Traditional Tarot

Desultory Notes on the Tarot


Leave a comment

Paul Marteau: Editions of Le Tarot de Marseille and the Ancien Tarot de Marseille

Translator’s Introduction

Of the many works published on the Tarot in French, perhaps none has had quite the influence or fortune enjoyed by that of Paul Marteau, Le Tarot de Marseille, begun in 1928 and published in 1949, almost twenty years after the first edition of his well-known Ancien Tarot de Marseille in 1930. That this work received the reception hinted at by the book reviews we have published is due to a number of factors, not all of which are those commonly advanced by critics and amateurs, enlightened or otherwise.

First of all, the fact that the book was written by the designer-publisher of what was to become the most common, if not standard, Marseille-type Tarot deck, played no small part in this popularity. After all, who better than the creator himself – and one, moreover, descended from a family with a century of experience in the cardmaking trade – to introduce and explain his own work?

Secondly, the complete, self-contained nature of the book, clearly and methodically laid out, also presents a positive development with respect to most of the preceding works on the subject. Unlike most other works (with the notable exception of those by Eudes Picard and Joseph Maxwell), Marteau treats of the entire pack of 78 cards in turn and in detail. The self-contained – hermetic, in the common sense of the word – nature of Marteau’s work is appealing: it contains no history (and therefore, neither myth nor bad history), no references to other systems of thought, mystical, divinatory or otherwise, with the exception of brief digressions on number and colour symbolism, for, after all, there are both colours and numbers in the Tarot. In a word, it is seemingly definitive and unassailable.

Lastly, one must not neglect its aesthetic value, a point oft overlooked by uninformed critics: published by Arts et Métiers Graphiques, a prestigious graphic design firm, with full-size, full-colour reproductions of the 78 cards, impeccable typography and a pleasing layout, Le Tarot de Marseille forms an attractive tome for collectors, amateurs and the merely curious alike.

Yet the style and tone of Marteau’s writing are polarising: one either admires his dense, precise prose, or one deplores its authoritative voice and stentorian formulations. Marteau himself apologises to the reader for its “ponderous phraseology”; Jean-Michel Mathonière says it is “well written and a pleasant read”; Tchalaï Unger calls it an example of “remarkable verbiage.”

The lack of a historical overview renders his book impervious to historical criticism, since it provides no foothold for critique, but the lack of a history of the deck he used as the basis of his work (aside from a single footnote singling out the deck printed by Nicolas Conver in 1761) makes it eminently suspect in the eyes of the historically-minded. Naturally, those interested in cartomancy or in the Tarot as a system of personal development have little concern for such things, but in the final analysis, the broad appeal exerted by Marteau’s book has also made it vulnerable to a multitude of criticisms, should one venture beyond the narrow confines of its particular scope and perspective. Writing of Marteau’s deck, the Tarot specialist Jean-Marie Lhôte correctly notes that it is “a deck whose origin is impossible to place; which is paradoxical coming from an erudite collector of his calibre.” (La Tour de feu, n° 121, p. 24)

In effect, the sole historical indication, the footnote alluded to above, reads as follows:

“This Tarot is the one published in 1761 by Nicolas Conver, master cardmaker in Marseilles, who had held onto the woodblocks and colour schemes of his distant predecessors. This Tarot is presently published by B. P. Grimaud, who have acquired the Conver estate and in this way could continue to print the traditional Tarot in its original form.” (Paul Marteau, Le Tarot de Marseille, Arts et Métiers Graphiques, 1949, p. 1)

As we shall see, unpacking this statement leads to a mystery that has still not been completely explained, namely the genesis and rationale of Marteau’s deck. Indeed, the early history of the Conver deck is also unexplored territory.

If we have insisted on this body of work, both deck and book, it has been in order to highlight the singular nature of Marteau’s undertaking, one which will be spelt out more fully in forthcoming articles. To reduce Marteau’s contribution to the world of Tarot to a commercial monopoly is a sign of ignorance at best, or a symptom of bad faith at worst.

These desultory notes provide some measure of context for the following series of articles which we intend to publish; the first by Paul Marteau himself, On Four Arcana of the Tarot, which provides insight into his view of the origins of the Tarot and on the genesis of his deck; and Paul Marteau, Author and Publisher of the Ancient Tarot of Marseilles (1930) by Gwenael Beuchet, which provides the only substantial overview of Marteau’s life and work; and finally, the introduction to the booklet which accompanied the 1990 Dusserre reprint of Marteau’s deck by Jean-Marie Lhôte, which provides an insightful examination of Marteau’s deck and legacy.

Before doing so, however, we have seen fit to draw up an outline and bibliography of the various editions of Marteau’s works, namely, his book, his deck and its booklet, in order to clarify some of the issues they pose. In effect, there have been a number of editions of both Marteau’s deck and book, and these editions present some subtle and interesting differences which are instructive to note.

* * *

Editions of Paul Marteau’s

Le Tarot de Marseille and the Ancien Tarot de Marseille

Box of the Ancien Tarot de Marseille, B. P. Grimaud, Paris, 1930. (Courtesy of Adam West-Watson)

Ancien Tarot de Marseille

Background

Paul Marteau, as heir to the Grimaud card company, not only inherited the technical knowledge and commercial savvy of his forebears, but also their collections of historical decks, and as such had access to a veritable treasure trove of card-related material. Grimaud, notably, had purchased the rights to a deck produced by Lequart, founded in 1872. As the Tarot historian Thierry Depaulis has noted, “Although Lequart is better known for its ‘Besançon’-like tarot, which Grimaud took over in 1891 and continued until 1930, it seems Paul Marteau has used an early edition of Lequart & Thuillier’s Italian-suited tarot with Popess and Pope.”[1] Wishing to secure commercial rights over a new deck specifically for the purpose of divination, Marteau produced a Tarot deck based on the line drawings of this Lequart deck and on the colour scheme of the 1890 Camoin reprint of the 1760 Conver deck, better suited to mechanical reproduction, and to which Grimaud had acquired the rights in the late nineteenth century.[2]

Yet it turns out that the genesis of this deck, through a tangled history of mergers and acquisitions, extends even further back in time. The 1748 date given on the ribbon of the II of Coins of both the Lequart and Grimaud editions refers to the then earliest known date for the Parisian cardmaker Arnoult, bought out by Grimaud in 1858.[3] Therefore this 1748 date may be considered arbitrary and motivated by commercial concerns, in order to claim historical precedence over the Camoin reprint of the 1760 deck.

Thierry Depaulis states that, “In fact, it is very similar to the Nicolas Conver tarot, which Camoin was still printing in the second half of the 19th century (from very worn woodblocks). […] It is very likely that Camoin’s Conver tarot formed the basis of Lequart’s own, since even the ‘royal’ coat of arms with fleurs-de-lis on the two of Cups has been copied.”[4] The Tarot specialist Wilfried Houdouin has also noted that the Lequart deck was in all likelihood carved in the workshop of the Parisian cardmaker Antoine Lefer (1752-1813) a century earlier: “This deck effectively presents all the hallmarks of a Tarot deck produced between 1750 and 1800, as its resemblance to the 1760 Tarot of Nicolas Conver and its characteristic engravings show.”[5] According to the same author, this deck “most probably dates from 1778.”[6]

Marteau’s deck, slightly modified with respect to the originals on which it was based, was first produced in 1930, subsequently reprinted with different back designs, and would later be modified again in 1948. Some of the more notable differences between these two ‘editions’ include the removal of the royal fleur-de-lis from the IIII of Coins, replaced by a more politically-neutral tulip, and the addition of a pair of dice to the Juggler’s table. (Dice are also to be found on the Juggler card of the earlier Tarot by Jean Noblet, produced ca. 1650.) Some minor changes to the colouration were also effected. This colour scheme has also given rise to some controversy, but in fact, it would appear that Marteau, having sought out the older Antoine Camoin to make enquiries on this very subject, was inspired to adopt the colours of the earlier Camoin reprint when he came across the original stencils, still bearing the traces of these colours.[7]

Although the history of this deck and its ancestors as well as the rationale for Marteau’s editorial decisions remain to be fully elucidated, it is very possible that Marteau sought to base himself on an established standard, both in terms of the line drawings and the colour scheme, and in this way, lay claim to publish the Conver deck – “the traditional Tarot in its original form” – thus establishing himself as part of a chain of Tarot cardmakers.[8] Until such a time as Marteau’s unpublished letters and diaries might be examined, the matter must remain speculative and unresolved.

There were many reprints of the Grimaud deck throughout the 20th century, and a large number of them have been catalogued here. Both editions of Marteau’s deck were accompanied by his 80-page booklet entitled “Ancien Tarot de Marseille, explication des Arcanes Majeurs et Mineurs, avec de nombreux exemples de positions respectives de lames, précédée de nouvelles méthodes de Divination par le Tarot Traditionnel.” This booklet contains some material not present in Marteau’s later book, most notably divinatory meanings, as well as so-called “encounters” (Fr. rencontres) between cards, i.e. 2-card combinations and their combined meaning. Incidentally, the 1969/1970 English edition of Marteau’s deck, published by J.M. Simon, contains an approximate translation of this booklet.

One noteworthy non-Grimaud reprint is the one published by Dusserre in 1990, who printed a facsimile of the original 1930 deck, accompanied by a booklet by Jean-Marie Lhôte, who himself had been in contact with Marteau shortly before his death in 1966.

* * *

Le Tarot de Marseille

The editorial genesis of Marteau’s magnum opus, Le Tarot de Marseille, has also given rise to some speculation due to the differences between the 1930 and 1948 decks and the descriptions in the book, but also due to some differences between the various editions, which are noted below. All editions were published by Arts et Métiers Graphiques, Paris.

  • 1949: The first edition, limited to 2,900 copies numbered on the colophon page, was printed as a softcover In-8 volume. The cards of Marteau’s 1948 deck are pasted directly onto the pages of the book.
  • 1970: This second edition is identical to the first, with the notable exception of the cards, also pasted into the book, which are those of the 1960 Camoin ‘bicentennial’ reprint of the Conver deck. Although the colour scheme more or less matches the descriptions in the book, since Marteau mostly followed the precursor of this deck for his own, the line drawings are a little different. It is very possible that this deck was used instead of the original 1930 Grimaud deck due to copyright issues following the takeover of Grimaud by J.M. Simon in 1962, and Marteau’s death in 1966.
  • 1977, 1981: Identical in format to the foregoing editions, with the exception of the cards, printed directly into the book this time, reproducing the 1948 edition of Marteau’s deck.
  • 1984: Same as the foregoing, except it is presented in hardback format, with a black dust-jacket over a yellow clothbound volume, with the Juggler on the front cover, and the Ace of Cups on the back.
  • 1983: Marteau’s book was also translated into Spanish and published as El Tarot de Marsella by EDAF from 1983, with a number of reprints.

* * *

The literary reception of Marteau’s book, hinted at by the various book reviews we have published, fails to give a complete picture of the influence his work has had, an influence disproportionate to the limited print run of its first edition. Yet many of the notions laid out in Le Tarot de Marseille are now part and parcel of what may be called French Tarology, at least, that of the 20th century; reading the Tarot as an analogical, optical language; interpreting the floral ornaments; and paying close attention to the incidental details. The systems of more recent authors, such as Alejandro Jodorowsky, Tchalaï Unger, Marie-Thérèse des Longchamps or Claude de Milleville, are all, to a certain extent, inspired by this approach.

Paul Marteau’s article, book and booklet, taken as a whole, and respectively referring to the origin, theory and application of the Tarot, must be considered as representing the totality of his tarological system, and it is to be hoped that a complete and comprehensive edition and English translation of these texts be published at some point in the future.

Notes

[1] Thierry Depaulis, ‘The Tarot de Marseille – Facts and Fallacies, Part I,’ The Playing-Card, volume 42 (2013-2014), Number 1, pp. 23-25.

[2] See Gwenael Beuchet, ‘Paul Marteau, auteur et éditeur de l’Ancien Tarot de Marseille (1930),’ in Thierry Depaulis (ed.), Actes du Colloque ‘Papiers, Images, Collections,’ 28, 29, 30 avril 2000, Le Vieux Papier n° 358 (October 2000), pp. 31-40.

[3] Thierry Depaulis, Tarot, Jeu et Magie, Bibliothèque nationale, 1984, p. 121. See also the detailed pages on the history of the Grimaud firm here.

[4] Thierry Depaulis, ‘The Tarot de Marseille – Facts and Fallacies, Part I,’ The Playing-Card, volume 42 (2013-2014), Number 1, pp. 23-25.

[5] Wilfried Houdouin, Le code sacré du Tarot, Éditions Trajectoire, 2011, Chapter III, note 1.

[6] Wilfried Houdouin, The Tarot of Marseilles – The Fundamentals, Books on Demand, 2021, p. 222.

[7] Gwenael Beuchet, op. cit., p. 36.

[8] Paul Marteau, Le Tarot de Marseille, Arts et Métiers Graphiques, 1949, p. 1.

Support this Site at ko-fi.com


Leave a comment

Jean-Pierre Seguin: Obituary: Paul Marteau (1885-1966)

Translator’s Introduction

The figure of Paul Marteau presents something of a paradox: although the name is known to almost every amateur of the Marseilles Tarot, the man himself remains completely unknown. To date, there has been but one comprehensive study of the man, his life, and his work, that by Gwenael Beuchet, ‘Paul Marteau, auteur et éditeur de l’Ancien Tarot de Marseille (1930),’ in Thierry Depaulis (ed.), Actes du Colloque ‘Papiers, Images, Collections,’ 28, 29, 30 avril 2000, Le Vieux Papier n° 358 (October 2000), pp. 31-40. Even the otherwise thorough book by Decker and Dummett, A History of the Occult Tarot, (Duckworth, 2002, pages 302-303) glosses over this important figure and his major contribution to the Tarot. The present series of book reviews and texts seeks to redress this oversight, and in that perspective, we present here Marteau’s obituary by Jean-Pierre Seguin, the only one we are aware of. The “great writer in distress” alluded to below is none other than Louis-Ferdinand Céline, whose odd relationship with Marteau – and indeed, with the Tarot itself – remains to be elucidated more thoroughly.

Marteau’s donation to the Bibliothèque nationale, mentioned below, followed that of his uncle, thereby providing the library with a significant collection of playing cards, prints, books, woodblocks and other memorabilia. Yet a number of items were later sold after his death, including his manuscripts and letters from Céline, by the Parisian auction house Drouot in 1979, which had earlier sold part of Marteau’s collection of books in 1934. The elder Marteau’s 1909 donation consisted of “856 feuillets [i.e. cards] belonging to 382 antique or modern decks; 132 types of tarot papers; 30 reproductions of antique cards; 95 prints related to the game of cards; 69 decrees, laws, edicts…; 115 books related to the game of cards.” Later, Henry-René D’Allemagne would also donate close to 7,000 cards, while the younger Marteau’s collection would comprise of 458 decks of cards, 25 woodblocks and 165 books. For further details, one may consult the exhibition catalogue drawn up by Jean-Pierre Seguin, as well as a detailed article by Jude Talbot.

To put paid to one particularly tenacious rumour, relayed by the Bibliothèque nationale itself, Paul Marteau was not an Officer of the Legion of Honour, France’s highest order of merit. This mistaken attribution stems from a homonym and close contemporary, yet simple verification on the database of the Grand Chancellory of the Order reveals the source of the confusion: his namesake, one Paul Edouard Marteau (1895-1960), a veterinarian surgeon and captain of the reserve, was decorated in 1949. Likewise, we have found no evidence that Marteau ever studied philosophy in Leipzig.

This obituary appeared in the Bulletin de la Société archéologique, historique & artistique le Vieux papier, tome 25, 1967, and the original may be read here. Marteau passed away in early December of 1966. The author, Jean-Pierre Seguin, was an art historian and senior librarian, curator of the Prints and Photography department of the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.

 

* * *

Paul Marteau (1885-1966)

Jean-Pierre Seguin

Reproduced with the kind permission of the publisher.

Paul Marteau died too soon to have been able to attend the inauguration, at the Bibliothèque nationale, of the exhibition of the most beautiful or most curious pieces of the collection of playing cards he donated in May 1966. He would have loved so much to have seen all the interest that, for six weeks, a host of friends, collectors, and strangers had for this unique set, which had been one of the passions of his life.

Paul Marteau, the last traditional master-cardmaker – such was the title he proudly gave himself – was the grand-nephew of Baptiste-Paul Grimaud, who in 1858 founded a House that remains famous, the son of Léo Marteau (1848-1920), master-cardmaker in Paris, and nephew of Georges Marteau (1851-1916), he too master-cardmaker and a great collector, who donated important collections of Far Eastern art objects to the Museum of Decorative Arts and of playing cards to the Bibliothèque nationale.

Paul Marteau was passionate about his work. He had the ambition – and he managed to achieve it – to maintain the high quality of the French playing card which had guaranteed it the first place in the international market. He was also fascinated by the esoteric aspect of the cards.

On his estate at Fleurière, in Cannes, planted with millennial trees and decorated with the flowers he loved, overlooking a magnificent view, he lived out his last years in the perfect communion of ideas and of sentiments with Madame Marteau. Without any illusions as to his health, peacefully and with a smile, he did not eschew any of the joys that were still allowed him.

He was a cultured man, of an exquisite politeness, of a smiling indulgence for those trifling flaws of character, but who did not tolerate mediocrity or nastiness. He was generous, without ulterior motives, and with the most perfect discretion. One day, we will know of the support he gave to one of our great writers in distress. His gesture in favour of the Cabinet des Estampes shows how much he knew how to let go, without regrets, of what he had loved so much for the benefit of others.

— Jean-Pierre SEGUIN

Support this Site at ko-fi.com


Leave a comment

René-Louis Doyon: Cartomancers’ Decks

Translator’s Introduction

“One grows weary of everything, apart from knowing.”

— René-Louis Doyon

 

The name of René-Louis Doyon, alias ‘the Mandarin’, is all but forgotten, and yet this obscure literary figure played an important and influential role in the French literature and publishing of the early and mid-twentieth century. Born in 1885, he died in 1966, and as such was the exact contemporary of Paul Marteau, his erstwhile friend, collaborator and benefactor.

Writer, journalist, publisher, bookseller, bibliophile and literary gadfly, Doyon’s career spanned the first half of the twentieth-century literary scene in France, where he exerted an uneven but definite influence. Throughout the course of his variegated editorial career, Doyon published a prodigious amount of works, by himself or others, including novels, literary and artistic criticism, biographies, social histories, memoirs, as well as a significant amount of prefaces and introductions. In addition to republishing editions of the classics, Doyon was instrumental in promoting younger and unknown authors. His literary flair is demonstrated when one considers that his back catalogue was eventually bought out by the publisher Robert Denoël, and that he was the first to discover and publish the writings of both Marcel Jouhandeau and a young André Malraux. Yet Doyon’s career, and indeed, life, was both marked and marred by his combative personality and a taste for polemics and literary feuds that would ultimately alienate him from the cultural establishment.

Perhaps the most succinct portrait of the man is that left by Éric Dussert, who says that, “René-Louis Doyon was an extravagant man of letters; failed publisher, mordant but erudite critic, he leaves behind an often messy body of work whose convoluted style is unforgettable. […] The case of René-Louis Doyon is exemplary of the paradox of those failures who work like maniacs, sometimes with talent, but without ever bending fate.”

In 1920, Doyon founded a literary journal called La Connaissance [Knowledge], also the name of his bookshop as well as his publishing outfit. This journal became more simply known as the Livrets du Mandarin from 1923, and was irregularly published until 1963. Although Doyon’s journal ostensibly focused on literature, the arts and current affairs, he also included a number of articles dealing with more metaphysical subjects, notably some articles by Paul Marteau, to which we shall return.

In effect, Doyon and Marteau were close for a time, La Connaissance was allegedly financed by Paul Marteau, according to François Gibault, biographer of Louis-Ferdinand Céline (cited in G. Beuchet,  ‘Paul Marteau, auteur et éditeur de l’Ancien Tarot de Marseille (1930),’ in Thierry Depaulis (ed.), Actes du Colloque ‘Papiers, Images, Collections,’ 28, 29, 30 avril 2000, Le Vieux Papier n° 358 (October 2000), pp. 33-34), and Marteau began to write a series of articles on esotericism for Doyon’s journal from 1921, although the planned series came to a premature end at the end of the same year after only three articles had been published. Marteau would also contribute an essay on the esotericism of the hermetic novel Le Comte de Gabalis to Doyon’s edition of that work, also published in 1921. Later, when Doyon’s professional and financial decline was fully underway, from the mid 1930s, Marteau would have aided him until they fell out, for reasons unknown, but not difficult to guess.

Both men would later go on to become acquainted with the controversial author Céline after the war, Doyon eventually selling his inscribed copy of a rare edition of Voyage au bout de la Nuit to Marteau. If, in 1935, Doyon could dedicate his study of J.-K. Huysmans, Ombres dans la Cathédrale, to “my friend Paul Marteau,” relations between the two men had soured by the mid-fifties, as is made evident from Doyon’s letter to Jean Paulhan on the 28 of March 1956, when he writes, “There is no one, not even Marteau (that spoilt child), who has not betrayed me with brutality. I am used to it.” Indeed, Doyon’s memoirs, published in 1953, contain but one brief and impersonal reference to his former friend: “Paul Marteau wrote on esotericism, whose arcana were familiar to him and of which he cultivated the bitterest specialities with the learned Caslant.” (Mémoire d’homme: souvenirs irréguliers d’un écrivain qui ne l’est pas moins, La Connaissance, p. 104.)

Doyon’s interest and knowledge of “occult matters,” as his friend Jean Paulhan put it, is attested by  his noteworthy edition of Le Comte de Gabalis by by Montfaucon de Villars, with an extensive introduction and accompanying essays (including the one by Paul Marteau). This was the first of a planned series of esoteric texts, followed by a text by Jean-Baptiste Willermoz, a prominent 18th-century Freemason and Martinist, Les Sommeils, in 1926, obtained through his friendship with one of the latter’s descendants. His 1942 biography of Montfaucon de Villars included an intriguing aside on the occultist author, Grillot de Givry, author of the well-known book Witchcraft, Magic and Alchemy, and whose untimely death, according to Doyon, was to be classified as a “mystagogic assassination” for having revealed occult secrets. Doyon also published a pamphlet on the mysterious secret society “Les Veilleurs” [The Watchers], to which belonged Schwaller de Lubicz and the poet Oscar Milosz, whom Doyon knew well and had published, showing his inside knowledge of the esoteric circles of the time (Livrets du Mandarin, n° 3 January 1960), as well as an in-depth biography and study of Joséphin Péladan (La Douloureuse aventure de Péladan, La Connaissance, 1946). Doyon further published an anthology of texts concerning the Compagnonnage and the mysticism of the trades-based initiations (La Pierre, ses fastes et les hommes, Denoël, 1939). On a lighter note, it is also worth noting a booklet on the popular folk legend of the beast of the Gévaudan which terrorised rural France in the mid-eighteenth century, Le Loup du Gévaudan. Variétés sur la légende, La Connaissance, 1936.

Doyon’s knowledge of cards and the Tarot is amply demonstrated by the three very interesting articles he penned on the subject, the first two for the Gazette Dunlop in 1937, and the third, some 25 years later, for his own Livrets du Mandarin. The obscurity of certain references show that Doyon engaged in some serious research and reflection on the subject before committing his thoughts to paper, although as we shall later see, his references were sometimes garbled. (For instance, neither the Grand nor the Petit Albert grimoires deal with cartomancy, nor are they concerned with games.) Be that as it may, the wit and erudition of these articles make them worth presenting to a wider audience.

The first article, La Petite Histoire des Cartes à Jouer [A Little History of Playing Cards], deals with the design, engraving and printing processes of card-making, and even taxation, in minute detail and with great erudition. The second article, Les Jeux de Cartes en France (Types et Varietés) [Card Games in France (Types and Varieties)], describes the types of cards used for both cartomancy and those used for playing, such as the Tarot Nouveau, as well as a number of other regional games, one of which, Aluette, we shall post in the next instalment.

Finally, Doyon’s 1962 article Petite Histoire des Cartes : Casse-tête et prophétisme [A Little History of Cards: Puzzles and Prophecy], taking up some of the observations of the earlier pieces, proceeds to analyse the very idea of the analogical correspondences of the Tarot, pre-empting the type of argument advanced by Umberto Eco in his writings (e.g.  L’idea deforme and Foucault’s Pendulum), and historical analyses which foreshadow those employed by later generations of historians.

Doyon died in 1966 in the utmost misery, a victim of his own uncompromising values and prickly personality. A selection of portraits and obituaries are available (in French) at the end of the following article. Aside from his published volume of memoirs, the only comprehensive overview of the life and works of René-Louis Doyon is the article Les chemins sinueux d’un étrange mandarin by Éric Dussert, first published in Le Matricule des Anges n°38, March 2002. Further reflections on Doyon’s single-minded and single-handed publishing efforts may be found in another article by Dussert here.

We present this brief excerpt from the second of his articles on playing cards, an overview of the various decks used for cartomancy. In it, one will find what is possibly the sole mention of the intriguing article Paul Marteau published in the Arts et Métiers Graphiques journal, 15 years before the publication of his book, and which, for reasons unknown, was not included in the final edition of his work. The illustrations accompanying Doyon’s article all come from the Grimaud firm, as do most of the decks cited (links to which may be found below), thereby underscoring his cordial relationship with Marteau, and, presumably, access to his collection.

The journal in which this article was published, the Gazette Dunlop, was devoted to motoring, sports and tourism, and the issues often included a miscellany of thematic articles as well. This was due in no small part to the encyclopaedic and eclectic mind of its editor, Louis Baudry de Saunier, another eccentric gentleman to whom we cannot do justice here. The original article was published in the n° 202 issue of the Gazette Dunlop of June 1937, and may be read here.

René-Louis Doyon in 1922

* * *

Card Games in France (Types and Varieties)

(Excerpts)

by The Mandarin (René-Louis Doyon)

Cartomancers’ Decks

The card decks destined to the various games played in Europe have always been and still are, more or less, of the same type.

Those destined for divination have much greater variety and their composition is mixed in with an occult science accessible only to initiates, as well as a lot of fantasy useful for impressing the anxious and gullible client. Their common father is the great and mysterious “Tarot” which comes from the Indias and which is generally labelled as Egyptian, as Bohemian, jealously guarded by the Egyptians, and yet known and put to work under the name of Ancient Tarot of Marseilles, with its recomposed colours and its orthodox arcana. Mr Paul Marteau has provided the outline of a very substantial study in Arts et Métiers Graphiques; to which those curious about symbols and mystic secrets may refer.

Some figures from the Egyptian Tarot, or so-called Tarot of Marseilles, which is currently used by Cartomancers

Is it known, for the other decks used by prophets and professional fortune-tellers, that their design and composition reach an entertaining realisation of images whose appearance and shuffling form the entire unexpected part of conjectural revelations? As we have the Grand and Petit Albert, attributed to the genius of the Dominican Albert the Great (and what has he not been attributed, since it is said that his name is to be found in that of the once ill-renowned Place Maubert – “Mauvais Albert” or “Evil Albert”?) We have the Grand and Petit Etteilla, from the 18th century, the work of an ingenious barber; the Tarot of Mlle Lenormand, official soothsayer of Napoleon and of Josephine, is still in use; the Sybil of the Salons, the Book of Destiny, the Little Cartomancer and the Ancient Destiny; a real palette, with impressive or comical images which occupy more space on the cardboard than on the tarotic image itself. That is not all: the Game of the Hand, with its very curious chiromantic diagrams, and the Astrological Tarot, with its celestial diagrams, that is what may yet be found commercially; with the means – for want of sure learning – on how to use them! What a choice! Only surprises and naïve ingeniousness here, and complicated to boot; a little learning and a lot of already outdated opportunism, for our age has become far too distracted or too preoccupied by science and business to seek out the secret and the why of the world by means other than the alembic, analysis and the scales; the most recent creations of these cards are almost a century old!

— The Mandarin (René-Louis Doyon)

* * *

Support this Site at ko-fi.com


Leave a comment

Patrice Boussel: On the Tarot of Marseilles

Translator’s Introduction

Paul Marteau‘s seminal work on the Tarot of Marseilles received widespread praise and a number of positive book reviews, some of which have been presented on this site. They show not only the ‘reach’ which Marteau and his publisher may have had, but above all, the interest which the Tarot aroused, and this from all angles. Effectively, the book was reviewed by art critics, playing card historians, literary figures and critics of all stripes rather than by occultists and fortune-tellers. One extensive, insightful and engaging review, by a critic well-qualified to do so, provides an in-depth view of the reception of this important work, and raises a number of important points in so doing.

The author, Patrice Boussel (1916-1985), was a senior librarian and a specialist on the history of medicine. Boussel was a prolific author, writing with wit and erudition on a great range of subjects; his illustrated histories of medicine, surgery and pharmacy “are considered classics and their rich iconography is often a revelation that bears witness to his curiosity and his artistic sensibility.”

Boussel further wrote works on all manner of subjects, such as Leonardo da Vinci, Balzac, Victor Hugo, Beaumarchais, the cult of relics, eroticism and gallantry in the 19th century, and guides to the battlefields of France and to the D-Day landing beaches of WWII. Closer to our subject matter, Boussel also penned a series of guides to the local legends and secret histories of a number of regions of France; Burgundy, Brittany, Normandy, are all examined in this perspective; and closer still, Boussel wrote a guide to the fortune-tellers of Paris. Finally, in 1963 Boussel published a Manuel de Superstition, to which we shall have occasion to return.

These numerous and varied publications express the man’s cultured background and wide learning; having graduated in both philosophy and law, Boussel became interested in mathematics and geology, and after marrying a pharmacist, became interested in the medical sciences. He later became the curator of the Bibliothèque historique de la Ville de Paris. A fuller biography of the man may be read here (in French).

Æsculape (pub. 1911-1974), the journal in which this article was published, was a monthly illustrated journal “on literature and the arts in their relations with the sciences and medicine,” founded by Benjamin Bord and later edited by Jean Avalon. The journal, although ostensibly aimed at the medical practitioner (“and his wife and his patients…”), had a much wider readership on account of the variety of its topics, its readability and the wealth of illustrations it contained. The iconographic collection built up by Avalon was highly considered, and the journal quickly became the official journal of the International Society for the History of Medicine. Out of print since 1974, copies have become sought-after items by amateurs of the weird and wonderful.

Æsculape, n° 1, 1950.

* * *

On the Tarot of Marseilles

Patrice Boussel

Georges Courteline, in a masterpiece, Boubouroche, Marcel Pagnol, in another masterpiece, Marius, brought to life men possessed by the demon of cards, and because they were writing comedies, they were able, without concession, without abstract discourses, to show just how serious a thing the game of manille is. They raised laughs, they raise laughs, and they shall raise laughs at their characters, for these fellows are real, reasonable, and tragic, if you like, and yet they do not know it; for they naturally engage in one of the most natural and important acts of man, they gamble. Gambling is a serious matter, much like marriage or death, which explains the involuntary but definitely comical aspect of a gambler, of a cuckold, or of an undertaker.

Reading a medical treatise, a marriage contract, a manual of contract bridge, on the contrary, only very rarely engenders hilarity. The frivolousness of their authors saddens us rather: not only do they take themselves seriously but they wish to be taken as such… and they manage to do so. The reader, forgetful of his human condition, fretfully wonders about the consequences of a bad dose of tuberculosis, of the marital community property regime, or a four no-trump bid, as though, master of his destiny, he considered himself immortal, happy in his domestic life, and unbeatable at cards. He no longer has any desire at all whatsoever to laugh.

The Moon, from the set of so-called Charles VI Tarot cards. This card, as well as the following ones, belong to a series of seventeen conserved in the Cabinet des Estampes of the Bibliothèque Nationale. These cards were, it is thought, executed in 1392 by an artist from the rue de la Verrerie in Paris, Jacques Gringonneur. These figurines are obviously from the 14th century, but nothing proves that they were part of the games created for the mad king and which the head of finances mentions in his accounts. The two astrologers we see here were replaced by two baying hounds in the later decks of the 15th century.

The book which Mr Paul Marteau has just published with Arts et Métiers Graphiques, on the Tarot of Marseilles, is not a joyful book, but it is a handsome book, and even a good book for many reasons, not all of which are those given by Mr Jean Paulhan in the preface he has provided, nor Eugène Caslant in his preliminary exposé.

Le Tarot de Marseille may be considered as being a promotional work, since the cards, published in 1761 by Nicolas Conver, master cardmaker in Marseilles, are currently being republished by B. P. Grimaud, and that “Paul Marteau, master cardmaker of France, is one of the directors of the Grimaud firm, globally renowned for its manufacture of playing cards.”

Le Tarot de Marseille is not a work of erudition, a “scientific” work, since it includes no bibliography, and we find almost none of those footnotes, respected by readers to the point of not reading them.

Le Tarot de Marseille is not a history book. The author says nothing of the origin of the cards, nor of the various hypotheses which have been proposed, he even says nothing of the historical position of this Marseilles Tarot.

Le Tarot de Marseille is not the work of an astrologer, for if the author uses the houses for the astrological spread, which is classic, he makes no allusion to the planetary influences, which could be deemed essential.

Finally, Le Tarot de Marseille is not a treatise of arithmosophy, to employ the term coined by Dr Allendy, author of the Symbolisme des Nombres. Mr Paul Marteau’s symbolism seems to be fairly summary: he opposes the Material to the Spiritual, instinct to religious sentiment, activity to passivity…

For all of this, may Mr Paul Marteau be praised.

The Hanged Man, from the so-called Charles VI deck. The Tarot deck is composed of 78 cards: 22 trumps, of which 21 are numbered, and four suits, consisting each of 14 cards. The names of the suits are: sword, cup, staff, and coin. Each suit has a king, a queen, a horseman, a valet, and ten cards numbered from 1 to 10. Of the 22 trumps, one is unnumbered: it is the fool, called Le Mat. The others are numbered from 1 to 21. The first five: the Juggler, the Popess, the Empress, the Emperor, and the Pope, constitute the lesser trumps. The last five, called the greater trumps, are the Star, the Moon, the Sun, the Judgment, and the World. The Hanged Man shown here is the twelfth card of the pack.

In his preface, Mr Jean Paulhan deals with occult matters and writes:

“The least that can be said of the specialists of occultism is that they also go awry, even more quickly than their sciences. I dare not even think of those who wind up in misery, or vile disease: neither Court de Gébelin, nor Éliphas Lévi – nor the Gypsies either, whose mysterious function, it would appear, was to spread the Tarot throughout the world, derived any profit from the riches they kindly promise us. There is worse, and the occultists best-known to us – those of the Enlightenment: Saint Germain, Cagliostro, Mesmer, Casanova, Etteilla a little later – end up in general by living at the expense of naïve elderly ladies seeking immortality. In brief, as happens one day, sooner or later, for the famous mediums, they cheat. When they do not adopt the trade that resembles most that of soothsayer: secret agents, informers; or else spies, turning for the benefit of the State which pays them the trenches they have dug out of the laudable concern of finding hidden treasure.”

The author of Le Tarot de Marseille must not “go awry.” He knows the existence of occult matters, but he wields them with prudence, and above all, with health. The superficial critic could say:

— But it’s a manual – a luxurious one – for beginning cartomancers!

No doubt seasoned professionals already have their own personal keys and have no need for the interpretation proposed by Mr Paul Marteau. This would bother them rather, for they might notice contradictions with what they hold to be true, which would inevitably sow some doubt in their souls, particularly avid for certainty.

The historians – equally professional – will consider this book with neither bibliography nor soothing references useful only for its beautiful reproductions of ancient images. They will not say that they are beautiful, but that they are precise, for beauty can be but foreign or unwelcome for the true historian. They will praise Mr Paul Marteau the technician, “the great master cardmaker of France,” and will only blame him for having had these ideas, and above all – o scandal! – for having presented them without any scientific apparatus.

Death, from the so-called Charles VI deck. Death is the thirteenth card of the pack. If they still play “tarot” in Burgundy and in Franche-Comté, the cards of the deck serve especially for the prediction of the future. The explanation of the “arcana” is, in essence, the aim of cartomancy. The interpretation of the combinations which they may present, of the influence exerted on this interpretation by the neighbouring minor cards, is a more complex matter than the summary explanations given by certain professionals would have one believe. The “science” of the Tarot demands knowledge of the kabbalah, of astrology, and of hermetic philosophy.

The author has “striven to show the reader that nothing in this Tarot has been placed at random, that the drawings have been conceived in such a way as to give significance to the slightest details, that the colours are always suited to the presiding idea of each card, and that the entire set reveals a transcendental philosophy.”

To explain the existence of soothsayers, of somnambulists, of fortune-tellers, one must accept that there exists, within every man, something secret, which guards itself and which refuses to be drawn out. The coffee grounds, the crystal ball… and in a more detailed and more precise fashion, the Tarot, enable one to evoke this something by stimulating the psyche of the seer, or of the cartomancer. No doubt the interpretation will always depend on this psyche, regardless of the instrument employed, but if we accept as much, how could we not accept that the perfection of the instrument may facilitate this interpretation? Now, the Tarot seems to be, and by far, the best of the lot.

3 of the major arcana plus the Mate, of the Tarot of Marseilles (Grimaud edition). The 22 arcana, of which the first, the Mate, is unnumbered, date back, according to the occultists, to the 22 major arcana of priestly magic.

“The Tarot is a universal vibrating instrument and becomes a source of energy by the fluidic projection of our thought.”

The Tarot provides “the symbolic keys of the universal laws which preside over the destinies of man.” Believe it – or not, the essential is that men would have thought in this way, and they would have summarised their philosophy in a collection of 78 images.

Court de Gébelin began his study on the Tarot pack with this striking phrase:

“If one were to announce that there still exists a work of the ancient Egyptians, one of their books that escaped the flames that devoured their superb libraries, and which contains their purest doctrine on interesting subjects, everyone would undoubtedly hasten to become acquainted with such an extraordinary book.”

Rather than making a general, and necessarily superficial, study of all the Tarot decks, Mr Paul Marteau has preferred to take as his subject the one he considers as being the best. From these 78 images, he has derived a philosophy, he has shed light on what one may imagine, by means of the Tarot of Marseilles, “of the universal laws which preside over the destinies of men,” he has therefore accomplished the task which he had set himself, and it must be admitted that those who would think otherwise would be bad jokers.

4 of the major arcana of the Tarot of Marseilles (Grimaud edition). The last trump, the World, marked with the highest number, takes all the others. These tarot cards are the faithful reproduction of a deck printed in Lyons in the 18th century.

“It would be imprudent to treat it as a handbook of physics or of geometry,” says Mr Jean Paulhan. “On the contrary. It must not be learned by heart. Nor shown – despite being, in my mind, very accurate and very beautiful – to all one’s friends. It must be read, of course, but to be immediately forgotten, and later read once more (without ever being reread). In brief, to relegate it to that secret part of ourselves, to which the Tarot as a whole is but a constant allusion.”

Le Tarot de Marseille presents itself as “a sort of dictionary, or even an encyclopaedia,” it is as serious as a book on law, a dictionary of philosophy, or a treatise on the game of chess might be, but it is by no means boring; the simplicity, the naïvety of the the engravings is moving, and moreover, the subject of the book – functionality and user’s guide to an instrument to know the unknowable – is entirely alive. To believe that we are about to know what we believe – at the same time – we cannot know, is that not human, “too human,” just as surely as considering oneself to be in love, cuckolded, or mortal?

* * *

Notes

Follow the links for further details on: Marcel Pagnol; Marius; Georges Courteline; Boubouroche, Dr René Allendy; Le Symbolisme des Nombres.

Images

Images of the “Charles VI” Tarot and Grimaud Ancien Tarot de Marseille courtesy of the BNF.
Support this Site at ko-fi.com


Leave a comment

Book Reviews: Le Tarot de Marseille by Paul Marteau

Translator’s Introduction

Continuing in our series of reviews of Paul Marteau’s seminal work on the Tarot of Marseilles, we present two further instalments, the first, from the journal of the Vieux Papier, an association still in existence, and which aims to study daily life through written and printed documents and iconography, including, incidentally, Tarot cards. It will come as no surprise, then, to discover that the historian Thierry Depaulis, whose works have often been mentioned in these pages, is the current president of the association. Indeed, Paul Marteau himself published a couple of articles in this journal in the 1930s.

This review, presumably by René Thiebaut, appeared on page 118 of the January 1951 issue of the Bulletin de la Société archéologique, historique & artistique le Vieux papier, tome 20, fascicle 154, and the original may be read here. Our few additions are within square brackets.

The second, from the Mercure de France, by the unknown collaborator who signed his [?] articles ‘S. P.’, was published on 1 October, 1949, and may be found on the Retronews website.

* * *

Book Reviews: Le Tarot de Marseille, by Mr Paul Marteau

Mr Marteau has, for a long time, taken pleasure in collecting beautiful modern works, both for the harmony of the texts and the variety of illustrations, but he remains deeply attached to his profession and, if we were to ask him to choose between bibliophile and cardmaker for his business card, we can be assured that he would choose the second title.

His uncle, Mr Georges Marteau, formerly a member of our society, has left to the Cabinet des Estampes [of the BNF] his very beautiful collection of playing cards, which Mr [Jean] Adhémar showed to us in the Reserve.

He himself had begun another collection, and his ambition, he told us one day, would be to see in France the creation of a museum of playing cards, like in Altenburg [the Castle and Playing Card Museum]. In his office, everything is devoted to the glory of the cardmaker: books, regulations, images, decks from every country and from every era, curios, popular objects depicting figures. That is an appropriate ambience for the writing of this learned and beautiful work on the Tarot of Marseille, completed after 20 years of research and study.

Published by Arts et Métiers Graphiques, whose very handsome and unfortunately discontinued journal has not been forgotten, this 300-page volume is enriched with 78 colour reproductions of the cards explained in detail. Each one is provided with a definition of the symbolism, the colours, the character, the attributes, the number, etc. … A preface by Jean Paulhan, an exposé by Caslant summarise, for the general reader, the elements which enable one to guide oneself through so many diverse sciences. Then, Mr Marteau analyses each figure, with great sagacity: first, the number, then the general significance, the abstract significance, the analogical particularities, the orientation of the figures, the practical significances on the mental, animic [psychic] and physical planes.

We humbly admit that our lack of knowledge does not allow us to describe this learned work as would be fitting, but those colleagues more advanced in symbolism will appreciate, we are certain, its solidity and clarity.

* * *

Le Tarot de Marseille, by Paul Marteau, preface by Jean Paulhan, introduction by Eugène Caslant; 19 x 27.5 cm; 300 pp.; colour reproduction of the 78 arcana; 2,900 copies; 2,500 francs. (Arts et Métiers Graphiques).

A very curious work, and a very handsome book. The preface is Paulhan at his finest, and goes far. The introduction and the text explain the use of the Tarot, and expand on its symbolism. It is an essay, and it is a treatise. A curiosity? Without doubt, but one of those “curiosities” that have both significance and reach.

—  S. P.

* * *

Support this Site at ko-fi.com


Leave a comment

Charles Estienne: Assessment of a Year of Painting: Book Review: Paul Marteau: Le Tarot de Marseille

Translator’s Introduction

Paul Marteau (1885–1966), heir and director of the Grimaud card manufacturing company, is best known for the deck of Tarot cards he produced in 1930, and the accompanying book he published in 1949. This deck, still in production, is the most widespread and best-known of the Tarot de Marseille type decks. Leaving aside the purely commercial aspect, the extent of his influence on the world of Tarot is as yet still little understood, through lack of research; if not badly understood or even misrepresented at times.

In an attempt to correct the record, and provide further indications in English, we have published a number of reviews of his work, and the perceptive reader will have noted the variety of horizons from which the reviewers hail; occultists, card historians, art critics, writers, poets; the influence of his work extended far beyond the confines of the insular worlds of cartomancy or card specialists, but instead brought the Tarot out into the open, as a cultural object in its own right.

Continuing in the series of book reviews, we present this piece by the noted art critic Charles Estienne (1908-1966). An important and influential critic and writer, Estienne was one of the main promoters of abstract and figurative art in the post-war period, and the author of numerous books on the subject. Close to André Breton for a time, it is therefore no surprise that he turned his attention to the Tarot, and especially, to the novel idea expressed by both Paul Marteau and Jean Paulhan, namely, that the Tarot be approached as an optical language in its own right, and conversely, applying the tarological exegesis to figurative art.

On that subject, it is not uninteresting to note the illustration by the artist Auguste Herbin which accompanied Estienne’s piece, which we have been unable to find, but which we have exchanged for a suitable replacement. The sculptor Jacques Villeglé later remarked that: “Charles Estienne had judiciously illustrated his article on the release of another book, this time dedicated to the Tarot of Marseilles and prefaced by Paulhan, by an Herbin, which, just like an arcana, was composed of simple forms with flat tones, o how resplendent!” (Jacques Villeglé, Cheminements, 1943-1959, 1999, p. 35.)

The following piece was originally published as “L’Art n’est-il qu’un jeu ? Bilan d’une année de peinture (1)” in the journal Combat, 14 September, 1949. It was followed by a second piece on recent exhibitions a week later, further expanding on the author’s views of expressionism and realism in art, but without reference to either the Tarot or to Marteau’s book. The original may be read on the French news archive here.

* * *

Assessment of a Year of Painting

Book Review: Paul Marteau: Le Tarot de Marseille

Charles Estienne

A curious painting by Herbin. (This is not the exact artwork as reproduced in the original article, which we have been unable to find.Trans.)

Is Art But A Game? – An Assessment of One Year of Painting (1)

Before submitting “my” list of the chief exhibitions of the last season to my readers, I would like to tell a little story that may somehow contribute to articulate its meaning.

Over the course of a conversation on abstract art with the “figurative” artist [Maurice] Bianchon and his wife Marguerite Louppe, also an artist, Léon Degand recalled his reply to [Léon] Gischia during a similar discussion:

“No one, said Gischia, would have had the idea of changing the rules of the game of whist. The same goes for painting…”

— “Well, replied Degand, but what if I wish to play bridge?”

On the moment, Marguerite Louppe could only declare herself in favour of the artist’s “freedom of the game”. But the next day, she declared: “I was thinking that we were not talking about the same thing: because you are no longer playing cards, you are reading them, you abstract types…”

The “Tarot of Marseille”

That this little anecdote might go much further then its superficial sense was confirmed to me recently as I leafed through the very curious work dedicated to the Tarot of Marseille published by Arts et Métiers Graphiques, and enriched, as they used to say, with a malicious and profound preface by Jean Paulhan, an exposé by Eugène Caslant (of the École Polytéchnique, as the publisher notes), and finally with the 78 cards of the Tarot pack, reproduced in colour, the main text being by Paul Marteau, director of the Grimaud firm, specialised, as we know, in the manufacture of playing cards.

Now the “Tarot” is also a pack of cards, but of a particular type, since the figures and the suits which it consists of have a precise symbolic significance, and that the “combinations” which its cards may give rise to are supposed to “express the flowing and varying play of the universal forces.” This is why, continues Eugène Caslant, the one who handled these cards considered that their shuffling, if it were done in affinity with the mental and passional prospection of the querent, could discern the cosmic law at work, and reveal, to a certain extent, fate.

Alphabet

Of course, I am not ignoring the fact that broaching the grave and hackneyed subject of the “fate of art” will have me labelled an obscurantist. And yet, close to a very ancient popular practice, the Tarot, of which our current decks of cards are but the degenerate descendants — and without danger, since we no longer play at “fate” — it has been difficult not to make some very simple observations by way of hypotheses or indications…

1. That abstract art presently finds itself reproached for being flat, technically speaking, as playing cards were. The reproach was already classic, in their day, with respect to Manet, Gauguin, those ancestors of abstraction. But an Herbin today, the flat forms and shades he employs, do they not correspond, to his mind, to an alphabet, that is, to a precise symbolism? And is this symbolism not fairly close, in the end, to that of the Tarot, and which gives that strangeness and mystery to some Herbin pieces, for example, the one exhibited recently at the [Salon des] Réalités Nouvelles?

Second observation: Does current figurative art not increasingly appear to you as a “game without danger”, where the rule is to stop at the appearances of the world to avoid burning oneself by seeking what is behind it?

The Secret of the World

It is therefore not absolutely absurd to reproach the so-called abstract painters of violating, to a certain degree, the “rule” of a certain pictorial tradition, for in fact, they are no longer playing at only reproducing appearances; and this in order to “participate in the secrets of the world, — short of understanding them,” as Paulhan remarks. They do not reason by identities, but proceed by analogies: which is the very principle of the Tarot (and of poetry…).

And, still following the same comparison, a non-figurative composition of forms and of colours, if painted by an authentic artist, one in deep “affinity” with his “mental and passional projection,” this “combination” is in greater accord with the “cosmic laws”, and reveals more of the presence of Nature than the repetition or the imitation of forms outside it. In this way, new art, probably unwittingly, reconnects with an even more ancient tradition than that of the Renaissance, and in its own way, it no longer plays cards, it reads them… or it plays something else, that is truly its fate, fused with that of the artist-man.

One will note, I hope, that such principles demand just as much, if not more, from so-called abstract art than from its contrary…

(To be continued)

Support this Site at ko-fi.com


Leave a comment

Book Review: Paul Arnold on Paul Marteau: Le Tarot de Marseille

Translator’s Introduction

Paul Arnold (1909-1992), writer, traveller, founder of the European Buddhist Union, and Supreme Court judge, played a role somewhat analogous to that of Christmas Humphreys where Buddhism was concerned in France. As a writer, he was a specialist on the history of theatre, and penned a number of serious books treating of the esoteric aspect of the works of Shakespeare and Baudelaire, as well as two scholarly works on Rosicrucianism and the origins of Freemasonry. As a native of Alsace, Arnold spoke German perfectly, and produced translations of the poetical works of Nietzsche as well as Goethe’s Faust. He also wrote a number of novels and translated the entire body of Shakespeare’s works in 20 volumes, confirming his status as accomplished man of letters.

Later in life, Arnold devoted himself to the study of Buddhism, travelling extensively in Asia, especially Japan, producing a number of influential works on Buddhism in the process, both on Japanese Zen and Tibetan Tantra. Further biographical details may be found here (in English) and here (in French). As far as the Tarot is concerned, Arnold provided Jean-Marie Lhôte with insights into the esotericism of Shakespeare for his catalogue-monograph Shakespeare Dans Les Tarots, (Bizarre, issues 43-44, J.-J. Pauvert, 1967) and was thus well-qualified to review Paul Marteau’s book. One will note the transparent references to the Tarot-inspired works of André Breton and Gérard de Nerval. This review appeared in the Cahiers du Sud, 1 July 1949. The original may be read on the French news archive here.

Arnold’s work on Shakespearean esotericism.

Book Review: Paul Arnold on Paul Marteau: Le Tarot de Marseille

Le Tarot de Marseille, Paul Marteau, Arts et Métiers Graphiques, 1949.

One of the great cardmakers of France, Mr Paul Marteau has given us a rational key to one of the oldest and most powerful instruments of the occult sciences, the game of Tarot – particularly the Tarot of Marseille whose 1761 edition, no doubt reproducing traditional figures, serves as the basis for the present study – is not a game of chance, but a form of knowledge of the particular destiny of man in the cosmos. Some of its arcana are famous. Who has not heard tell of Arcanum 17, “the Star” of the Spirit? Who does not know that Nerval was in conjunction with Arcanum 13, “Death,” – resurrection?

Each of the 78 cards which make up the Tarot of Marseille is here described in minute detail; each of its elements (line, figure, objects, colours, orientations) is explained according to the traditional interpretations. And we are indebted to Mr Marteau for having completed this tradition, often incomplete or obscure, with a lot of prudence. Enlivened by the colour reproductions of the cards under consideration, these examinations explain in succession the symbolism of the number inscribed according to the esoteric tradition, the general significance, the analogical particularities, the concrete significance in the three planes: mental, animic [psychic], and physical. A summary of the principles of reading the cards completes the study. A more complete or clearer user’s manual could not be wished for.

We are now suddenly headlong in a dangerous, enchanting world which, according to a solid tradition, allows one to cruelly reveal the consultant’s destiny, less on the plane of his immediate concerns, which are nonetheless not neglected, rather, on the plane of the evolution of the soul in the cosmos, the result of Wrestling with the Angel which we are perhaps unwittingly engaging in. Whatever the objections that the recourse to this ancient method of introspection and divination may raise for our positive minds, Jean Paulhan, who introduces the volume, is right to recall that “there exist occult facts. And the least that can be said is that these facts do not allow themselves to be dominated, nor allow themselves to be wholly known.”

* * *

Support this Site at ko-fi.com