 |
| Posted: Sat Jan 23rd, 2010 12:59 am |
|
1st Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
I'm probably going to get bonked for opening this can of worms, but what the hey!
I was looking at my Kaplans and poring over the information available on the various editions, and reviewing the timeline of historical tarot that Mary Greer and James Revak have put together - great stuff! I'm glad that there's a simple categorization for the Etteilla decks now, anyway.
Kaplan II differentiates between various editions, but doesn't show the card backs and only infrequently mentions the back design (e.g., "red in a repeating pattern of a star of six teadrops surrounded by a circle of dots"). I'm wondering if anyone has taken on the gargantuan task of trying to sort out the editions by back design...Cerulean has a detailed Etteilla thread over on AT, but stops short of addressing the card backs.
I have an Etteilla which I believe is an 1838 Grand Livre du Thot, but I can't say for sure because there's just not enough information to cobble together to get there.
I'm uploading a few images. Maybe if others on the forum do the same we can start informally cataloguing what's out there?
Attached Image (viewed 242 times):
 Last edited on Sat Jan 23rd, 2010 01:04 am by Kimber
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 23rd, 2010 01:02 am |
|
2nd Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here's the back. Attached Image (viewed 246 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 23rd, 2010 01:03 am |
|
3rd Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
This is the cover of the Orsini book. Attached Image (viewed 239 times):
 Last edited on Sun Jan 24th, 2010 08:26 pm by Kimber
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 23rd, 2010 01:03 am |
|
4th Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
And the 2 of Coins; no tax stamp.
Attached Image (viewed 238 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 23rd, 2010 07:10 am |
|
5th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
I've got some & will post pics later.
The tax stamp is on the 2 swords 
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 23rd, 2010 03:17 pm |
|
6th Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
That could explain it!! LOL OK, here's the 2 of Swords. The decks from this period all appear to be hand colored.
Attached Image (viewed 220 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 03:06 am |
|
7th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here's some of mine.
Lines are broken and print quality not so crisp. The box is a train wreck with both bottom and one side completely gone, and only half of the two-part box, and no booklet.
As always, photographed with love rather than skill.
Attached Image (viewed 208 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 03:06 am |
|
8th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Be sure to compare the 2 swords!
Attached Image (viewed 207 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 03:07 am |
|
9th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Are they all out of focus, or is it my eyes?
Attached Image (viewed 204 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 03:08 am |
|
10th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
...and the red box, or what's left of it.
Attached Image (viewed 205 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 08:24 pm |
|
11th Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Thanks for posting these, Debra! According to Kaplan II (p. 405) there were a couple of versions of the Z. Lismon deck published in the late 19th century.
The first one came with the same booklet by Orsini that came with my deck (as pictured above), and "Etteilla" was spelled correctly on card 1. It was called the Z. Lismon Etteilla Tarot.
Subsequently, Z. Lismon printed a second edition titled, "Jeu des 78 Tarots Egyptiens, Livre du Thot", with "Etteilla" misspelled on card 1, but otherwise identical.
Then a third edition, aslo titled "Jeu des 78 Tarots Egyptiens, Livre du Thot" was printed, this time with the name "Etteilla" spelled correctly on card 1 - I think this is the deck you have. (1890-1917).
Straightforward, until we get to Kaplan's description of the back design for the Lismon decks: "a blue lattice with a white dot in the middle interspersed with crosses". I'm interested to see if anyone on the forum has versions of these old Etteilla decks with the blue backs described.
The later Grimaud decks have a sun in the middle of the clouds on the Consultant card ( card 1, Chaos), and there are many other differences between the cards.
The Delarue decks are completely different and therefore easily distinguished ( the Etteilla deck published by LS as the Book of Thoth is the Delarue style).
Does anyone know if all of the Etteilla decks were printed in France?
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 08:58 pm |
|
12th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Thank you, Kimber!
I'm waiting for an older Grimaud printing--will post pics when I get it.
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 10:26 pm |
|
13th Post |
| Posted: Sun Jan 24th, 2010 11:59 pm |
|
14th Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Hi Debra - good stuff!! Thanks for the link! I had seen Cerulean's thread, but not the otehrs. Unfotunately, the links posted by papageno are all broken now, but there are some great pics uploaded comparing both fronts and backs! wonder if we could get those ATers to join us here and help us organize?? 
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 05:29 am |
|
15th Post |
OnePotato
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 325 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here are some photos of my Lismon "Eteilla" spelling deck.
First, the box:
Attached Image (viewed 181 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 05:32 am |
|
16th Post |
OnePotato
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 325 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
The Julia Orsini book:
(Note that a blank cover has been added later, by a conservator, but the interior is in very nice shape.)
Attached Image (viewed 179 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 05:38 am |
|
17th Post |
OnePotato
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 325 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here are cards 1 and 10:
Attached Image (viewed 173 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 05:39 am |
|
18th Post |
OnePotato
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 325 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here is card 62, with an April 1890 tax stamp, and a back:
Attached Image (viewed 173 times):
 Last edited on Mon Jan 25th, 2010 06:01 am by OnePotato
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 05:40 am |
|
19th Post |
OnePotato
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 325 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
And here are cards 74 and 76:
Attached Image (viewed 173 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 06:40 am |
|
20th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Ah ha.
Your two decks, Kimber and Spud, are older than mine and yet obviously in better condition (the story of my life).
I'm interested that the #74 upper-left wreath is broken on both OnePotato's and mine.
And that 2 of swords! There's a story there, but what is it? Somethin's not right...
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 10:58 pm |
|
21st Post |
Kimber
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 424 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
And yet another back design! Still red. Very odd. Thanks for posting the pics!!
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 25th, 2010 11:58 pm |
|
22nd Post |
Sumada
Member
|
Excellent thread, but yes I agree with you Kimber, it would be really great if the ATers (and others from equally informative sites) would join in with us here, so that all the info was in one place. Getting a handle on different Etteilla decks is hard enough without having to negotiate the labyrinth of various threads on various forums, not to mention the frustration of broken links!
Anyway, I'd like to join in here with my grungey old Etteilla decks, because I beleive there are some reasonably interesting differences. So first up, an unknown Type II deck, but possibly Blocquel (Lismon), with a unique marbled back to every card, and no tax stamp.
Attached Image (viewed 158 times):
 Last edited on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 12:10 am by Sumada
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 12:12 am |
|
23rd Post |
Sumada
Member
|
Numbers 1 and 10 from the marbled back deck.
Attached Image (viewed 160 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 12:15 am |
|
24th Post |
Sumada
Member
|
Numbers 74 and 76 from the marbled back deck. Note the different image on the bottom half of #76 as compared with OnePotato's Z. Lismon deck above. I have that deck too, and there are many differences between the lower images on the pip cards of my two decks (and possibly between mine and OnePotato's). I have read an explanation of this anomally somewhere; it is to do with the fact that these cards were printed by the old letter press method, where each component of the card is on a separate metal block bound together in a chase along with the type, which is also handset from individual metal letters. This explains spelling mistakes; just wait till you see my #10 from my blue boardered Lismon! Attached Image (viewed 130 times):
 Last edited on Tue Jan 26th, 2010 02:09 am by Sumada
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:00 am |
|
25th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
I'm not seeing those last images, Sumada. Is it just me?
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:05 am |
|
26th Post |
Sumada
Member
|
OK, here's my Z. Lismon "Jeu des 78 Tarots Egyptiens - Livre de Thot". If your box is a 'train wreck' Debra, then mine is an atrocity, but do note the different boarder decoration from both your's and OnePotato's boxes. I actually beleive Debra's deck is the older one, by nature of the back design, but am happy to be corrected.
Attached Image (viewed 149 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:10 am |
|
27th Post |
Sumada
Member
|
debra wrote: I'm not seeing those last images, Sumada. Is it just me?
I can't see them either, and yet it states they have been viewed 10 times!?!
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:12 am |
|
28th Post |
debra
Member
| Joined: | Sun Sep 9th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1115 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Every time someone clicks on the thread, it counts as a "viewing."
Probably need to reload the images.
Your decks look fab, and this is fun!
(I should get out more.)
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:13 am |
|
29th Post |
Sumada
Member
|
I can't actually see the date on your fabulous "inverted landscape" 2 of Swords Debra!!! (Another example of poor handsetting of the metal blocks). I can only boast an inverted tax stamp, but my #74 is missing the same bit on the upper left wreath, but it is not missing from my marbled back deck above; I reckon the printing block has got damaged between the two printings. I am also begining to think that Monsieur Blocquel was a very cheap and cheerful printer! Attached Image (viewed 142 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:24 am |
|
30th Post |
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:33 am |
|
31st Post |
Sumada
Member
|
I assume this is an Etteilla I deck by Grimaud. I have no box or book.
Attached Image (viewed 141 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:41 am |
|
32nd Post |
Sumada
Member
|
...and again, my assumed Grimaud Etteilla I deck. Shame I can't see the date properly, but I'm thinking the back suggests April 1890. Attached Image (viewed 138 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 26th, 2010 01:47 am |
|
33rd Post |
Sumada
Member
|
...and yet again, my assumed Grimaud Etteilla I deck. As we all know, this deck shows a large number of differences from the Blocquel/Lismon decks, which are really just poor redrawings of the originals. Most notably #s 10, 12, 15 & 21 have totally different images, and the pips have no lower image/glyph on the Cups and Swords; while the Batons and Coins do, but again, totally different to Blocquel's decks.
I also have a 1960s/70s Grimaud Grand Etteilla, an 1890 De la Rue Etteilla III, and the Dusserre repro, but I've run out of energy to do any more scanning today!Attached Image (viewed 133 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 29th, 2016 01:07 am |
|
34th Post |
DustyWhite
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 25th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Bah! Why am I always late to the party? Well, I hope you guys are still interested in any of this stuff. I am trying to establish a date range for this Etteilla. I got it from Beatrice a few years ago and she said it was an 1890, but the more I look the more it seems to be between 1840 and 1890 (I am thinking later than earlier).
My thoughts are that the wreath is unbroken, yet it has the double border, which I am certain must be a later printing. Also, comparing it to other decks it seems to fall squarely in the middle of the timeline. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance  Attached Image (viewed 67 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 29th, 2016 01:07 am |
|
35th Post |
DustyWhite
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 25th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Here is another image . . . Attached Image (viewed 66 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 29th, 2016 01:08 am |
|
36th Post |
DustyWhite
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 25th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Oh yeah, sadly no tax stamp to be found, and no box or booklet. Here is the last sample image. Attached Image (viewed 66 times):
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 29th, 2016 09:43 pm |
|
37th Post |
Sumada
Member
|
Yo Dusty
Sorry, I can't answer your questions definitively, but I do think your suppositions have every likelihood of being correct.
Since this thread started I have picked up another Etteilla deck, which appears to match Kimber's from the start of this thread. She doesn't post the 4 of Coins, but note that the 2 of Swords not only lacks a tax stamp, but also a beard!
As I have explained somewhere in the past, Lizmon's* cards were printed using handset type and individual printing blocks for each part of the total image, all held together in a device called a chase. This has resulted in each edition/print run being slightly different, as the compositor didn't always use the same image at the bottom of the cards. Not to mention making spelling mistakes occasionally!
But most importantly, what size are your cards please? Usually the blue bordered Etteilla IIs are bigger than those without blue borders. The use of the same back design, albeit a different colour, just might make our two decks close(ish) in age.
Wouldn't it be great to know when the 4 of Coins printing block got damaged :-)
*Simon Blocquel
Attached Image (viewed 60 times):
 Last edited on Mon Feb 29th, 2016 09:56 pm by Sumada
|
|
|
DustyWhite
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 25th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Thanks for the reply (and so quick too! :-)
I think they are 5" x 3 1/8"
That is what Beatrice listed them at. I really should measure all of their dimensions. I will get that in cm as well, since that is a more accurate method of comparing decks. I am wondering why some are rounded and others are not, and the back colors being different even though the pattern is the same. I know the Morgans were extremely careless with their deck printings but this makes me scratch my head. I was certain that the single border cards were older than the double bordered cards, but it seems that some single border cards are either newer or thought to be newer.
Also, I have pics of another Etteilla I was able to examine two years ago. It is more like yours, but I have to dig those pics out to get exact facts on it. Fortunately I am working on this site almost every day now, so it should be up in a month or two.
|
|
|
Sumada
Member
|
Ok - that's approx. 127mm x 79mm; the same as my blue bordered deck, and presumably the same as one potatoe's deck too.
The other Etteilla IIs are 122mm x 67.5mm
And what site are you workibg on please?
|
|
|
Sumada
Member
|
Both those links show an Etteilla 1 deck Dusty. And I can be very sure it will measure 119mm x 65mm Last edited on Thu Mar 3rd, 2016 05:41 am by Sumada
|
|
|
DustyWhite
Member
| Joined: | Mon Mar 25th, 2013 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 32 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Thanks! I went back and checked the original listing and HK said "Cards Size: 4 5/8" x 2 1/2" Inches." That means you are very close. Wow, Julie probably has no idea that she snagged an Etteilla I by sheer good luck. At the time of her purchase (about two weeks before I got my (II?) we were discussing Etteilla and his influence on Waite and she grabbed this on an impulse. What a find :-)
|
|
|
Sumada
Member
|
Yes a wonderful deck indeed, but dont let the "1" designation and the 1890 tax stamp lead you to believe it's particularly old. The stamp was used, apart from a short break, from 1890 up to WW2, and going by the back design I would imagine this deck is from the 1930s.
Also, you have a PM ;-)
|
|
|
Current time is 05:52 pm | |
|
|
|
I guess anybody's temperature would rise if they were trying to put a horse's bit and bridle on an elephant!!!
