He offers the possible hope that Decker's forthcoming book (which finally did come out 10 years later) would offer some defense of the idea that Etteilla's were derived from the Bologna (I don't see any). He does not consider the reverse question, apparently thinking that the sheet was too early to have been derived from Etteilla's book.
In 2005 Vitali and Zanetti repeated the four correspondences identified by Dummett, as well as giving most of those on the Cartomancy Sheet (they leave one out, supplied by Pratesi) and no one has looked at the two lists since. It is time to revisit the two lists.
The most accessible place to read Etteilla's lists is in Google Books' scans of the 2nd edition, 1773, at https://books.google.de/books?id=CI85AA ... &q&f=false,
pp. 9-15. This reference is for anyone who wants to check my
translations (and please do, as I make mistakes). In English, by ranks,
the result is:
Etteilla 1770/Bologna 1760-1782
Kings
|
Hearts/Cups
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla
Upright
|
Blond man
|
A man
|
Dark-haired
[brun] man
|
Man in legal
profession |
Etteilla
Reversed
|
Light brown- haired [chatain blond] man | Another man |
Brown-haired
[chatain brun] man |
Widower |
Bologna
|
Old man
|
Unmarried man
|
The man
|
Evil tongue
|
Queens
|
Hearts/Cups
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla
Upright
|
Blond woman
|
A woman
|
Dark-haired
woman
|
Widow
|
Etteilla
Reversed
|
Light brown-haired woman | Another woman |
Brown-haired
woman |
Woman of the world |
Bologna
|
Married woman
|
Whore
|
Truth
|
missing
|
Pages/
Jacks |
Hearts/Cups (f in Bologna)
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins (f in Bologna)
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla Up
|
Blond boy
|
Soldier
|
Dark-haired boy
|
Widow
|
Etteilla Reversed
|
Light brown-haired boy | Domestic servant |
Brown-haired
boy |
Spy |
Bologna
|
The woman
|
Thought of the woman
|
Young woman
|
missing
|
Aces
|
Hearts/Cups
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla Upright
|
Mars, laborious person
|
Letters
|
Much money |
Venus, pleasure
loving woman |
Etteilla Reversed
|
Table extraordinaire | Note | Nobility | Pregnancy |
Bologna
|
House
|
Vexations
|
Table
|
Letter
|
Tens
|
Hearts/Cups
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla Up
|
City where one is
|
Gold
|
House |
Tears
|
Etteilla Re
|
Inheritance | Betrayal | Lover | Loss |
Bologna
|
Married woman
|
missing
|
Money
|
Tears
|
As you can see, there are more correspondences than Dummett identified. In Kings, here is "man" by itself, not an obvious choice, given that the suits were readily and often associated with various professions, i.e. the clergy, country lords or peasants, the nobility or military, and commerce. It is the same for Femme by itself as Queen of Batons, linking with Donna in the Page of Cups; there is also "Table" in the Aces. The preceding 4 plus these 3 equal 7, out of 17, a not insignificant number.
There are others that could be a basis for the Bolognese cartomancer. "House tiles", Coppi della casa, is a variation on the previous "House", adding Coppi, the plural of Coppo, Roof Tile, which is spelled thsimilar to the word for Cups, Coppe. Cartomantically what it means, at least as Terry Zanetti understands it (personal communication from Andrea Vitali), is "secrets under the roof".
Moreover, we have to take into consideration that Bolognese court cards
looked different from French court cards (Paris standard above). Hair
color was easily associated with suits in France because of the red and
black suit signs. This wouldn't work in Italy. In Bologna, what
distinguished the Kings was bearded and older vs. non-bearded and
younger. So of course we will have, instead of "blond man" in Hearts,
"Old Man" in Cups. And "Married woman" for the Old Man's Queen (since
older men are married), and "whore" (Puttana) for the young king, perhaps also
related to "woman of the world" in the other suit, Piques, with another
young king. Below are the "Dalla Torre" Kings of Batons and Swords,
together with the associated Queens. The Kings of Coins and Cups, not shown, are both old and bearded.
These adjustments for the visual differences between French and Bolognese suits add a total of 6 to the 7 correspondences. we had. 13 out of 17 is not bad.
Only four of the Bolognese meanings are left out: Evil Tongue, Truth, Thought of a Woman, and Vexations. Evil Tongue pertains to the nature of Swords, i.e. wounding. The other three perhaps pertain to some local custom or partiality of the cartomancer, easy to remember. For example, there might have been a tradition in which the Page of Batons, with his "stick", might have been identified with a particular womanizer. Also, there might have been a saying, relating to Coins, similar to the English "Put your money where your mouth is", i.e Truth instead of talk. Or again, to the specific meaning of the Queen of Coins, femme d'amour, a truly loving wife. I do not know about "Vexations".
3. The 1802 Le
Bohémien and its reportedly 1771 (or 1757) "Petit Etteilla"
Now I want to add some data on the Etteilla side that I think is helpful, namely, a "Petit Etteilla" included in the book Le
Bohémien, contenant l’Art de tirer les cartes, suivi par l’Art
d”Escamoter, et de l’application des Rêves aux Numéros de la Lotterie. My copy, scanned for me by the University of Chicago, is Paris 1802; it was originally 1797 according to DDD, note 65 on p. 275.
Although anonymous, there are good reasons to think the author, or at least editor, was Jacques Saint-Sauveur. After attending school in Paris, at least until 1772, he followed his father’s career in the diplomatic service and then wrote illustrated travel books; he also seems also to have been known for performing magic tricks, which is what the second half of Le Bohemien is devoted to explaining.
Decker, Depaulis and Dummett state that he published a Petit Etteilla,
i.e. a Piquet deck marked with Etteilla’s keywords, sometime in the last
years of the 18th century. They also observe that the publisher’s
address for the earlier printing of the booklet on magic tricks (Le
Petit Escomoteur) is the same as that given for “Cen." (Citoyen) Saint-Sauveur
for his Petit Etteilla. An example of this deck has now been put online by the British Museum. The Consultant card, on which "Cen. St. Sauveur" gives his name and address, and the 9 of Hearts are at right.
L’Art de tirer les cartes is a compendium of different methods of reading ordinary playing cards, using different layouts and different sets of meanings. About the short treatise, again called "Le Petit Etteilla", the editor says it is a transcription of a work that Etteilla printed privately for friends in 1771. In it are two sets of cartomantic meanings for the Piquet deck. The editor says that a copy fell into his hands, and he went to visit Etteilla in 1772, to ask permission to reprint it. He continues (p. 46; I thank Alain Bougereal for disentangling the first line):
As to where this system came from, the 1791 document mentions only “three elderly persons” imprisoned for cartomancy in Paris 1751-1753. This passage was misleadingly paraphrased by DDD, who say only that he "restored" their false meanings (p. 97), leaving it unclear on what basis he did so. Decker corrected this impression (The Esoteric Tarot, 2013). Rather than use his translation, I will give the French original plus as literal a translation as possible (I get the French from the little white book that accompanies the France Cartes edition of the Petit Etteilla, whose cards agree 100% with those in the British Museum, except for not including the name and address of "citoyen" Saint-Sauveur, and instead substituting those of the current publisher):
What follows in the 1802 text are these meanings of 1753-1757, as published in 1771. There are two sets, one much shorter than the other, due to there being many more Reversed meanings. Both are of interest. I have cut and pasted the relevant passages from the 1802, by suit, with the first set on top and the second on the bottom. Here are Hearts and Diamonds, then Clubs and Spades. I don't display the pictures themselves because then there would be too much of a gap in the text. If you go to the Appendix to this paper, you will see both the French and the Italian meanings, the latter below the former:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgYVHrC5GQqulmm5UrT09d6ptB7EDNPUqM7GmqA-xtiPrwYK2N1ht9fJGztB6DIlMomdNHMCukrn5D5PWeZnB9uxiJEx727jJFT9fHWEl1cNuGnaWa6HUnnrnl6doOtc7Wfqxk4NGulP0/s1600/07BohemienCoeursCaros.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzLI1WNO4LoqF1JwuUpFeibFPyGGowSS9w167R0OC9osxQNWttO9ZeOhMCf_qAfxUbOw3RVCbfbFrJ2JH21AideyYS1_K1sGgh4PbQXmYwAz87vD5Sh9MxdIkhLd0vVoNsMbYa2tnCsUg/s1600/08BohemienTreflesPiques.jpg
Now I will give a translation into English of the above comparing them to the Bologna document's meanings, as I did with the 1770. You will notice that these meanings largely agree with what Etteilla said in 1770. But there are differences. One is that there are only two hair-colors. That, among other things, leaves rooms for other significations. There are four new pairs of interest, which I have put in bold.
Although anonymous, there are good reasons to think the author, or at least editor, was Jacques Saint-Sauveur. After attending school in Paris, at least until 1772, he followed his father’s career in the diplomatic service and then wrote illustrated travel books; he also seems also to have been known for performing magic tricks, which is what the second half of Le Bohemien is devoted to explaining.
L’Art de tirer les cartes is a compendium of different methods of reading ordinary playing cards, using different layouts and different sets of meanings. About the short treatise, again called "Le Petit Etteilla", the editor says it is a transcription of a work that Etteilla printed privately for friends in 1771. In it are two sets of cartomantic meanings for the Piquet deck. The editor says that a copy fell into his hands, and he went to visit Etteilla in 1772, to ask permission to reprint it. He continues (p. 46; I thank Alain Bougereal for disentangling the first line):
Since Etteilla was born in 1738, Decker, Depaulis and Dummett point out, he would have “given” this work in 1753 or 1754, and “verified” its correctness in 1771. They note that what comes next “strongly resembles Etteilla’s own very peculiar style.” This early date is consistent with other reports attributable to him. A 1791 document, to which Etteilla gave his signature, also characterizes him as “giving” (donnant) his method in 1753. Somewhat confusedly, it also speaks of him writing an “abrège” (synopsis) in 1757. However in 1785 he said he wrote that work in 1753. In any case, its first set of meanings is much the same as those of his book of 1770.Eteilla [sic] fut plus loin, et crut me devoir des obligations de réimprimer ce petit amusement, duquel il n'avoit prétendu tirer aucun parti; ayant donné cette manière de tirer les cartes a l'âge de quinze ou seize ans, et l'ayant vérifiée juste à celui de trente-trois.
(Eteilla [sic] went further, and considered that he should pay me if I reprinted this little amusement, from which he had not claimed to take any advantage; having given this way of drawing cards at the age of fifteen or sixteen, and having just verified it at thirty-three.)
As to where this system came from, the 1791 document mentions only “three elderly persons” imprisoned for cartomancy in Paris 1751-1753. This passage was misleadingly paraphrased by DDD, who say only that he "restored" their false meanings (p. 97), leaving it unclear on what basis he did so. Decker corrected this impression (The Esoteric Tarot, 2013). Rather than use his translation, I will give the French original plus as literal a translation as possible (I get the French from the little white book that accompanies the France Cartes edition of the Petit Etteilla, whose cards agree 100% with those in the British Museum, except for not including the name and address of "citoyen" Saint-Sauveur, and instead substituting those of the current publisher):
What he did, according to this account, was to "harmonize" the three sets of meanings. Decker properly observes (The Esoteric Tarot p. 183):Notre auteur, dès 1753, en donnant la manière de lire les significations adaptées aux cartes, avaid non seulement rediges les fausses significations que les trois personnes leur admettaient, chacune de leur côté; mais il avait en outre accordé ces significations, en prenant légitimement pour le neuf de coeur celle de la victoire, qui, par une autre de ces trois personnes, était mal à propos attibutuée au neuf de carreau, etc.
(Our author, from 1753, giving the manner of reading the meanings adopted by the three persons, not only rectified the false meanings that the three persons granted them, each on their part; but he also harmonized these meanings, taking from them legitimately for the nine of hearts that of victory, which by another of these three persons, was improperly attributed to the nine of diamonds, etc.)
Etteilla does not say explicitly how he "harmonized" the meanings, but presumably he eliminated that given by only one, if the other two agreed on something else.The fifteen year old Etteilla, although fascinated by the reading of cards, was alert to its inconsistencies, and he confidently addressed them. He tabulated the cards' meanings and issued the tables in print.
What follows in the 1802 text are these meanings of 1753-1757, as published in 1771. There are two sets, one much shorter than the other, due to there being many more Reversed meanings. Both are of interest. I have cut and pasted the relevant passages from the 1802, by suit, with the first set on top and the second on the bottom. Here are Hearts and Diamonds, then Clubs and Spades. I don't display the pictures themselves because then there would be too much of a gap in the text. If you go to the Appendix to this paper, you will see both the French and the Italian meanings, the latter below the former:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgYVHrC5GQqulmm5UrT09d6ptB7EDNPUqM7GmqA-xtiPrwYK2N1ht9fJGztB6DIlMomdNHMCukrn5D5PWeZnB9uxiJEx727jJFT9fHWEl1cNuGnaWa6HUnnrnl6doOtc7Wfqxk4NGulP0/s1600/07BohemienCoeursCaros.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzLI1WNO4LoqF1JwuUpFeibFPyGGowSS9w167R0OC9osxQNWttO9ZeOhMCf_qAfxUbOw3RVCbfbFrJ2JH21AideyYS1_K1sGgh4PbQXmYwAz87vD5Sh9MxdIkhLd0vVoNsMbYa2tnCsUg/s1600/08BohemienTreflesPiques.jpg
Now I will give a translation into English of the above comparing them to the Bologna document's meanings, as I did with the 1770. You will notice that these meanings largely agree with what Etteilla said in 1770. But there are differences. One is that there are only two hair-colors. That, among other things, leaves rooms for other significations. There are four new pairs of interest, which I have put in bold.
Etteilla 1757/1771 (two sets of meanings, the second in parentheses; --- means no reversed for that card), compared with Bologna c. 1760-1782
Kings
|
Hearts/
Cups |
Diamonds/
Batons |
Clubs/
Coins |
Spades/
Swords |
Etteilla
Upright
|
Blond man (blond businessman)
|
It is a man
(A soldier)
|
Dark-haired
man (same + fidelity)
|
Man of the law
(same)
|
Etteilla
Reversed
|
--- (Man of good heart) |
--- (Man of the country)
|
--- (Illness of men)
|
Widowed man (Evil man) |
Bologna
|
Old man
|
Unmarried man
|
The man
|
Evil tongue
|
Queens
|
Hearts/Cups
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla
Upright
|
Blond woman (good blond woman)
|
A woman (traitorous woman)
|
Dark-haired
woman (wife of love)
|
Woman of loose morals [femme gallante] (Widow)
|
Etteilla
Reversed
|
--- (Good woman) | --- (Woman of the countryside) |
--- (Jealous woman)
|
Widow (Evil woman) |
Bologna
|
Married woman
|
Whore
|
Truth
|
missing
|
Jacks/ Pages
|
Hearts/Cups (f in Bologna)
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins (f in Bologna)
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla Upright
|
Blond boy (blond young man)
|
A soldier
(A traitor)
|
Dark-haired boy (faithful man) |
Envoy (Traitor)
|
Etteilla Reversed
|
--- (Thought of a blond man) | Domestic servant (same) |
--- (Indecision) | One who is curious (Illness) |
Bologna
|
The woman
|
Thought of the woman |
Young woman
|
missing
|
Aces
|
Hearts/Cups
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla Upright
|
Bottle, Table (House of the full
heart) |
Letters
(Great news) |
Much money |
Love (Trial, pregnancy)
|
Etteilla Re
|
Inheritance | Betrayal | Lover | Pregnancy |
Bologna
|
House
|
Vexations
|
Table
|
Letter
|
Tens
|
Hearts/Cups
|
Diamond/Batons
|
Clubs/Coins
|
Spades/Swords
|
Etteilla Upright
|
City where one is (Repast of the full heart)
|
Gold -next to bad Swords, Angers
(Sure campaign) |
House (Fortune) |
Tears
(Boredom) |
Etteilla Reversed
|
--- (Repast of the false heart) | --- (Anger) | --- (Love) | --- (Tears) |
Bologna
|
House tiles
|
missing
|
Money
|
Tears
|
In Queens we see a stronger connection between "whore" (P--ana) and the Queen of Swords, who is here not a "woman of the world" but a femme gallante, which means "woman of loose morals". Etteilla substituted femme du monde in 1770. But in Bolognese cartomancy we see the term again in the 19th century: the King of Cups is Gallantuomo P and the King of Coins (these are the two older men in tarot depictions) is Gallantuomo. But of course an older male gallant is not the same as a young female one. I also do not think it is the same as a femme d'amour, which I interpret as "wife of love". For these later occurrences of gallant see my list of all the Bolognese meanings, from the sheet and also the handwritten words on three later decks, spanning 1820 to 1920 (in my Appendix).
In Pages/Jacks we see Bologna's piensiero da donna cropping up in Etteilla's Jack of Hearts as Pensée d'un homme blond (thought of a blond man). This term "pensée de" never turns up again, although we do have "pensée" by itself for the 7 of Hearts in 1770. In Bologna pensiero di... appears numerous times. In the document there is precisely piensiero della donna for the Knight of Hearts., and in later Bolognese cartomancy, the Page of Bastoni;s Bastone in pensiero (as opposed to Bastone in personne for the Queen) and Suo pensiero. The Knight of Swords later gets Piensiero di spadina (thought of the dagger) and the Knight of Batons piensiero della Regina and Pensiero di lui. These later occurrences could not be due to Etteilla's writings, because by 1770 he had removed them everywhere. All that remained was Pensée for the 7 of Spades.
In the Tens we see the words courreaux and colere, both meaning anger, which is just a strong version of vexation. Neither word ever appeared in the Petit Etteilla. Yet oddly it does appear in his Tarot, in the same reversed meaning.
The only Bologna meaning not accounted for is "Truth", for which any connection to Etteilla is remote. One can speculate about a relationship to femme d'amour, as somhow meaning "true love", but that is all it is, speculation. But a 95% corelation, 16 out of 17, is not bad, even if some take some imagination. That is more than I would expect if the medium was simply word of mouth from practitioner to practitioner over decades. Even within Bologna, over a fifty year period, there isn't such a match.
The 1771/1757 document also explains one important difference between Etteilla's 1770 book and the Bologna cartomancy sheet. The 1770 book had Reversed as well as Upright meanings for almost every card. The Bologna sheet has no reversals. In the 1771/1757 document, there are reversals in only one suit, Piques. It is easy enough to understand why someone using the 1771/1757 as inspiration for the Bolognese sheet would neglect such reversals, as they are the exception rather than the rule.
This booklet also accounts for another difference between Etteilla 1770 and the cartomancy sheet. Etteilla had a special significator card, standing for the consultant, called "Etteilla", a 33rd card. Normally it was just one of the court cards. But there is no such card in 1757/1771.
Another feature pointing to the 1771/1757 booklet rather than the 1770 book is that the two meanings that have the closest match - gallant and pensiero de... - continue to be used in Bologna long after they have disappeared from French cartomancy. In fact they do not appear in any of Etteilla's books, only the 1771 booklet. But how could that booklet, of quite limited circulation, have managed to get to Northeastern Italy in the very decade in which it had been produced in Paris?
4. Did Etteilla's work inspire the Bologna document? Problems and responses
How could the 1757/1771 document in Paris of quite limited circulation have influenced a document in Bologna in the same decade? Here is one scenario. The very person who had asked Etteilla's permission to distribute it more widely, even though only 15 years of age, suddenly found himself removed from Paris in precisely what is now Northeastern Italy, in a cosmopolitan milieu that would likely have been very intrigued by what he had to offer.
Jacques Saint-Sauveur's father was a career diplomat who, after years of suffering disgrace, even prison, in Paris was suddenly given a position as consul to Trieste, in March of 1772 (I get this information from the entry for Saint-Sauveur in an 1826 biographical dictionary that Steve linked to at http://tarotforum.net/showpost.php?s=38 ... ostcount=9). I would expect that the father would have gone first and then, perhaps at the end of the school year, his family would have followed, including 15 year old Jacques. If he acquired the booklet in 1772 as he says, he would have had it with him going to Trieste. Even though then Austrian, the city was quite close to Venice, then an independent city-state to which doubtless his father and he would have had numerous occasions to visit. If he ever reprinted it, it would have probably been in this new milieu. And since his father was in the process of grooming Jacques for a diplomatic career himself, the necessary introductions would have been made, including, as would be likely for a person of his class and profession, an entry into Freemasonry. Venice was also the nearest cosmopolitan city to Bologna. It is not hard to imagine someone from there interested in exotica picking up a copy, whether from a friend or in a shop.
However this scenario raises other problems. For one, why would the meanings have shifted so much from the cards designated by Etteilla to those of the cartomancy sheet? While it is true that the same meanings wander among cards as we go through the history of cartomancy in Italy, these shifts are decades apart and probably due to errors in oral transmission rather than deliberate reinterpretations. On the other hand, after Etteilla's first cards in 1789 much the same keywords appeared in much the same places on Etteilla decks ever since (not counting those since 1977 by Cartes France). In an age when the written word is the primary means of transmission, variability is much less.
So we have to ask, why would there be so many shifts in card assignments, even if the meanings stayed more or less the same? One answer might be that the person constructing the list had enough to do getting the meanings to fit the Italian cards. That will perhaps explain differences among the court cards. But what about the number cards?
It might be that person simply saw the cards as sufficient to cover a range of answers to typical questions, and that was enough, without bothering to match the meanings card for card. There is also another possibility: the person might have been aware of a different method of card-reading, also French, one described later (1779) by another French diplomat in Northeastern Italy, this time France's representative in Venice from 1766 to 1770 (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Argenson), Marc Antoine René de Voyer de Paulmy d' Argenson. De Palmy writes (Mélanges Tirés d'une Grande Bibliothèque, Volume 2, pp. 332ff, http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=22294#p22294), as translated by Steve Mangan at
http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=22197#p22197:
http://forum.tarothistory.com/viewtopic.php?p=22197#p22197:
...The general rules: the hearts indicate happiness & success in gallantry, and the diamonds, of one’s interests & finance; clubs are favourable to one’s ambitious views, and spades to war projects or military advancement: contrary, the spades are unfavourable in the affairs of gallantry, the clubs must give reason to fear that financial and business interests go wrong, the hearts announces big disappointment to projects of ambition, and the diamonds act contrary to soldiers. If it is a married man who questions & is distinguished, the king is the most favourable card there is, if it is a woman, it is the queen; & if it is a young person, it is the Valet. The tens signify the greatest happiness or misfortune, then the nines, eights or sevens in the decreasing order, and finally the ace is the smallest injury or slightest advantage....
You will have noticed that whereas Etteilla assigns money to Clubs, de Palmy assigns it to Diamonds. Clubs get "projects of ambition". Also, while Etteilla makes the Ace highest, de Palmy makes it the lowest. Also, it is not that money issues are not addressed by Clubs, but rather that they are addressed in a negative way. Likewise Love is addressed in Spades, but negatively, and so on for the other two suits. These considerations may have influenced our cartomancer in Bologna, if only not to take the particular assignments to individual cards too seriously.
Another difficulty with a French origin is one raised by Pratesi: its stated method of dividing a large number of cards - 35 - into 7 piles of 5 cards each. Such a procedure is not recorded in Etteilla's 1770 work, or that of the 1780s, nor by de Mellet. Yet Le Bohémien, in its part we have supposed is Etteilla's Abrege, as one of two methods of laying down cards, says to put 12 cards into 4 piles: “for you,” “for the house,” “for that which is to be” and “for the surprise" (p. 65). Then one reads the first three piles by groups. The process is done three times, with the “surprise,” which only got one card per turn, read at the end. This 40 card reading in 10 sets of 4 is roughly comparable to Bologna document’s 35 in 5 sets of 7, even if done all at once in Bologna.
Finally, there is the difficulty that Etteilla himself attributed his method of reading the cards to an Italian source, a so-called “Piémontese”. The 1791 booklet signed by Etteilla has him learning about the tarot from “un Piémontese” in 1757. This account occurs in the paragraph after the mention of his writing of the “Abrège”; so probably he would have met this person after he wrote that summary of divination with the Piquet pack (Le Nouvel Etteilla, Cartes Frances reprint with Petit Etteilla deck, p. 13) If so, that points to an Italian source for the tarot meanings, but not for those of the cards of the Piquet deck. For these Etteilla was quite clear: it came from three elderly persons arrested in Paris 1751-1753.
Another difficulty with a French origin is one raised by Pratesi: its stated method of dividing a large number of cards - 35 - into 7 piles of 5 cards each. Such a procedure is not recorded in Etteilla's 1770 work, or that of the 1780s, nor by de Mellet. Yet Le Bohémien, in its part we have supposed is Etteilla's Abrege, as one of two methods of laying down cards, says to put 12 cards into 4 piles: “for you,” “for the house,” “for that which is to be” and “for the surprise" (p. 65). Then one reads the first three piles by groups. The process is done three times, with the “surprise,” which only got one card per turn, read at the end. This 40 card reading in 10 sets of 4 is roughly comparable to Bologna document’s 35 in 5 sets of 7, even if done all at once in Bologna.
Finally, there is the difficulty that Etteilla himself attributed his method of reading the cards to an Italian source, a so-called “Piémontese”. The 1791 booklet signed by Etteilla has him learning about the tarot from “un Piémontese” in 1757. This account occurs in the paragraph after the mention of his writing of the “Abrège”; so probably he would have met this person after he wrote that summary of divination with the Piquet pack (Le Nouvel Etteilla, Cartes Frances reprint with Petit Etteilla deck, p. 13) If so, that points to an Italian source for the tarot meanings, but not for those of the cards of the Piquet deck. For these Etteilla was quite clear: it came from three elderly persons arrested in Paris 1751-1753.
In the Second Cahier, 1785, Etteilla wrote that he learned about the tarot “aided by the advice of a wise, very old Piedmontese”, now adding that he claimed to be “the grandson of Alexis called Piémontois” (“aidé des sages avis d'un sage Piémontois (a) très-agé, & se disant petit fils d'Alexis dit le Piémontois”. Deuxième Cahier, pp. 136-137, text and translation at http://etteillastrumps.blogspot.com/2012/05/cards-as-whole.html, in my post “The cards as a whole"). That name “Alexis Piémontois” was the pseudonym of the author of a famous book of “secrets”, really home remedies, originally published in Italian in 1555 Venice, then in French translation in 1557 and reprinted many times thereafter (both editions are in Google Books) and reprinted many times thereafter.l. If so, Etteilla’s Alexis, the so-called “Piémontese”, could easily have been his invention, after seeing the book – a 17th or 18th century edition, since an author of 1555 could not possibly have had a grandson alive two centuries later. The choice of pseudonym may be related to the translation’s sponsor, the Duke of Savoy, who also ruled Piedmont. The second page of the 1557 dedication to the duke (in Google Books) even hails the author as a Piedmontese. Italian scholars since the 19th century, based on 18th century testimony think that the author’s real name was Girolomo Ruscelli, an author who wrote many more reputable works under his own name (Dizionario di opere anonime e pseudonime di scrittori italiani o come che sia aventi relazione all'Italia. Milano, L. di G. Pirola, 1848. vol. I (A-G), p. 32, in Google Books). Born in Viterbo, dying in Venice, with some time in Rome and Naples, he had no reported personal relationship to Piedmont.
It is true that the original Italian edition of 1555 (online in Google Books) also gave him the same pseudonym, except for using the Italian “Alessio” instead of “Alexis”: “Alessio Piemontese". If so, the appellation “Piedmontese” is not restricted to the French translation. But it is possible that the real author already had a French version in mind, perhaps even its sponsor, and named himself accordingly.
In both places that Etteilla talked about his Alexis, in 1785 and 1791, Etteilla said he met him in 1757. By then, according to the 1791 and 1802 books, he had already worked out his system for the Piquet deck, having done so in 1753; that year is also given for the “Abrège de la Cartonomancie” in his 1785 Philosophie des Haute Sciences (online in archive.org, p. 116). We must also keep in mind that Etteilla did not so much as mention Alexis until 1785, not even to Saint-Sauveur, even though in 1770 he did mention divination using the “Taraux”, saying only that it was done, as if he knew nothing else (Etteilla 1770, online in archive.org, p. 74).
There remains the question of the means of transmission, both to him and from Saint-Sauveur. Etteilla himself gave his sources as “three elderly persons”. Masonic contacts are also a reasonable possibility, not in 1753, at age 15, but later, after becoming a seed merchant, by 1761, or after starting his print selling business, documented in 1768 (Decker, Depaulis, and Dummett, 1996, p. 80). The large lots of printed material that he purchased for resale might reasonably have included the “book of secrets”. Also, among the collectors of old prints he met (or buyers of seeds), some would have been Freemasons. It is not improbable that one of them, or someone else met in business, would share in confidence a system already known in Masonic circles, so that the rest is fiction, to protect his source.
In short, Etteilla’s statements about an Alexis do not count for much, especially in relation the Piquet deck.
That the tarot’s special cards, along with its Italian
suit-symbols and courts, would have provided a foundation for cartomancy generally is
reasonable enough. Its allegorical cards are eminently suited for moralizing
divination and identification with particular persons and events in a
consultant’s life. Its distinctive Pages (beardless) explain why garçon, boy, would be a meaning in
addition to jeune homme, young man. And
money, the cartomantic theme of Clubs, is not the first thing I would think of
for those designs that the French called Clovers; but it is quite natural for
Coins. But the derivations of the particular keywords for King through Ten in Bologna are another matter.
The correspondences seem too close to be explained by a gradual diffusion from Italy up to Paris, even if it cannot be ruled out entirely.
More needs to be known about the other documents that were part of the same group as the sheet in question. If there were letters, who were they to, where, and when? Perhaps there is nothing of interest; but perhaps there is a link to one of the two French individuals in the diplomatic community known later to have an interest in cartomancy. That would certainly help. In the meantime, the link to Saint-Sauveur makes the most sense. But the connection is circumstantial at best.
5. Summary and Appendix
The dating of the Bologna cartomancy document was discussed, and no reason found not to assume that it is from the same period, 1760-1782, as the other documents accompanying them, all Italian but with some connection to Freemasonry.
The list of meanings on the sheet was compared with Etteilla's published meanings, both for the special cards associated with the tarot, published in 1783, and with those for the ordinary suit cards in 1770, following the correspondences Spade = Piques, Coppe = Coeurs, Bastoni = Carreaux, and Denari = Trefles, the correspondences to the tarot were no different from what would be expected by chance and what was suggested on the cards themselves. For the suit cards, however, the result was different. Allowing both for some embellishment when translating into Italian and adjustment for how the court figures look on Bolognese vs. French cards, a correspondence of 13 out of 17 cards was found. Another Etteilla document was also compared to the Bolognese list, this one said by its 1797/1802 editor to date from 1771. In this case 16 out of 17 meanings were confirmed, several in a stronger way, with some vague relationship in the case of the 17th, i.e. about a 95% correlation, although in many cases not with the same card in the two sets.
Moreover, the 1797/1802 editor had been in Northeastern Italy, specifically Trieste and probably Venice, in the period 1772 to 1780, as part of the French diplomatic corps with his father. Since the editor, Jacques Saint-Sauveur, had secured Etteilla's permission to distribute the pamphlet a short time before, its circulation in Northeastern Italy is the likeliest explanation for the correspondences on the list. However in the period just prior to 1770, another French nobleman who later wrote on cartomancy was ambassador to Venice. So it is still not clear in which direction the influence went, from Bologna to Paris or vice versa. It is possible that more clarity could be attained through a re-exmination of the 1760-1782 documents for possible connections to members of diplomatic circles in Venice, Trieste, or elsewhere.
Appendix: 1757/1771 Etteilla cartomantic meaning vs. Italian meanings on the 18th century sheet and as written on three later decks of cards, the first from c. 1800-1825, the second from c. 1850-1875, and the third from 1920 (all four taken from Andrea Vitali and Terry Zanetti, pp. 80-81).
Italian cartomancy meanings Bologna
1760-1782 (with 1800-1825, 1850-1875, and 1920 in parentheses)
Coppe/Cups
Re: Un vecchio (Un coppo; Galantuomo P., Uomo)
Regina: Donna maritata (Una coppina;
Donna di garbo, Regina
di coppe)
Fantesca: La donna (Una Coppina, Giovinetta, Uomo)
Asso: La casa (Letto, Casa propria, Martello della porta)
Dieci: Coppe della casa (Allegrezza, Allegrezze, che fiorisce)
Bastoni/Batons
Re: Un signore non ammogliato (Regina,
Lui, Uomo gi[ovane])
Regina: P[utta]na (Bastone in persona/in vita; Lei, Donna)
Fante: Pensiero della Donna (Bastone in pensiero, Suo pensiero, Uomo)
Asso: Baronate (Baronate, Fa baronate, Matrimonio)
Dieci ---- (assente nei primi due, Viaggio )
Extracts from Le Bohémien, pp. 52-53
(left) and 59-60 (right), for Clubs (Trefles, left) and Spades (Piques, right)
Italian cartomancy meanings Bologna
1760-1782 (with 1800-1825, 1850-1875, and 1920 in parentheses)
Denari/Coins
Re: L’Uomo (Buonanuova, Galantuomo, Re di denari)
Regina: Verità (Di verità conferma, Lettera, Regina di Denari)
Fantesca: Signorina (Biglietto, Chiacchiere, Uomo)
Asso: Tavola (In tempo di tavola, In tempo di tavola, Fuori di tavola)
Dieci: Denari (Denari, ----, Lacrime)
Spade/Swords
Re: Malalingua (Spadino, Giovinetto, Re di Spada)
Regina: --- (Afflizione, Donna triste, Regina di Spade)
Fante: --- (Ambasciata, ----, Mala lingua)
Asso: Lettera (alla porta, Martello della porta/Martello, Carta Scritta)
Dieci: Lacrime (---, ---, Fiorimento)
