Tarot Symbolism

By Robert V. O'Neill

No Synopsis Available.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0895369362
• ISBN13: 9780895369369
• Release Date: January 1986
• Publisher: Fairway Pr
• Length: 392 Pages
• Weight: 1.35 lbs.

Customer Reviews

Brilliant synthesis and history

O'Neill's book is the seminal history of the tarot. While debunking fanciful occult theories, O'Neill marshalls an amazing array of sources to propose that the Tarot is a product of Italian Renaissance scholarship and Italian Renaissance culture and style. If you're interested in the history of the tarot, you simply must read and understand this book. Nothing in the book makes the tarot less useful as a tool for today. but understanding the world view of its designers and understanding its original purposes can help the modern taroist form her own practice.

finely researched exploration of the ideas behind the tarot

For many years, the tarot has been presented as an ancient occult artifact, encoding deep metaphysical secrets. In this century, historians have offered a contrary view: that the tarot deck is simply a Renaissance card game with no deeper significance. Documentary evidence tends to support the latter view, although the images on the cards remain as intriguing and provocative as ever.This book represents a milestone in tarot scholarship; O'Neill presents the thesis that the tarot symbols *do* constitute a profound metaphysical system, even while he acknowledges and accomodates the historical evidence which debunks the fanciful speculations of the early occultists. Marshalling an encyclopedic array of sources, the author establishes that the intellectual climate of the Italian Renaissance was highly conducive to production of an emblematic synthesis of Neoplatonic philosophy and heretical mystical practice. He makes a sound case that the tarot was designed as a cosmograph, a map of the underlying spiritual structure of the universe, which might be used by those seeking enlightenment within the western tradition.One of the outstanding qualities of this book is the thoroughness with which O'Neill addresses rival hypotheses about the origin of the tarot. He considers both the strong and weak points of all the major theories on the subject, so readers can follow the arguments for themselves, and reach an informed opinion about the strength of each theory. The book thus makes an excellent starting point for learning about these rival theories; the interested reader can then follow up by seeking out the books and articles O'Neill references.There are some shortcomings, however. This book is not for casual reading. The style is that of an extended research paper. Alas, the manuscript did not receive the attention of a major publisher, so the presentation suffers in many ways: there is virtually no illustration, there are many typos, and many of the tables and lists could use the work of a good designer. Taken together, these things may discourage the less dedicated reader.O'Neill is tackling an extraordinarily difficult topic, in that he is trying to fathom the intentions of the anonymous designer of the first tarot deck, using only the indirect evidence of the cards themselves and the cultural millieu which produced them. If, in the end, having exhausted the facts, he seems to follow his personal hunches, at least he does so with candor and tempered by humility. A person with different background and interests could well reach different conclusions.This book is completely unrivaled as a scholarly attempt to understand the tarot as a coherent symbolic system. Some may argue that the tarot is not a coherent symbolic system at all, but no one makes the case better than O'Neill.How historically plausible is it that the tarot was invented to embody a serious metaphysical doctrine? If this question interests you, _Tarot S

Scholarly treatment of tarot symbology.

I own 30 or so books on tarot and symbol-systems and this is the best I have ever seen. I give this work a 9, and a complete index would make it a 9.75 or 10. Mr. O'Neill is a research scientist and his research and scholarly experience certainly pays off here; the text is clear, well-organized, and properly annotated. The author uses sources familiar to the orthodox student of Renaissance historiography (Burckhardt, et al) and the conclusions he draws are quite good. Do I disagree with his conclusions ocassionally? Yes. But the research he has done lays a wonderful groundwork for the reader to make their own critical assessment. Well done, Mr. O'Neill. The standard for scholarly tarot symbology research has been set.