Hi EUGIM,

So are you suggesting the Chosson is 1872?


RaH

Hi Rah ... (Btw,your re Mellancholic no ? )

No,I m suggesting that at least is from the same time of Conver.
I see them very close but as I said before I also mentioned that for example if we take VI card and compares the Cupid in both decks and then with Noblet,Vieville or Dodal,Chosson seems to close to Conver and too far from the others.(Take that just as one xample card).
So if we place together Chosson and Conver,the first Cupid seems more Baroque done (Think in Rubens for example ) than Conver,thus one could think place him after Conver or closely after.


PS/ So you re the greatest dancer....

Eugim

.

I don't think 1672 is an unrealistic dating for the Chosson. We already have a definite Tarot de Marseille II, the Pierre Madenie, which looks just like the Conver too, from 1709. That would be only a 37 year difference between the Chosson and the Madenie.


Cheers,

RaH



PS. And yes, I am the greatest dancer... I don't care what Baryshnikov says.... ;)

Nice to see you again Rah...

1-Regrettably here in Argentina we only can support us at the web.So I have only one deck (Conver /Lo Scarabeo) and the rest so Vieville,Noblet,Dodal,Jean Pierre Payen and Chosson I found only on the web.
2-If you are friendly sure you can send to me a web site where I can know Pierre Madenie or also you can attached here some cards.Suppose 2 essential cards for have clues VI and XII
So I then will can replay to you.
3-And here so to be honest with you I only found a single detail that live me thinking that Chosson could be prior than Conver.
Precisely the XII card. /Chosson and only Vieville,Dodal and Jean Pierre Payen (who as right deduced JMD was the same engraver),numbered it IIX.
So not Noblet nor Conver. / As I said before here and at Aeclectic,Mllanchlc,many times details seems to jump on an irrespective way time and place,defying all clasifications. (Tarot de Marseille 1 or 2 or 1500...). Thus here I m agree with you and the others comrades here (BTW,seems to be nobody here ...),that this detail could link Chosson with earlier decks,but on the other side on both extremes not Noblet nor Conver show it.
4-Iconography details by contrast I think help us to place a deck with regard to other.
I allways keep in mind the simple childish fact that we have decks so none historical serious books about Tarot de Marseilles which explain it s origin,iconography and symbolism.
But also is a fact tath once in 1499 Frenchmen brought Italians Tarot to France they reworked at all (But curiously they don t changed the EPEE pattern..)
So we have just only ours eyes,intuitions and ourselves historical background.
For instance Mllanchllic,we have the IIII card.Dodal was the only who placed the number 4 // Why ?-What reason for ?.
I told to Yves that the game players where illiterate,so if the roman number showed it clear,so why he add the 4 ?
Here I entered at a zone very difficult because just for me the "mind" creators of the iconography of the cards,could be surely balance image enough clear for game purppose and hidden meanings.
5-See The crown of L EMPERVR Chosson/Conver -Noblet / Dodal .
In which group you ll be place Chosson ? / Tarot de Marseille 1 or Tarot de Marseille 2 ?
6-Also see the design of the hat of the women ox XI./See how incongruence is the comparisson between the decks I mentioned ! / Absolutely incongruous !!!
6-Do you want another ? / See XIII depiction of death.
Vieville (The accused for unjusted reversed the entirely deck,so if not tell my why LA PAPESSE is right placed...)
Why on Vievile and Noblet the death goes "frankly" to the left so contrary to the others decks mentioned ?
7-Always been said that the figure at the top of X card is an sphinx. /So which is the historical sustain prove for that ? /For me is the worst heritage beginning Eteilla ad ending with Eliphas Levi. (Egyptian lies used for ... )
I investigated all the Medieval Bestiary possible at my hand,and I concluded that is a Gryphon,the Guardian of the Divine (Se Romanesque and Gothic French art for that)

See this, and till the next...

Eugim

.

Hi EUGIM,

The only pictures I've seen of the Pierre Madenie are in Kaplan's Encyclopedia of Tarot Vol. II. They are black and white, and rather small, so all you can really deduce is that the deck is clearly the same pattern as the Chosson and the Conver. If you don't have Kaplan vol. I and II, they have them in stock at amazon.com, who does ship to Argentina. Volumes III and IV are of course also in stock, but focus more on the occult tarots and modern decks.

Kaplan shows at least twenty other TdMs beyond the Noblet/Dodal/Conver, many of which may or may not be just as important in understanding the late 17th/early 18th century French tarots.



Cheers,

RaH

Hello RaH...
You must begin to know from now that I m a tireless hunter.
I m been tripping with my drakkar as a true Viking and found a post did by JMD on Aeclectic where he attached these as follows...
PS/ The quality of the images aren t enough good so not able to zooming too much,but is useful I think.

Eugim

Analyzing Chosson deck came to my mind the topic of which must be the order of the suit of the pips.
Which comes first ? / And why ?

A-The named cards suggested that we must read the card from left to right
B-The numbered cards that there is a sequence from left o right
C-The numbered card thus as is a numerical progression,show also a position from a card with regard to the another.
By extension,a place determined.(And that is why I sustain that LE MAT as unnumbered is,hasn t a place at the card sequence,he is out of it)

1-So as deniers aren t numbered I think they must be first placed,as Aces show us
2-The epee the second as it s Ace show that his left hand sustain the sword
3-The baton the third for the same reason that is the right hand sustain the polo stick
4-The coupee fourth
5-The Ace of epee show that them must be placed with the hilt below on the cards 3-5-7-9-10
6-The suit deniers is the only named in plural so the rest are in singular.So another reason for me to place them first

Eugim

Perhaps I have read through this thread rather too quickly in trying to catch up on some of the discussion.

A number of questions come to mind:

1) Is there any reason, in light of what has so far been presented, to doubt that the Chosson is either contemporaneous or post-dates Conver? I cannot see any.

2) Is it reasonable to conclude, based on iconographic evidence and the plausibility that it is not Chosson, but Sellon who 'made' the deck, and that in the 17th century? it seems that this indeed follows.

I would suggest that the current view is a 'theory built around the facts' (to paraphrase Eugim's quote of Sherlock Holmes), and that to suggest otherwise would require different details to emerge or be presented that may perhaps have been overlooked.

Either that, or I'm missing or overlooked something central in this discussion (quite possible, of course).

Hello JMD nice to meet you...
1-Before a few minutes ago I posted on the thread "French or Italian origin" the topic about the crosier as is see both in Noblet and Dodal deck both undated by his authors. (correct me if I m wrong ) As Chosson also
2-There I copied a Wikipedia where is mention than after the Innocent III (Xi century ) the crosier was abandoned by the Pope and then was an attribute of the Bishops.
3-As far I know only Noblet and Dodal show it.
But not Chosson...
4-So I will conclude that any of this decks are prior to XI century ? // Of course its impossible !
5-So here as I posted before meanings could coexist with the undoubtedly purpose of a card game.
6-Dodal done a deck pour L Estrange ...
A XII card numbered as IIX,do you think help the card players ? / How as illiterates they were help that ??
7-That not suppose per se a Gebelin place of the card,not just for me.
Is related to a more deepest source,too far from the XIX French Esoteric ending in Eliphas Levi...

eugim

JMD...

1-Really I haven t much information about back card decks.
2-I thought if images couldn t help one back card may be...
3-Here we have the Chosson one.
http://tarotchoco.quebecblogue.com/file ... -copie.jpg
4-Having your far expierience.
Close to other deck you place it ?