Re: The Tarot de Paris (The Parisian Tarot)

11
EUGIM wrote:If he is not a Bishop,why he is bearded ?

Popes from :
a- 1362 to 1523 : shaved
b- 1523 to 1700 : bearded
c- 23/11/1700 till now : shaved from Clément XI

-The Tarot de Marseille seems to have a medieval,gothic art style,instead of the italians decks prior of it which have a renaissance art style.
I'm not sure about the dates of shaved/unshaved, where are you getting that from?

Regardless, the images don't have to be contemporary, they may be references to famous people in the past. I have often wondered if the Pope is "supposed" to be Gregory, and the Popess is "supposed" to be Augustine. The images could simply be referring to popes in the past, there is, as far as I can see, no reason to believe they were supposed to be contemporary portraits.

As for the gothic versus renaissance styles in the Tarot de Marseille... I'm not at all convinced that that is a fact. They look like typical woodcuts from their period to me... but that's another topic than the Paris thread, but it is interesting enough that we should continue that discussion in the thread that already exists here:
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=174

Popes: Beards and Crosiers

12
EUGIM wrote:If he is not a Bishop,why he is bearded ?

Popes from :
a- 1362 to 1523 : shaved
b- 1523 to 1700 : bearded
c- 23/11/1700 till now : shaved from Clément XI

-The Tarot de Marseille seems to have a medieval,gothic art style,instead of the italians decks prior of it which have a renaissance art style.
Wait a minute, now I'm really confused. You're saying that they were bearded from 1523 to 1700? Then why wouldn't the Popes have beards in the Tarot de Marseille? Even IF it was supposed to be a contemporary, those dates are pretty perfect for the Tarot de Marseille. If your dates are correct, then I would EXPECT the pope to have a beard in the Tarot de Marseille, or at least any existing ones. It would also explain the Pope on the Cary Sheet.

If those dates are correct and it really is the rule without exception, and IF these were supposed to be contemporary, then in all likelihood, it would indicate that our version of the Tarot de Marseille was created after 1523.

Where are those dates from?

Re: The Tarot de Paris (The Parisian Tarot)

13
The dates were taken from Gerard Van Rijneberk book " Le tarot,histoire,iconographie,esoterisme "

1- 1362 / 1523 : From Urbano V to Adriano VI - shaved
2- 1523 / 1700 : From Clemente VII to Inocencio XII - bearded
3- 1700 : From Clemente XI till now : shaved

-Only Noblet fall in the period 1523 to 1700,so we have a bearded Pope.
The rest should be shaved,but they are not.
I know that surely the iconography is debt to an earlier historical reference.
But I am convinced that Tarot de Marseille is not depicting a Pope.
It is depicting a Bishop who is holding a crosier.
I dont want to repost here,but I said that the crosier was an attribute of the Bishops,not of Popes.
The Universe is like a Mamushka.

Re: The Tarot de Paris (The Parisian Tarot)

14
EUGIM wrote:The dates were taken from Gerard Van Rijneberk book " Le tarot,histoire,iconographie,esoterisme "

1- 1362 / 1523 : From Urbano V to Adriano VI - shaved
2- 1523 / 1700 : From Clemente VII to Inocencio XII - bearded
3- 1700 : From Clemente XI till now : shaved

-Only Noblet fall in the period 1523 to 1700,so we have a bearded Pope.
The rest should be shaved,but they are not.
I know that surely the iconography is debt to an earlier historical reference.
But I am convinced that Tarot de Marseille is not depicting a Pope.
It is depicting a Bishop who is holding a crosier.
I dont want to repost here,but I said that the crosier was an attribute of the Bishops,not of Popes.
Even though the dates of decks like the Dodal, Conver, etc... are after 1700, they are all almost certainly based on images created earlier. The period of 1523-1700 makes absolute sense! We know that Conver and every other Tarot de Marseille II are basically copies of decks from before 1700, (like the Chosson), it should not be a surprise at all to see the bearded popes if the dates given are correct.

The only surprise for me is that the 1523 would be a little later than I would expect, but then, as I said earlier, it would explain the Pope on the Cary Sheet being beardless. I'm not saying that I "buy" that the beards or non-beards are indicative, but if they are, then it makes perfect sense that the Tarot de Marseille Popes would have beards on them. It dates our model of the Tarot de Marseille as being created after 1523.

Popes: Beards and Crosiers

15
1523 leaves the Visconti deck out,so in the prior beardless period.
I heard that the Visconti family weren t closer to the Pope of Rome and they were closest to the church of Constantinople.
All the Patriarchs of Constantinople used beard,so may be this was the model followed for the Visconti deck.

:-?
The Universe is like a Mamushka.

Re: Popes: Beards and Crossiers

17
The Pope of the Charles VI deck is shaved.
Being of the end of XV century fits the historical sequence given by Van Rijneberk.
Thanks to Ross link I can see some Popes with beard but the great majority are shaved or beardless.

* 1362 / 1523 : From Urbano V to Adriano VI
The Universe is like a Mamushka.

Re: Popes: Beards and Crossiers

18
But honestly, I just don't know what we expect to get from it? The Tarot de Marseille represents, generally, a particular place in time when the art originated. For the most part, we see fairly good consistency in most of the iconography, especially in the Tarot de Marseille II.

I personally wouldn't trust the identification of beard or no beard to date a pattern, and certainly wouldn't to date a particular deck.

I think the images of the Pope of the Tarot de Marseille, as we see it on decks after Noblet, Dodal, Chosson, Conver etc.. is probably consistent with a dating of 1523 onwards... although, as I said, I wouldn't use that to date the images.

As you point out, the Visconti, which is almost certainly from before 1523, shows a bearded Pope... so i just don't think that the bearding can be taken as a reliable indication of age of a image... especially since these are not, as far as I know, portraits of particular people, and even if they are, there's no reason to believe that those portraits are contemporaneous.