THE INFLUENCE OF

ETTEILLA & HIS SCHOOL

ON MATHERS & WAITE
By JAMES W. REVAK

PREFACE
WHAT’S NEW IN THIS VERSION

The changes in Version 1.1 are modest.  Perhaps the most important changes comprise the division
of the report into a greater number of pages to optimize download times.  To optimize these times
further, many illustrations are presented in smaller formats than previously.  However, in all such
cases the reader has the option of clicking on the images to obtain larger ones.
THE REPORT

This research report treats the renowned eighteenth-century French occultist Etteilla who was
instrumental in the early development of the esoteric Tarot.  Specifically, it focuses on his influence
on later occultists, with special attention paid to his impact on S. L. MacGregor Mathers and A. E.
Waite.
I have chosen to conduct this research and publish detailed results because, despite the leading role
played by Etteilla in the development of the esoteric Tarot, he has often received little credit for his
achievements.
I have chosen to write this report in a technical or academic style to begin to correct a serious
deficiency in literature pertaining to Tarot in general and Etteilla specifically.  Rigorous research
into Tarot has been a sporadic affair at best and the literature abounds with misinformation, error,
and shoddy documentation.  This certainly extends to the subject of Etteilla and his school of
disciples.  Time and again, with regard to them, I confronted misinformation, error, and blatant
propaganda in the literature.
For the reader who is unfamiliar with technical or academic research literature, please know that, in
part, it requires the author to document his or her findings in a fastidiously detailed manner and I
have striven to do just that.  Therefore, the reader will find numerous citations throughout this
report.  I have generally adhered to the requirements of the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association, a widely recognized authority with regard to academic and research
paper style.  Generally, sources are cited by name of author and date of publication in the text; thus
avoiding the tedium of footnotes.  In the case of works which have been translated from a foreign
language, both the date of publication of the original work and that of the translation were
provided.  To learn more about any source, the reader is encouraged to turn to the complete list of
references accompanying this report.
Readers who have a special interest in divinatory meanings assigned to Tarot cards by the School of
Etteilla, Mathers, and Waite, are invited to read the author’s Tarot Divination: Three Parallel
Traditions, which is also available via the World Wide Web.  This work includes, apparently for the
first time ever, significant selections from the output of the School of Etteilla in English translation.
Finally, I am indebted to Mary K. Greer who first drew my attention to the fact that some divinatory
meanings assigned to cards by contemporary practitioners of Tarot parallel those of Etteilla and his
disciples, as presented in Papus’ Le Tarot divinatoire.
 
JAMES W. REVAK
ABSTRACT (SUMMARY)
The subject of this study is the influence of the eighteenth-century French occultist
Etteilla and his school of disciples on S. L. MacGregor Mathers and A. E. Waite. 
Specifically, the author analyses their influence on the divinatory meanings (DMs)
assigned to Tarot cards by: (a) Mathers in The Tarot: Its Occult Signification, Use in
Fortune-Telling and Method of Play; and (b) Waite in The Pictorial Key to the Tarot
(Being Fragments of a Secret Tradition Under the Veil of Divination).  He also analyzes
Mathers’ influence on the DMs of Waite.

Results show strong support for the idea that the School of Etteilla (SE) significantly
influenced the DMs of both Mathers and Waite.  They also show modest support for the
idea that Mathers influenced Waite.  Implications for Tarot scholars and practitioners are
also discussed.

During a review of relevant literature, the author begins to place Etteilla in historic
perspective by reviewing his career, assessments of him by his peers, and his influence
(direct and through his disciples) on later generations of esotericists.

Three hypotheses, suggested by the review, are tested:

• The SE significantly influenced Mathers’ DMs;

• The SE significantly influenced Waites’ DMs; and
• Mathers significantly influenced Waites’ DMs.

The hypotheses were tested by detailed textual analysis and comparison of 624 DMs
from Mathers, 1,115 from Waite, and 2,417 from selections from Papus’ Le Tarot
divinatoire: Clef du tirage des cartes et des sorts [Divination by Tarot: Key to Reading
Cards and Lots].  The latter was chosen as the source authority for the SE’s DMs.  Each
comparison was judged as a strong match, modest match, or no match.

Quantitative analysis of the resulting data set shows that approximately:

• Two out of five (38%) of Mathers’ DMs strongly matched those of the SE;
• One half (49%) of Waite’s DMs strongly matched those of the SE; and
• One out of ten (9%) of Waite’s DMs, which do not match (strongly or modestly)
those of the SE, nevertheless strongly matched those of Mathers.

Coupled with the historic record and other studies, results support the idea that the SE
played a pivotal role in the development of Tarot theory and praxis.  Scholars, therefore,
may wish to study the SE in greater depth to evaluate further other possible
contributions.  Additionally, practitioners may wish to study the output of the SE and
apply it to enrich their use of Tarot.
INTRODUCTION
DIVERSITY OF OPINIONS CONCERNING ETTEILLA

Scholars and practitioners of the esoteric Tarot have assessed the renowned eighteenth-century
French occultist Etteilla in wildly divergent ways; “opinions about him have ranged from cynical to
idolatrous” (Kaplan, 1986, p. 398).  How are we to understand this range of opinions?  Was he
strictly a fortune-teller who popularized Tarot, or did he make additional contributions?  For
example, did he significantly influence other leading practitioners and scholars of Tarot?
On the one hand, occultists have described him as the “Grand Master” (Papus, 1909, p. 36) and
“father of modern cartomancers” (Lévy, 1854-55/1910, p. 170).  On the other hand, occultists (and
sometimes the same ones) have scorned him.  “Etteilla is held in contempt and widely ridiculed by
subsequent generations of occultists” (Jorgensen, 1992, p. 142).  Lévy claimed that “the measure of
his intelligence . . . was not of great extent” (1860/1913, p. 316).  Waite characterized him as “the
illiterate but zealous adventurer” (1910, p. 48); his ideas, as a “bizarre system” (p. 49); and his
books, as mere “colportage” (peddling or hawking) (p. 321).  Papus wrote, “Etteilla did not possess
the gift of complete knowledge, which would lead him from writing about pitiful daydreams to the
truly marvelous results of intuition” (p. 36).  However, he also noted that he was a gifted
cartomancer, achieved professional success, and commanded a faithful following: “Etteilla applied
all his knowledge to fortune-telling and, if one believes his contemporaries, he discharged the
responsibilities of his job wonderfully.  Also, he became the God of card readers, who swear only
by him” (p. 36).
Curiously, some esotericists have even ignored Etteilla in their overviews of Tarot history, although
they do discuss the origins of Tarot among ancient Egyptians or gypsies, and other discredited
theories, or discuss achievements by others, including Lévi and Gébelin (e.g., Case, 1947; Crowley,
1944; Wang, 1978, 1987).
Recent opinion apparently remains divided.  On the one hand, Giles (1992) wrote that his “primary
effect was in popularizing the idea of Tarot, rather than actually contributing to the theory or design
of the cards (p. 26).”  Both she and Jorsensen (1992) credited him with little else of substance or
historic importance.  On the other hand, Decker, Depaulis & Dummett (1996) concluded:
“Although Etteilla receives little credit in popular literature today, he can be credited
with many ‘firsts’. . . .  There is something touching in the man, who was sincere and
passionate, generous and enlightened (in all the meanings of the words in the late XVIII
century).”  (p. 99).

OBJECTIVES & IMPORTANCE

This paper seeks, in part, to interpret this diversity of opinion by beginning to place Etteilla in
historic perspective; it will briefly review his career, assessments of him by his peers, and his
influence (direct and through his school of disciples) on later generations of esotericists.  It will also
propose and test several pertinent hypotheses concerning the influence of the School of Etteilla (SE)
on Mathers and Waite, two highly influential occultists with expertise in Tarot (see Mathers
1888/1993, c. 1888a, c. 1888b, c. 1888c; Giles, 1992; Kaplan 1978, 1986; Waite 1909, 1910,
1938).  Finally, it will propose and test an hypothesis concerning Mathers’ influence on Waite.
This study is important because if it provides support for the idea that the SE influenced Mathers
and Waite, it will support the notion that its influence extended well beyond the eighteenth century,
into the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and widely impacted divination by Tarot.
The balance of this paper comprises a:
• Review of relevant literature;
• Detailed description of method and procedures;
• Presentation and analysis of results; and
• Discussion of results, including implications for scholars and practitioners of Tarot.
LITERATURE REVIEW
ETTEILLA’S CAREER
Introduction & Importance of Divinatory Meanings

Were it not for Etteilla and a handful of like-minded occultists,

the esoteric Tarot may not exist today.  Extending and applying
the theories of Gébelin and Mellet concerning the purported
Egyptian origins and symbolism of the cards, Etteilla developed
and first popularized on a large scale divination by Tarot.  “Had
it not been for Etteilla, Court de Gébelin’s speculations about the
Tarot would most likely have been forgotten” (Decker, Depaulis,
& Dummett, 1996, p. 166).  If that had been the case, the Tarot
pack may have never attracted the attention of Lévi and later
occultists.  The esoteric Tarot, including its use for divination,
might be unknown today.
Figure 1 (above): Etteilla at work, frontispiece (detail) from Cour thèorique et pratique du Livre du Thot (1790) (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, pl. 4, 1996).

The employment of Tarot for divination or fortune-telling began no later than the late eighteenth
century.  It was (and still is) one of the cards’ significant uses.  Practitioners have long used
divinatory meanings (DMs) assigned to specific cards (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996;
Jorgensen, 1992).  The analysis of such DMs will figure prominently in this study; however, the
reader should not interpret this to mean that they are the only tools used by Tarot practitioners.  In
fact, DMs “are viewed by many occultists as weak meanings; that is, the simplest, most elementary
significance of the cards” (Jorgensen, p. 166).  To interpret cards, occultists also used or advocated
the use of a grammar to link DMs, intuition, and references to numerous other occult theosophies
(e.g., astrology, alchemy, Cabala, and numerology, to specify a few) (Decker, Depaulis, &
Dummett, 1996; Jorgenson, 1992).  Nevertheless, numerous occultists developed or published DMs,
e.g., Etteilla (1785/1993; c. 1788/c. 1975; see also Decker, Depaulis & Dummett, 1996; Papus,
1909), Mathers (1888/1993, c. 1888a), Papus (1889/1910, 1909), Waite (1909, 1910, 1938), Case
(1947), Gray (1960, 1970, 1971), and Douglas (1972), to specify a few, and one may reasonably
conclude that numerous practitioners used them.  Even Greer, who generally de-emphasized use of
text-based DMs and, instead, advocated an intuitive or meditative approach to the cards, still
included brief DMs in Tarot for Your Self: A Workbook for Personal Transformation (1983). 
Regardless the limitations of DMs, they do comprise an important aspect of Tarot studies, have
enjoyed a long and popular history, and are “especially useful for illustrating tarot meanings to an
uninitiated audience” (Jorgensen, p. 166); surely they merit the kind of analysis which comprises, in
part, this study.
One of the most important practitioners of the early esoteric Tarot (including a system of DMs), was
Jean-Baptiste Alliette (1738-1791), also known as Etteilla (his surname spelled backwards), who
was born the son of a caterer.  Early in life he supported himself and his family as a seed merchant
and dealer in antique prints; contrary to reports by Lévi, (1854-55/1910, 1860/1913), Papus
(1889/1910, 1909), Waite (1910), and others, he apparently was never a hairdresser or wigmaker
(Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).  He is remembered, however, for his contributions to
cartomancy (especially divination by Tarot), which included the setting of multiple precedents, a
summary of which follows.
Cartomancer and Author

Etteilla was the first known professional Cartomancer; he earned his living by reading cards
(including Tarot) and pursuing related studies (including astrology) for a significant portion of his
life, eventually earning wealth, rank, and fame (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996; see also Lévi,
1854-55/1910, 1860/1913; Papus, 1989/1910, 1909; Waite, 1910).
He authored, in 1770, the first known book to treat divination by
playing cards, Etteilla, ou manière de se récréer avec un jeu de
cartes [Etteilla, or a way to entertain yourself with a deck of
cards] (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).  In 1785, he
published the first known book to treat divination by Tarot,
Manière de se récréer avec le jeu de cartes nomées Tarots [How
to entertain yourself with the deck of cards called Tarot] (see
illustration 2) (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).  In it he
assigned DMs to each of the Tarot cards (both upright and
reversed orientations) and presented card spreads (Decker,
Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996; Etteilla 1785/1993; Papus,
1889/1910, 1909).
His approach to Tarot was influenced, in part, by pre-existing
cartomantic methods using playing cards (including his own),
and comprised, in part, extensions of the theories of Gébelin and
Mellet concerning the purported Egyptian origins and
symbolism of Tarot (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).
Figure 2 (above): Title page from the third book of Manière de se récréer . . . Tarots (1783) (Papus, p.
4, 1909).

Etteilla’s Tarot

He published c. 1788 the first Tarot deck specifically designed—not for gaming—but for occult
purposes, including divination.  Kaplan (1986) asserted that Etteilla never published a deck, and
Jorsensen (1992) implied the same.  However, Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996 (1996) have
shown conclusively that he did and that it was very similar to a revised version published by
Grimaud in the nineteenth century (see also Lévi, 1889/1910; Papus, 1909; Waite, 1910).  The deck
used fresh iconography and titles or keywords for each card.  It and variations on it remained
popular for about 120 years, i.e., from the time of its introduction through the nineteenth century
(Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).  To provide perspective, the popular Rider-Waite-Smith
deck has been with us for only ninety years, having been first published in 1909 (Kaplan, 1978; see
also Waite, 1910).  To this day, a revised version of the nineteenth century Grimaud deck, titled
Grand Etteilla: Ou Tarots Egyptiens [Grand Etteilla: Or Egyptian Tarot] (Etteilla, c. 1788/c. 1975),
is in print.  Other decks loosely based on Etteilla’s Tarot (ET) also remain in print, e.g., the Antichi
Tarocchi Esoterici [Ancient Esoteric Tarot] (Lo Scarabeo, c. 1870/1996), Tarocco Egiziano
[Egyptian Tarot] (Del Negro, c.1870/n.d.), and Jeu de la Princesse Tarot [Princess Tarot Deck]
(Dusserre, c. 1876/n.d.).  In addition, popular books explaining ET are in print, e.g., San Emeterio
(1997) and Silvestre-Haéberlé (1996).
Other Accomplishments
Among additional precedents, Etteilla was the first to incorporate Tarot into a Hermetic system by
assigning elemental and astrological correspondences to selected cards (Decker, Depaulis, &
Dummett, 1996; see also Papus, 1909; Etteilla, 1785/1993, c. 1788/c. 1975).  For a brief discussion
of Etteilla’s integration of Tarot and astrology, see Appendix A.
He also broke ground by creating the first organization whose principal mission was the formal
study of Tarot, when he founded the Société des Interprètes du Livre de Thot [Society of the
Interpretors of the Book of Thoth] in 1788 (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).
Through his personal practice and books he was the first to popularize cartomancy, including
divination by Tarot, on a large scale (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996; see also Lévi, 1854-
55/1910, 1860/1913; Papus, 1989/1910, 1909; Waite, 1910).
In addition, Etteilla influenced the development of Tarot by training a new generation of card
readers.  In 1791, he claimed that he had 500 students, of which 150 were professional
cartomancers (L’homme à projets [Man’s Projects], cited in Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).
Etteilla’s School of Disciples

Upon his death at age 53, he was succeeded by his disciples, including Claude Hugend, Pierre-
Joseph Joubert de La Salette, and Melchior-Montmignon D’Odoucet, who extended and further
popularized their master’s teachings (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).  For convenience, this
report will refer to them and like-minded Tarot theorists and practitioners as the School of Etteilla
(SE).  Hugend (also known by his pseudonym Jéjalel) published, in 1791, a brief book titled
Cartomancie, ou l’art de développer la chaîne des événemens de la vie: Récréations astrologiques
par le Livre de Thot [Card-reading, or the Art of Developing Life’s Chain of Events: Astrological
Recreations According to the Book of Thoth] (Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett, 1996).  Also in 1791,
Dictionnaire synonimique du Livre de Thot, précédé d’un discours préliminaire, par un membre de
la Société des interpètes de cet ouvrage [Thesaurus of the Book of Thoth, Preceded by a
Preliminary Discourse, by a Member of the Society of Interpreters of This Work] was anonymously
published; however, Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett (1996) have attributed it to La Salette. 
Essentially, the work was a thesaurus, which served as a companion to Etteilla’s Tarot (ET). 
Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett reported that:
“The core of the Dictionnaire synonimique du Livre de Thot is a ‘Table des synonymes
du livre de Thot’ [‘Table of synonyms of the Book of Thoth’] (pp. 19-57), a systematic
exposition of Etteilla’s ‘feuillets’ [leaves or cards], according to Etteilla’s order. 
Seventy-eight ‘hieroglyphs’ are described, with their titles as they appear on the
engraved cards, of which the Dictionnaire was the obvious companion.  Straightforward
synonyms are listed for each one according to its orientation (upright and reversed).” 
(p. 110).

During the period 1804-1807, D’Odoucet published Science des signes, ou médecine de l’esprit
[Science of signs, or medicine of the mind], which was:
“A compendium of Etteilla’s philosophy, written much in Etteilla’s style and
expounding his system of Tarot cartomancy.

........................................
 “The second volume of the Science des signes is more concerned with the Tarot and is
clearly inspired by Dictionnaire synonimique (1791) of which it is a kind of
summary. . . .  It only shows some minor divergences. . . .” (Decker, Depaulis, &
Dummett, 1996, pp. 106-107).

Later, Papus reproduced the synonyms or DMs found in Dictionnaire synonimique and Science des
signes in Le Tarot divinatoire: Clef du tirage des cartes et des sorts [Divination by Tarot: Key to
Reading Cards and Lots] (ch. 6, 1909).
METHODS & PROCEDURES
HYPOTHESES

The review of literature suggested the following hypotheses:

H-se-m: The SE significantly influenced Mathers’ DMs;
H-se-w: The SE significantly influenced Waites’ DMs; and
H-m-w: Mathers significantly influenced Waites’ DMs.
SOURCE AUTHORITIES FOR DMs

To test the hypotheses, the author judged that a meticulous textual comparison of DMs was
appropriate.  He selected part of chapter four (pp. 48-50) and all of chapter six (pp. 112-152) of
Papus’ Le Tarot divinatoire (1909) as source authorities for the SE’s DMs.  Chapter four (pp. 48-50)
comprises selected card combinations (e.g. four Kings, three Kings, two Kings, etc.), which Papus
attributes to Etteilla.  Chapter six is titled:
“A Detailed Study of the Divinatory Meanings of 78 Cards in Accordance with Etteila
[sic] and D’Odoucet

“ETTEILA’S [sic] TAROT

“Commentary by d’Odoucet [sic]”  (p. 112).

For this chapter, Papus repeatedly cited D’Odoucet’s Science des signes as his source, which, as
noted above, reproduced the synonyms from Dictionnaire synonimique.  Furthermore, Decker,
Depaulis, & Dummett (1996) state that this chapter essentially “copies the table of meanings found
in the Dictionnaire synonimique” (p. 107).  Clearly, this selection from Papus is a product of the
SE.  Regrettably, books by Etteilla and members of his school concerning Tarot were apparently not
in print (Alapage.com, 2000; Culture Surf, 2000) and unavailable to the author at the time he
conducted this study; therefore, they were excluded from consideration as source authorities.  The
sole exception, as mentioned above, was the fourth book of Manière de se récréer . . . Tarots
(Etteilla, 1785/1993); however, it lacks anything approaching a comprehensive discussion of DMs. 
It too, therefore, was excluded from consideration.
An English translation of Le Tarot divinatoire has apparently never been published; therefore, the
author of this report translated the aforementioned selections into English, which comprises part of
Tarot Divination: Three Parallel Traditions (Papus, Mathers & Waite, 1909, 1888, 1910/2000). 
Although he is not completely fluent in French he has studied the language on the university level. 
To help ensure that the translation was accurate, he regularly referred to appropriate authorities on
the French language (Beryl et al, 1998; Hawkins & Towell, 1997).  Upon completion, he carefully
reviewed the translation twice for accuracy and completeness at which time he made a few
corrections and improvements.
With regard to Mathers’ The Tarot (1888/1993), the author used all DMs in the section titled
Meanings of the Cards (pp. 23-61).  With regard to the DMs of selected card combinations in the
section titled Special Insights (pp. 63-65), Mathers, as noted above, attributed most of them to
Etteilla (see p. 63).  Although they presumably depend from Etteilla the author found no source with
which to compare them; therefore, he regrettably excluded them from this study.
With regard to Waite’s PKT (1910), the author used all:
• DMs of the Minor Arcana in part 3, section 2 (pp. 170-282);
• DMs of the Major Arcana in part 3, section 3 (pp. 283-287);
• Supplementary DMs for the Minor Arcana in part 3, section 4 (pp. 288-293); and
• DMs for selected card combinations in part 3, section 5 (pp. 295-297).

CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN TRUMPS

Before comparing DMs assigned to the Trumps one must determine correspondences between the
Trumps of ET and those of the TM and similar decks; as noted above, the Trumps differ
significantly by decks.  Papus (1909), Kaplan (p. 140, 1978), and Decker, Depaulis & Dummett
(Table 2, p. 86, 1996) have suggested correspondences.  Apparently, although Mathers (1888/1993)
used none of these, Waite (1910) used those of Papus.  Therefore, this paper will use those of
Papus.  For details about how the author made this decision, see Appendix C.
 HOW COMPARISONS WERE MADE

To conduct his analysis, the author meticulously compared each DM of Mathers to the
corresponding DMs of the SE and classed each DM of Mathers as a strong match, modest match, or
no match.  Similarly, he compared each DM of Waite to the corresponding DMs of the SE and
classed each DM of Waite as a strong match, etc. The author also compared each DM of Waite not
matching those of the SE to those of Mathers and classed each as a strong match, etc.
A strong match comprised DMs which were identical or very similar.  A modest match comprised
DMs which were not strong matches but were similar to the extent that a reasonable person would
likely conclude that they were probably related.  The assignment of DMs to specific card
orientations (upright or reversed) did not influence the classification process.  The author judged
that similarities between DMs were sufficient for classification regardless the card orientation to
which they were assigned.  For example, if he judged that an upright DM from Waite was identical
to a reversed DM from the SE, the DM from Waite was classed as a strong match.
However, in some cases, even if DMs were apparent matches, the author classed them as no match. 
Specifically, if he judged that a reasonable person with a working knowledge of Western
Esotericism and its iconography could construe a given DM of Mathers or Waite by visual
inspection of the TM or like decks, then such DM was always classed as no match.  He did so even
if such DM of Mathers or Waite was identical to that of the SE.
For example, Trump 11 of the TM and similar decks (or Trump 8 of RWS) is typically titled
Strength or Fortitude and depicts strength personified as a woman either opening or shutting a lion’s
mouth (e.g., see Conver, 1761; Waite & Smith 1909/1971).  Therefore, when Mathers or Waite
made reference to strength, fortitude, power, etc., the author classed these DMs as no match—even
though the SE espoused identical or similar DMs.
Finally, to help determine to what extent, if any, Waite may have used Mathers as his source for
DMs from the SE, the author compared the subset of Waite’s DMs which matched (strongly or
modestly) those of the SE to the corresponding DMs of Mathers.  He then classed each as a strong
match, etc.
The author compared all DMs in like manner and recorded his judgments in a computerized
spreadsheet.  Later, he reviewed both his judgments and the spreadsheet for completeness and
accuracy at which time he made a few improvements and corrections to the data set.
For detailed examples of how the author compared DMs, see Appendix D.
RESULTS & ANALYSIS
SUPPORT FOR HYPOTHESES

Quantitative analysis of the data set showed that approximately two out of five (38 percent) of
Mathers’ DMs comprised strong matches with those of the SE (see Table 9).  An additional four
percent comprised modest matches.  When broken down, DMs for the Major Arcana comprised a
scant one percent strong matches; and two percent, modest matches.  However, DMs for the Minor
Arcana comprised 48 percent strong matches and five percent modest matches.
Results strongly supported H-se-m, i.e., they supported the hypothesis that the SE significantly
influenced Mathers.  Interestingly, they also supported the notion that the SE’s influence on Mathers
was limited almost exclusively to the Minor Arcana.
With regard to Waite, approximately one half (48 percent) of his DMs comprised strong matches
when compared to those of the SE (see Table 9).  An additional eight percent comprised modest
matches.  When broken down, the Major Arcana and Minor Arcana showed approximately the same
results.  However, for selected card combinations, the proportion of Waite’s DMs which comprised
strong matches increased to 71 percent; and the proportion of modest matches, to 17 percent.
Results strongly supported H-se-w, i.e., they supported the hypothesis that the SE significantly
influenced Waite.  Of equal importance, they showed that significant proportions of Mathers’ and
Waite’s DMs were apparently original or derived from sources other than those which were selected
as source authorities for the SE.
Results indicated that of Waite’s DMs which did not match (strongly or modestly) those of the SE, a
modest nine percent comprised strong matches with those of Mathers; and a scant one percent,
modest matches (see Table 9).  When broken down, the Major Arcana showed 16 percent strong
matches; and one percent, modest matches.  However, the Minor Arcana showed only six percent
strong matches; and two percent, modest matches.
Results modestly supported H-m-w, i.e., they supported the hypothesis that Mathers influenced
Waite to a modest degree.
Table 9—Matching Divinatory Meanings from the School of Etteilla, Mathers & Waite
Percentages
Selected Card
Major Arcana Minor Arcana All DMs
  Combinations
Strong Modest Strong Modest Strong Modest Strong Modest
Matches Matches Matches Matches Matches Matches Matches Matches
Mathers’ DMs(a)
Matching those
of the SE(b) 1 2 48 5 — — 38 4
Waite’s DMs(c)
Matching those
of the the
SE(b) 45 3 49 9 71 17 49 8
Matching those
of Mathers(a,d) 16 1  6 2 — —  9 1
Notes.

(a) Total DMs from Mathers = 624 (132 for the Major Arcana and 492 for the Minor Arcana).

(b) Total DMs from the SE = 2,417 (588 for the Major Arcana, 1,805 for the Minor Arcana, and 24 for Selected Card Combinations).
(c) Total DMs from Waite = 1,155 (260 for the Major Arcana, 847 for the Minor Arcana, and 48 for Selected Card Combinations).
(d) Restricted to DMs which do not match (strongly or modestly) those of the SE.

OTHER ANALYSIS
One might speculate that the subset of Waite’s DMs, which match (strongly or modestly) those of
SE, are nevertheless derived via Mathers.  However, results showed that only 15 percent of the
qualifying DMs from Waite comprised strong matches with those of Mathers.  In addition, only 11
percent comprised modest matches (see Table 10).  Apparently, Waite relied, for the most part, on
source(s) other than Mathers for his knowledge of the SE’s DMs.
Table 10—Divinatory Meanings of Waite
Which Match Those of the SE & Mathers(a)
Percentages
 
Strong Matches Modest Matches
Major Arcana  0  0
Minor Arcana 15 11
Total 15 11
Notes.

Total DMs from Waite, the SE, and Mathers are the
same as those of Table 9 (above).
DISCUSSION & IMPLICATIONS
THE SCHOOL OF ETTEILLA’S PIVOTAL ROLE
Results of this and prior studies (e.g., Decker, Depaulis & Dummett, 1996) help to place Etteilla and
his school in historic context more accurately.  Specifically, one may reasonably argue that Etteilla
and his school played a pivotal role in the development of the esoteric Tarot by placing itself at the
center of a system comprised of:
• The theories of Gébelin and Mellet and extensions thereof;
• Hermeticism (including astrology);
• Cartomancy with playing cards; and
• Tarot-specific cartomancy, which included DMs (see Figure 11).

Figure 11: The School of Etteilla’s role in the development of the esoteric Tarot.

THE SCHOOL OF ETTEILLA’S

INFLUENCE ON MATHERS & WAITE
In turn, the SE significantly impacted Mathers and Waite.  Specifically, it strongly influenced: (a)
Mathers’ DMs for the Minor Arcana and (b) Waites’ DMs for the Major Arcana, Minor Arcana, and
selected card combinations.  In turn, through Mathers’ and Waite’s books and these authors’
involvement in the other esoteric movements (including the GD), the SE influenced numerous
occultists, including practitioners of Tarot.  (For a brief look at the SE’s influence on contemporary
practitioners of Tarot see Appendix E.)  The results of this study also show that Mathers had a
modest influence on Waite’s DMs, especially those of the Major Arcana.  One may view these
influences as a system unfolding over time (see Figure 12).
Figure 12: The School of Etteilla’s Influence on Mathers & Waite.

Interestingly, although popular contemporary authors (e.g. Giles, 1992; Wang 1978, 1987) often cite
(and justifiably so) the GD as a major influence on Tarot theory and praxis from the late 19th
century on, they give little if any credit to Etteilla.  Yet, Mather’s The Tarot (1888/1993) and Waite’s
PKT (1911), which continue to influence contemporary Tarot theory and praxis, depend to a
significant extent from the SE.  In fact, one may reasonably argue that Waite’s approach to Tarot, as
revealed in the text of PKT, was as much a product of the SE and it was of the GD.  Perhaps the
time has come for scholars and popular authors to re-evaluate Etteilla’s impact on contemporary
theory and praxis.
CONTEMPORARY SCHOLARS & PRACTITIONERS
Although the SE arguably played a vital role in the development of the esoteric Tarot and continues
to exert influence today, apparently most contemporary scholars and practitioners rarely if ever
study or consult the works of Etteilla and his school.  For those whose only language is English
(and they presumably comprise an enormous number worldwide), these works were inaccessible;
they have never been translated into English.  However, the situation has changed with the
publication of a portion of the SE’s corpus in English translation in Tarot Divination: Three
Parallel Traditions (Papus, Mathers & Waite 1888, 1909, 1911/2000).  English-speaking
practitioners and scholars, apparently for the first time, now have relatively easy access to DMs
from the SE.  This ease of access, coupled with this study and others, may place English-speaking
scholars in a better position to assess the SE.  It may also place English-speaking practitioners in a
better position to study and apply DMs from the SE.  Arguably the time is ripe for scholars to
conduct further research into the SE, and practitioners to re-discover and re-claim the SE as an
integral part of their heritage.
WAITE’S LACK OF OBJECTIVITY & CANDOR
This study also demonstrated the importance of studying primary sources, i.e., works produced by
the SE.  Unfortunately, due to the frequent unavailability of these works, many scholars and
practitioners have presumably relied on secondary sources authored by occultists who clearly
lacked objectivity.  For example, one the least objective was Waite’s PKT (1911), wherein the
author derided Etteilla’s achievements and mounted ad hominem attacks.  In the bibliography, he
takes the opportunity not to acknowledge Etteilla, but, as previously noted, to denounce his literary
output as “colportage” (mere peddling or hawking) (p. 321).
As a result, a casual reader might conclude that Etteilla contributed little to Tarot and was not
among Waite’s major sources.  However, as this report shows, apparently nothing could be further
from the truth.  His many accomplishments notwithstanding, Waite clearly lacked objectivity and
was less than completely candid with regard to his indebtedness to Etteilla.  Unfortunately, Waite’s
propaganda and that of similarly minded occultists (e.g. Lévi, 1854-55/1910; 1860/1913), have
helped to perpetuate the false notion that Etteilla and his school contributed little to Tarot beyond
popularization.  Therefore, scholars and practitioners who wish to research or study the SE, would
be wise to include primary sources, which depend from the SE, in their readings.
LIMITATIONS
Risks of Generalizing
Generalizing findings presented here is risky.  For example, for someone to say, without conducting
further research, that the SE significantly influenced DMs from sources other than Mathers’ The
Tarot and Waite’s PKT would be unwise.  For someone to conclude that the SE was a major source
for Mathers’ and Waite’s views on Tarot in general would also be unwise; this study only analyzed
one aspect of their views, DMs.
Assessment of Methodology
The methodology of this study, although eminently practical, does have notable drawbacks.  Only
one individual, the author, translated the source materials from French.  Additionally, only one
judge, the author, compared DMs.  Other individuals might have translated the source materials
somewhat differently.  Additionally, other judges might have reached different conclusions upon
comparing DMs.  Should a similar study ever be conducted, one may wish to use multiple
translators and a panel of judges to help ensure the validity of findings.
Another drawback of this study is its reliance on only a small part of the output of Etteilla and his
school, i.e., selections from Papus’ Le Tarot divinatoire (1909).  Although such reliance was
eminently practical because most of the SE’s output remains out of print, should a similar study
ever be conducted, one may wish to use additional sources from the SE.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE
SCHOLARLY & PRACTICAL WORK
Results of this study suggest the need for additional scholarly work, including publication of
translations of the output of the SE.  Additionally, re-publication of works from the SE in French,
preferably with scholarly commentary, is also indicated.
Further related research remains to be conducted to answer numerous questions, a selection of
which follows.
• In addition to DMs, did the SE significantly influence Mathers’ and Waite’s views of Tarot
in other ways?
• Why did Mathers and Waite apparently use some DMs from the SE and reject others?
• Other than their The Tarot and PKT, which works, if any, by Mathers and Waite did the SE
significantly influence?
 • Which other collections of DMs, if any, has the SE significantly influenced?  For example,
has it significantly influenced DMs found in such contemporary sources as those of Gray
(1960, 1970, 1971) and Pollack (1997)?
• Precisely which sources did the SE use to develop its DMs?
• Approximately one half of Mathers’ The Tarot and Waite’s PKT are apparently not derived
from the source authorities chosen for this study.  Where did they come from?
CONCLUSION
The subject of this study has been the influence of the eighteenth-century French occultist Etteilla
and his school on Mathers and Waite.  Results have shown strong support for the idea that the SE
significantly influenced the DMs suggested by both Mathers and Waite.  They also showed modest
support for the idea that Mathers influenced Waite’s DMs.
Results of this and other studies imply that the SE played a pivotal role in the development of
Tarot.  In light of this, scholars may wish to study the SE in greater depth to evaluate further other
contributions, if any, which it has made.  Additionally, practitioners may wish to study the output of
the SE and apply what they learn to enrich their use of Tarot.
APPENDIX A
A BRIEF LOOK AT ETTEILLA’S INTEGRATION OF TAROT AND
ASTROLOGY
Etteilla apparently was the first to integrate Tarot and astrology.  In the fourth book of Manière de
se récréer . . . Tarots (1785/1993), he presented a synthesis of the two, with emphasis on its
application to divination.
Specifically, he presented a fairly complex method of conducting a consultation, which employed
both Tarot and astrology and required use of his deck.  Etteilla, in both Manière de se récréer . . .
Tarots (1785/1993) and his deck (c. 1788/c. 1975), assigned zodiacal correspondences to twelve of
the Trumps (see the discussion of Trumps in the main body of this paper and Appendix B) and
additional astrological correspondences (including the planets) to the numerical (pip) cards of the
suit of Coins (see Table 11).  The correspondences are integral to his deck and essential components
of his synthesis.  A brief, simplified summary of his method follows (see Table 12).
Table 11—Selected Astrological
Correspondences from Etteilla’s
Tarot(a)
Astrological
Suit of Coins Correspondence
Ace Sun
Two Mercury
Three Venus
Four Moon
Five Mars
Six Jupiter
Seven Saturn
Eight Head of the
Dragon
Nine Tail of the Dragon
Ten Part of Fortune
Note.

(a) From Etteilla (1785/1993, c. 1788/c. 1975).  Kaplan (1978) presents different, apparently incorrect, astrological
correspondences, for which he cites no source.

Table 12—Summary of Etteilla’s Method for Conducting a Consultation Which Integrated Tarot &
Astrology(a)

1. The querent (consultant) poses a question.

2. The reader removes from the deck, the zodiacal Trumps and
places them clockwise in a circle with Aries at nine o’clock,
Taurus at ten o’clock, etc.  He/she uses these Trumps as
indicators of the astrological houses into which the remaining
cards are placed (see next step).
3. The reader shuffles the remaining cards and places the first
one outside the Trump, which corresponds to the zodiacal
sign which the Sun is currently transiting.  This will be known
as the first house.  Moving clockwise, he/she then places the
next card in the second house by placing it outside the next
Trump, etc. until the cards are exhausted.  Concentric circles
 of cards placed in the twelve houses around the zodiacal
Trumps result.
4. He/she reads the cards by interpreting specified card pairs in
a specified order without special reference to astrology.
5. He/she then notes in which houses the pip cards from the suit
of Coins appear.  The astrological symbols from these cards
are transferred to a chart where they are placed in the
appropriate houses.  Such a chart may show, e.g., that Saturn
is in the second house, Venus is in the third house, etc.
6. The reader interprets the chart according to astrological
methods (which are explained in great detail in the text).

Note.

(a) Adapted from Etteilla (1785/1993).

In a somewhat heretical move, Etteilla separated astrology from ephemerides and used the
astrological houses, planets, etc. as a complex symbol system—not unlike how he treated the Tarot
pack (Halbronn, 1992).  Although later occultists discarded the specifics of his system, they did
follow his example when they created their own syntheses between Tarot and Astrology.  Such
occultists included Christian (1870/1952); Papus (1889/1910, 1909); Mackenzie, to whom the GD
Cipher Manuscript (c. 1870/1996) is attributed; Mathers (c. 1888a, c. 1888c); and Wirth
(1927/1985).  In his assessment of Etteilla, Hollbronn noted:
“Etteilla places himself within a group of 16th century astrologers, which we have
already touched on, and which decided to simplify calculations, without renouncing the
use of traditional astrological treatises.  In effect, the French school of astrology
followed in the footsteps of Etteilla and elaborated upon his discourse on astrology
through the entire 19th century, from Lenain to Christian.”  (p. 9).

He also concluded:
“Eighteenth century French esotericism is not as insignificant as one would like to say. 
The School of Etteilla comprises a sufficiently important current on the condition that
one not seek to judge it against only the norms of astrology of ephemerides.”  (p. 105).

In light of his synthesis of astrology and Tarot, perhaps it is time to re-evaluate Etteilla’s
contributions to Tarot and esotericism in general.
APPENDIX B
COMPARING THE TRUMPS OF ETTEILLA’S TAROT
WITH THOSE OF THE TAROT DE MARSEILLE
Table 13—Etteilla’s Tarot vs. the Tarot de Marseille: Comparison of Trumps by
Selected Criteria(a)
Etteilla’s Tarot(b) Tarot de Marseille(c)
Selected Selected
Correspond-  Correspond- 
No.  Title(d) Image  ences(e) No. Title  Image ences(f)
 1 Etteilla, Male Dark clouds surrounding Aries, Primal No corresponding Trump.(g)
Querent apparently empty space. Chaos
 2 Enlightenment, Above: bright star; below: 2nd element XVIIII The Sun Above: Sun with Probably  the
Fire two nude children on steps (Fire), 1st Day of human-like face; Sun; possibly
of pedestal on which is Creation, below: two children Fire or Gemini
apparent pyramid. Taurus. in loincloths in front
of wall.
 3 Comments, Above: Moon in cloudy sky; 1st element XVIII The Moon Above: Moon with Probably the
Water below: body of water in (Water), 3rd Day human-like profile, Moon; possibly
background with  lobster at of Creation, teardrop-shaped Water or
edge, two towers at sides, Gemini objects in sky Cancer
wolf & dog in foreground. (possibly rain or
dew); below: two
towers at sides, two
animals (possibly
dogs or wolves);
foreground: lobster
in body of water.
 4 Desolation, Air Kneeling nude woman 3rd element XVII The Star Kneeling nude Probably stars
pouring water from two (Air), 2nd Day of woman pouring or planets (as
pitchers into body of water Creation, Cancer water from two general
beneath stars & planetary pitchers into body classes),
sigils, butterfly at side. of water beneath possibly Water,
eight stars; or Aquarius
background: two
trees, bird in one.
 5 Voyage, Earth Center: nude woman holding 4th element XXI The World Center: nude Probably Earth
in right hand branch & (Earth), 6th Day woman holding
standing between two of Creation, baton in left hand,
pyramids,  encircled by Leo(h) standing on right
Ouroboros; corners: angel, foot only (possibly
eagle, lion, bull (possibly dancing),
symbols of the Four surrounded by
Evangelists). mandorla-shaped
wreath; corners:
angel, eagle, lion,
bull (possibly
symbols of the Four
Evangelists).
 6 Night, Day Above: Sun, Moon, stars, 4th Day of III The Empress Crowned woman, Possibly  Virgo
part of zodiac (Aries & Libra); Creation, Virgo sitting on throne on or Venus
below: terraced landscape vegetation, holding
with vegetation. in left hand scepter
surmounted by orb
& cross, & in right
hand, shield
 emblazoned with
eagle.
 7 Support, Above: flying birds; below: 5th Day of IIII The Emperor Enthroned, Possibly
Protection body of water & coast, sea Creation, Libra helmeted, bearded Jupiter
animals & monsters, snake. man with crossed
legs and chain
around neck,
holding in right
hand scepter
surmounted by orb
& cross, shield at
his side on which
eagle emblazoned.
 8 Etteilla, Female Nude female outdoors, Day of Rest, II The Papess Foreground: Possibly Virgo
Querent surrounded by eleven Scorpio enthroned, woman
circles, tree and footpath in wearing triple
foreground, mountain in crown (apparently
background. papal tiara) and
priestly vestments
(including stole),
holding open book
on knee;
background:
narrow curtain or
possibly back of
throne.
 9 Justice, Jurist Crowned woman, seated on Sagitarius VIII Justice Crowned woman, Probably  Libra
throne on tiled floor, holding seated on throne
balance in right hand & on vegetation with
upright sword in left, THOT chain around neck,
apparently on waistband. holding in left hand
balance,  upright
sword in right hand.
10 Temperance, Angel standing outdoors, Capricorn XIIII Temperance Angel standing Possibly Water
Priest pouring liquid between two outdoors, pouring or Aquarius
pitchers, sunburst on head; liquid between two
left foot on spherical object pitchers, flower in
(possibly rock); other on hair.
triangular object; THOT on
waistband.
11 Strength, Crowned woman, seated on Aquarius XI Strength Standing woman Probably Leo
Sovereign throne on tiled floor, with wearing large hat
head of lion on lap, THOT and possibly crown,
on waistband. holding (with both
hands) open jaws
of lion standing
next to her.
12 Prudence, The Woman outdoors holding Apparently  none XII The Hanged Man, hands behind Apparently
People Caduceus in left hand, lifting Man back, hanging none
edge of dress with right upside-down, right
hand, gazing down at snake foot bent at knee,
crossing her path. left foot tied with
rope to gibbet
comprised of
horizontal beam
between two trees
(from which
branches
removed).
13 Marriage, Union Bearded standing man Apparently none V The Pope Middle ground: Possibly
 indoors & wearing miter bearded, seated Taurus or
(apparently priest), man (apparently Jupiter
apparently marrying man & pope), wearing
woman standing at his sides papal tiara, priestly
& reaching out to each other. vestments, holding
scepter in right
hand surmounted
by triple cross;
foreground: two
men (probably
tonsured and
kneeling);
background: back
of throne or
possibly two
columns.
14 Great Force, On pedestal: demonic Apparently none XV The Devil On pedestal:  Possibly Fire,
Great Force creature with wings (possibly cross-eyed Earth, or
those of bat), horns (possibly demonic creature, Capricorn
those of ram),  bearded head sticking tongue out,
of man, breasts of woman, wearing hat or
scaly midsection, apparently helmet, with wings
furry legs, holding lit torch in (possibly those of
right hand; on ground & tied bat), horns
to pedestal: nude & horned (possibly those of
man & woman. deer), head of man,
breasts of woman,
exposed male
genitalia, & claw-
like hands & feet,
holding in left hand
lit torch; on ground
& tied to pedestal:
two nude demonic
creatures with
hands behind
backs, horns
(possibly those of
deer), long ears
(possibly those of
ass), long tails, &
claw-like feet.
15 Illness, Illness Bearded man (apparently Apparently none I The Juggler Man with large hat Probably
priest or magician) wearing or standing at three- Mercury
miter, holding wand in right Mountebank legged table (on
hand, standing indoors at [Le Bataleur] which cups, knives
altar (on which apparent urn & other objects),
& other objects) with ram’s standing on
heads at corners. vegetation, holding
baton in left hand
and apparent coin
in right hand.
16 Judgment, Above: sunburst in front of Apparently none XX Judgment Above: angel with Possibly Fire, 
Judgment which angel flies, blowing flower in hair, halo, Air, or Earth
trumpet & holding two more; among clouds and
below: three standing men,  apparent rays of
kneeling man, & nude light, blowing
woman apparently rising trumpet from which
from grave in foreground, banner
crowd of people in emblazoned with
background. cross hangs;

17 Mortality, Skeleton clothed in robe,
Nothingness holding scythe upright in left
hand, pointing downwards
toward earth with right hand,
pyramids in background.
18 Traitor, Traitor Running bearded man
outdoors in robe (apparently
monk with cowl down),
holding lantern aloft in right
hand & cane in left hand,
near apparent pedestal,
round building in
background.
19 Misery, Prison Round building on hill in
foreground, lightning bolt
emerging from cloudy sky
and apparently striking
crumbling tower in
background.
20 Fortune, Above: crowned, capped
Increase animal (possibly monkey)
sitting on tree branch,
holding scepter; below: thin
ring suspended in air above
earth, on rim man (serpent
wrapped around him)
descends & animal (possibly
mouse or rat) ascends.  descends, another
21 Dissension, Crowned man wearing
Dissension cuirass, holding scepter in
left hand, reins in other,
seated in chariot, led by two
horses.
78  Folly, Folly Foreground: bearded man Apparently none None The Fool
below: man,
woman, and third
person (possibly
tonsured man)
apparently rise
from their graves
with apparent hills
in background.
Apparently none XIII None (but Skeleton (missing Possibly Saturn
commonly left foot),
called Death) apparently reaping
with scythe; on
ground are
vegetation & body
parts (three hands,
two heads & foot).
Apparently none XIV  The Hermit Standing or walking Possibly Saturn
bearded man in
robe (with cowl
down), holding
lantern aloft in right
hand & cane in left
hand.
Apparently none XVI The House of Lightning bolt Possibly Fire
God striking tower, or Jupiter
crown of which is
flying off at angle,
round objects
(apparently debris)
& two human
beings fall from
tower; background:
hills.
Apparently none X Wheel of Six-spoked wheel Apparently
Fortune with crank & none
supporting frame,
at top, winged,
crowned creature
(possibly sphinx),
animal on rim
(possibly monkey)
animal (possibly
rabbit) ascends.
Apparently none VII The Chariot Crowned man Probably  Mars
wearing cuirass &
epaulets with
human-like faces,
standing in chariot
(topped with
canopy supported
by four posts),
holding scepter in
right hand, left
hand on hip, VT
emblazoned on
front of chariot, led
by two horses.
Walking man Apparently
(or 0) walking outdoors (building at wearing hat none
his back) wearing pullover (apparently fool’s
hat, carrying bag on stick cap), carrying bag
over right shoulder, holding on stick over right
cane in left hand, single bell shoulder, holding
on belt, apparently pursued cane in left hand,
by animal (possibly cat) multiple bells on
waste & collar,
which apparently bites him in
pursued by animal
right leg, mountain in (possibly cat),
background. which scratches
him on his exposed
right buttock.
No corresponding Trump.(f) VI The Lovers Above: Eros Possibly Fire,
(winged nude child Sagitarius, or
armed with bow & Venus.
arrow) flies in front
of sunburst, aiming
drawn arrow
downward; below:
man between two
women, woman on
his right wears
possible crown &
places left hand on
his right shoulder,
woman on his left
stretches her left
arm towards him.
Notes.

Redindicates aspects of ET which are absent or significantly different from corresponding aspects of the TM in the opinion of the author.

Green indicates aspects of the TM which are absent or significantly different from corresponding aspects of ET in the opinion of the author.

(a) Correspondences between the Trumps of ET and those of the TM are from Papus (1909) (see body of this paper and Appendix C for further details).
(b) Etteilla’s original Tarot deck was reconstructed to the extent possibly by the author from Decker, Depaulis, Dummett (1996); Etteilla (c. 1785/c. 1975);

and Silvestre-Haéberlé (1996).

(c) From Conver (1761/n.d.).

(d) Two titles appear for each card: the first is for the upright orientation; the second, for the reversed orientation.  Occasionally both orientations carry

identical titles.
(e) Correspondences are limited to the four elements, zodiacal signs, and days of creation, and were developed by Etteilla (1785/1993, c. 1788/c. 1975)
(see also Decker, Depaulis, Dummett, 1996; Silvestre-Haéberlé, 1996).  For further astrological correspondences developed by Etteilla (including the

planets) see Appendix A.  Kaplan (1978) presents different, apparently incorrect, astrological correspondences, for which he cites no source.
(f) These correspondences, which are limited to the four elements, zodiacal signs, seven planets (individually and as a class), and stars (as a class) were
developed, in part, by the author.  They reflect how he feels a reasonable person with a working knowledge of Western Esotericism and its iconography
might assign correspondences to the TM.  No attempt was made to include systematically all elements, zodiacal signs, or each planet individually or relate
them to any single esoteric view or doctrine.  Many of these correspondences have also been suggested by others, e.g., Mackenzie (c. 1870/1996); O’Neill

(1986); and Wirth (1927/1985); to specify a few.

(g) These Trumps have no correspondents from the other deck according to Papus (1909) (see body of this paper and Appendix C for further details).
(h) In addition to the the card, in general, corresponding to Leo, the angel, eagle, lion, and bull are individually assigned to Aquarius, Scorpio, Leo, and
Taurus respectively.
 APPENDIX C
CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN THE
TRUMPS OF ETTEILLA’S TAROT & THOSE
OF THE TAROT DE MARSEILLE
Table 14 details sets of correspondences suggested by: (a)
Papus (1909) and (b) Kaplan (p. 140, 1978) and Decker,
Depaulis & Dummett (Table 2, p. 86, 1996).  Disagreements
between the two, which are highlighted in red, are relatively
few.

Table 14—Correspondences Between the Trumps of the Tarot de Marseille &

Etteilla’s Tarot
Etteilla’s Tarot(b,c)
Decker, Depaulis & Dummett;
Tarot de Marseille(a) Papus(d) Kaplan(e)
I The Juggler or  15 Illness, Illness 15 Illness, Illness
Mountebank [Le Bataleur]
II The Papess   8 Etteilla, Female Querent  8 Etteilla, Female Querent
III The Empress   6 Night, Day  6 Night, Day
IIII The Emperor   7 Support, Protection  7 Support, Protection
V The Pope 13 Marriage, Union  1 Etteilla, Male Querent
VI The Lovers   None 13 Marriage, Union
VII The Chariot 21 Dissension, Dissension 21 Dissension, Dissension
VIII Justice  9 Justice, Jurist   9 Justice, Jurist
IX The Hermit 18 Traitor, Traitor 18 Traitor, Traitor
X Wheel of Fortune 20 Fortune, Increase 20 Fortune, Increase
XI Strength 11 Strength, Sovereign 11 Strength, Sovereign
XII The Hanged Man 12 Prudence, The People 12 Prudence, The People
XIII None (but commonly called 17 Mortality, Nothingness 17 Mortality, Nothingness
Death)
XIIII Temperance 10 Temperance, Priest 10 Temperance, Priest
XV The Devil 14 Great Force, Great Force 14 Great Force, Great Force
XVI The House of God 19 Misery, Prison 19 Misery Prison
XVII The Star   4 Desolation, Air   4 Desolation, Air
XVIII The Moon   3 Comments, Water   3 Comments, Water
XVIIII The Sun   2 Enlightenment, Fire   2 Enlightenment, Fire
XX Judgment 16 Judgment, Judgment 16 Judgment, Judgment
XXI The World   5 Voyage, Earth   5 Voyage, Earth
None The Fool 78 Folly, Folly 78 Folly, Folly
(or 0) (or 0)
  None   1 Etteilla, Male Querent    Does not apply
Notes.

Red indicates disagreement between correspondences suggested by Papus and those suggested by Decker, Depaulis & Dummett; Kaplan.
(a) From Conver (1761/n.d.).
(b) Etteilla’s original Tarot deck was reconstructed by the author from Decker, Depaulis, Dummett (1996); Etteilla (c. 1785/c. 1975); and Silvestre-Haéberlé

(1996).
(c) Two titles appear for each card: the first is for the upright orientation; the second, for the reversed orientation.  Occasionally both orientations carry

identical titles.

(d) From Papus (1909).

(e) From Decker, Depaulis & Dummett (Table 2, p. 86, 1996); Kaplan (p. 140, 1978).

 
The author chose to use Papus’ set as his authority because it
may better reflect the attitudes of esotericists of the late
eighteenth and early twentieth centuries, when Mathers wrote
The Tarot (1888/1993); and Waite, PKT (1910).  For example, a
quick comparison of the DMs of affected Trumps will quickly
reveal to the reasonable person that Waite was probably using
Papus’ correspondences.  Let us compare the SE’s DMs for the
ET Trump titled Marriage [Marriage] with Mathers’ and Waites’
DMs for the Hierophant (Pope), which is the correspondence
suggested by Papus.

The School of Etteilla (Papus, 1909):

“MARRIAGE

“Upright.

“This card signifies, with regard to medicine of the

mind [i.e. D’Odoucet’s Science des signes, ou
médecine de l’esprit (Science of signs, or medicine
of the mind )], Union, Joining, Assembling, Bond,
Alliance, Chain, Slavery, Financial Straits, Captivity,
Servitude.

“Reversed.

“Society, Contacts, Alloy, Blending, Compounding.

—Peace, Concord, Accord,
Harmony, Correct [Good] Understanding.”  (p. 118).

Mathers (The Tarot, 1888/1993):

“5.  The Hierophant, or Pope

“Mercy, Beneficence, Kindness, Goodness.

“Reversed: Over-kindness, Weakness, Foolish

exercise of generosity.”  (p. 25).

Waite (PKT, 1910):

“The Hierophant.—Marriage, alliance, captivity,

servitude; by another account, mercy and goodness;
inspiration; the man to whom the Querent has
 recourse.  Reversed: Society, good understanding,
concord, over-kindness, weakness.”  (p. 284).

A reasonable person will quickly note an absence of parallels

between the SE and Mathers but will note significant parallels
between the SE and Waite.

Now, let us compare Mathers’ and Waite’s DMs for the

Hierophant (above) to the SE’s DMs for the ET Le Consultant
[The Male Querent (Consultant)] Trump, which is the
correspondence suggested by Decker, Depaulis, & Dummett
(1996) and Kaplan (1978).

The School of Etteilla (Papus, 1909):

“THE MALE QUERENT [CONSULTANT]

“Upright.

“God, Supreme Being; Central Spirit, Chaos.—

Meditation,
Reflection, Mental Process.

“Reversed.

“The Universe.—Physical Man or The Male.  The

Male Querent [Consultant].”  (pp. 112-113)

A reasonable person will note that the absence of parallels

between (a) the SE and (b) Mathers and Waite.  Therefore, one
concludes that, although Mathers may not have used either set of
correspondences, Waite apparently used those of Papus.  This
study, therefore, used those of Papus.
APPENDIX D
HOW COMPARISONS BETWEEN DIVINATORY MEANINGS WERE
MADE
Perhaps the best way to understand how the author classed DMs, is to present a few examples;
therefore, let us compare DMs for the Four of Cups, which follow.
The School of Etteilla (Papus, 1909):
“Upright.
“This card signifies, with regard to medicine of the mind [i.e. D’Odoucet’s Science des signes, ou
médecine de l’esprit (Science of signs, or medicine of the mind)]: Weariness, Displeasure,
Discontentment, Disgust, Aversion, Enmity, Hate, Horror, Anxiety, Mental Suffering, Mild
Dejection, Vexation, Painful, Annoying, Unpleasant.—Distressing, Troubling.
“Reversed:
“New Instruction, New Light.—Sign, Indication, Conjecture.—Omen,
Presage.—Premonition, Prognostication, Prediction, Novelty.”  (p. 135).
Mathers (The Tarot, 1888/1993):
“[Upright:] Ennui, Displeasure, Discontent, Dissatisfaction.
“Reversed: Acquaintance, Conjecture, Sign, Presentiment.” (p. 46).
Waite (PKT, 1910):
“[Upright:] Weariness, disgust, aversion, imaginary vexations, as if the wine of this world had
caused satiety only; another wine, as if a fairy gift, is now offered the wastrel, but he sees no
consolation therein. This is also a card of blended
pleasure.
“Reversed: Novelty, presage, new instruction, new relations. [Additional Meanings:]
Presentiment.”  (p. 218)
 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
“[Upright:] Contrarities.  Reversed: Presentiment.”  (p. 290).
The author judged that of Mathers’ eight DMs, seven comprised strong matches and none
comprised modest matches (see  Table 15).  He also judged that of Waite’s seventeen DMs, eight
comprised strong matches and two comprised modest matches (see Table 16).
 
Table 15—Comparisons of DMs of
Mathers vs. Those of the School of
Etteilla

Mathers The School of Etteilla

Strong Matches
Ennui Weariness
Displeasure Displeasure
Discontent Discontentment
Conjecture Conjecture
Sign Sign
Presentiment Premonition
Modest Matches
None
Table 16—Comparisons of DMs of Waite vs. Those
of the School of Etteilla

Waite The School of Etteilla

Strong Matches
Weariness Weariness
Disgust Disgust
Aversion Aversion
Vexations Vexation
Novelty Novelty
Presage Presage
New Instruction New Instruction
Presentiment Premonition
Modest Matches
Contrarities Vexation, Annoying, Troubling, etc.
New Relations Novelty, New Light, etc.
Next, let us compare the subset of Waite’s DMs which match (strongly or modestly) those of the SE
with those of Mathers.  The author found that of the 10 qualifying DMs of Waite, two comprised
strong matches; and two, modest matches  (see Table 17).
Table 17—Comparison of Selected DMs of Waite
vs. Those of Mathers

Waite Mathers
Strong Matches
Weariness Ennui
Presentiment Presentiment
Modest Matches
Presage Sign, Presentiment
Vexations Displeasure, Discontent, Dissatisfaction
These examples illustrate how the author made comparisons of DMs.
APPENDIX E
A BRIEF LOOK AT THE SCHOOL OF ETTEILLA’S INFLUENCE ON
CONTEMPORARY TAROT PRACTITIONERS
Apparently, contemporary Tarot practitioners use, at least occasionally, some DMs from the SE to
this day.  For example, carefully compare the DMs of the SE for the Four of Cups with those of a
selection of relatively recent authors.
The School of Etteilla (Papus, 1909):
“[Upright:]

“This card signifies, with regard to medicine of the mind [i.e. D’Odoucet’s Science des
signes, ou médecine de l’esprit (Science of signs, or medicine of the mind)]: Weariness,
Displeasure, Discontentment, Disgust, Aversion, Enmity, Hate, Horror, Anxiety, Mental
Suffering, Mild Dejection, Vexation, Painful, Annoying, Unpleasant.—Distressing,
Troubling.

“Reversed:

“New Instruction, New Light.—Sign, Indication, Conjecture.—Omen,

Presage.—Premonition, Prognostication, Prediction, Novelty.”  (p. 135)

Gray, The Tarot Revealed (1960):

“[Upright:] Divinatory Meaning: Discontent with environment, but hesitancy to embark
on a new venture.  Contemplation, dissatisfaction with material success, re-evaluation of
one’s earthly pleasures.

“Reversed: New instructions, new relationships, novelty.”  (p. 60).

Pollack, Seventy-Eight Degrees of Wisdom (1997):

“[Upright]

“In the main . . . the card shows a situation when everything in life has come to appear
the same.  The card sometimes shows apathy resulting from a dull, unstimulating
environment.

“Reversed

“. . . .  New things offered, new relations, new ideas.  Most important, the reversed card
shows enthusiasm and the seizing of opportunities.”  (p. 202)

Douglas, The Tarot: The Origins, Meaning and Uses of the Cards (1972):
“Upright: Emotional happiness and fulfillment which has reached its peak and can
proceed no further.  The establishment of a family.  The passive enjoyment of that which
has already been attained.  But the card also indicates a new dissatisfaction which the
things of this world cannot assuage.  Fulfillment having been attained, what can
follow?  Love is perhaps turning into familiarity.
 “Reversed: Satiety, excesses of all kinds.  Fatigue or ill-health resulting from over-
indulgence.  (p. 165).

Louis, Tarot: Plain and Simple (1998):

“Discontent

“Upright: In a shell.  Dissatisfied.

“Key Words and Phrases: Boredom.  Weariness.  Withdrawal.  Social isolation. 

Declining social invitations.  Reassessment.  Reevaluation.  Turning inward.  Apathy. 
Walled off.  Lost in thought.  Silence.  Distraction.  Distance.  Anticlimax.  Something is
missing.  An empty feeling inside.  Feeling in a rut.  Resentment.  Depression.  Feeling
jaded.  Ennui.  Introversion.  Looking within.  Lack of motivation.  Feeling fed up. 
Nobody understands me.  The honeymoon is over.  I never promised you a rose garden. 
The grass is greener on the other side.  The winter of our discontent.

........................................

“Four of Cups Reversed: The end of discontent.

“Key Words and Phrases: (+) Renewed relationships with others.  Something to look
forward to.  Accepting a social invitation.  Motivation.  Initiative.  Socializing.  Verve. 
Readiness for challenge and new opportunities.  Revitalization.  Feeling energized. 
Turning outward.  Coming out of your shell.  Letting down the wall.  Satisfaction.  No
longer in a rut.

“(-) Self pity.  Fatalism.  Satiety.  Excess.  Apathy.  Lethargy.  Despair.  Depression. 
Exhaustion.  Lack of enjoyment.  Lost opportunities.”  (pp. 170-171).

DMs for the upright orientiation from recent authors include weariness and discontentment, which
are among the upright DMs from the SE .  Additionally, recent authors often refer to concepts
related to weariness and discontent, e.g. ennui, apathy, lack of stimulation, fatigue, and boredom. 
DMs for the reversed orientation from recent authors refer to new things or novelty, which are also
among the reversed DMs from SE.
Of course, these authors also avoid some DMs from the SE, e.g. hate, horror, omen, and
premonition.  They also suggest many DMs which may not be related to those of the SE (at least as
found in Papus, 1909), e.g., contemplation, enthusiasm, and seizing opportunities.  However, their
repeated use of such themes as weariness, discontentment, and novelty supports the idea that
contemporary Tarot practitioners, at least occasionally, use some DMs from the SE to this day.
REFERENCES
Abraham the Jew (attrib.).  (1458[?]/1900).  (S. L. MacGregor Mathers, Trans.).  The book of the
sacred magic of Abramelin the Mage: As delivered by Abraham the Jew unto his son Lamech, A.D.
1458 (2d ed.).  New York: Dover.
Agrippa of Nettesheim, Henry Cornelius.  (1531/1998).  (James Freake, Trans.; Donald Tyson,
Ed.).  Three books of occult philosophy.  St. Paul: Llewellyn.
Alapage.com.  http://www.alapage.com/.  Database of books in French offered for sale, consulted
January 24, 2000.
Alliette, Jean-Baptiste.  See Etteilla, his pseudonym.
Barnesandnoble.com.  (2000).  http://shopbarnesandnoble.com/booksearch.  Database of books
offered for sale, consulted January 24, 2000.
Beryl, Atkins T., Duval, Alain, Milne, Rosemary C., Cousin, Pierre-Henri, Lewis, Hélène M. A.,
Sinclair, Lorna A., Birks, Renée O., Lamy, Marie-Noëlle.  (1998).  Collins Robert unabridged
French/English English/French Dictionary [Le Robert & Collins senior dictionnare
Français/Anglais Anglais/Français] (5th ed).  Glasgow: Harper Collins; Paris: Dictionnaires Le
Robert.
Butler, Bill.  (1975). Dictionary of the Tarot.  New York: Shocken.
Culture Surf.  (2000).  http://www.culturesurf.com.  Database of  books in French offered for sale,
consulted January 24, 2000.
Christian, Paul. (1870/1952).  (James Kirkup & Julian Shaw, Trans.).  The history of magic.  New
York: Citadel.  Originally published as Histoire de la magie, du monde surnaturel et de la fatalité à
travers les temps et les peuples.
Case, Paul Foster & Parke, Jessie Burns.  (c. 1930/1998).  The Builders of the Adytum Tarot. 
Stamford, CT: U.S. Games..
Case, Paul Foster.  (1934/1991).  The book of tokens: Tarot meditations.  Los Angeles: Builders of
the Adytum.
Case, Paul Foster.  (1947).  The Tarot: A key to the wisdom of the ages.  Richmond, VA: Macoy.
Case, Paul Foster.  (1981).  The true and invisible Rosicrucian order: An interpretation of the
Rosicrucian allegory and an explanation of the ten Rosicrucian grades.  York Beach, ME: Samuel
Weiser.
Connolly, Eileen.  (1979).  Tarot: A new handbook for the apprentice volume 1 of the Connoly
Tarot.  North Hollywood: Newcastle.
Constant, Alphonse-Louis.  See Eliphas Lévi, his pseudonym.
Conver, Nicolas.  (1761/n.d.). Tarot de Marseille [Tarot of Marseilles].  Bordeaux, France: Héron. 
A contemporary reproduction (no date given) of the original deck.
Crowley, Aleister.  (1944).  The Book of Thoth: A short essay on the Tarot of the Egyptians.  York
Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser.  Illustrated by Lady Frieda Harris.  It is not short.
Crowley, Aleister & Harris, Lady Frieda.  (1969).  Aleister Crowley Thoth Tarot deck.  Stamford,
CT: U.S. Games Systems.
Culture Surf.  http://www.culturesurf.com.  Database of books in French offered for sale, consulted
January 24, 2000.
Dal Negro.  (c. 1870/n.d.). Tarocco egiziano [Egyptian Tarot].  Treviso: Dal Negro.  Contemporary
edition (no date given) of this Tarot deck.
Decker, Ronald, Depaulis, Theirry, & Dummet, Michael.  (1996).  A wicked pack of cards: The
origins of the occult Tarot.  New York: St. Martin’s.
Douglas, Alfred.  (1972). The Tarot: The origins, meaning and uses of the cards.  New York:
Penguin Books.
Dusserre.  (c. 1876/n.d.). Jeu de la princesse Tarot [Princess Tarot Deck].  Paris: Editions Dusserre. 
Contemporary reproduction of a deck originally sold by the Parisian firm Wattilaux.
Etteilla.  (1785/1993). L’Astrologie du Livre de Thot [Astrology of the Book of Thoth].  Paris: La
Grande Conjonction.  A facsimile of the fourth book of Manière de se récréer avec le jeu de cartes
nomées Tarots.  Bound with Halbronn, Recherches sur l’histoire de l’astrologie et du Tarot (q.v.).
Etteilla (c. 1788/c. 1975). Grand Etteilla: Ou Tarot Egyptiens [Grand Etteilla: Or Egyptian Tarot]. 
France: Grimaud.  Revised version of the Tarot deck published by Etteilla.
Encausse, Gérard-Anaclet-Vincent.  See Papus, his pseudonym.
Faivre, Antoine. (1994/1986).  (Author, Trans.).  Access to Western Esotericism.  Albany, NY: State
University of New York.  Originally published as Accès de l’Esotérisme occidental.
Fortune, Dion.  (1935). The mystical Qabalah.  York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser.
Gargiulo-Sherman, Johanna.  (1982).  The sacred rose Tarot deck.  Stamford, CT: U.S. Games
Systems.
Gilbert, R. A.  (1997). The Golden Dawn scrapbook: The rise and fall of a magical order.  York
Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser.
Giles, Cynthia.  (1992). The Tarot: History, mystery, and lore. New York: Fireside.
Grand Orient.  Pseudonym for A. E. Waite, q.v.
Gray, Eden.  (1960). The Tarot revealed: A modern guide to reading the Tarot cards.  New York:
New American Library.
Gray, Eden.  (1970). The complete guide to the Tarot.  New York: Crown.
Gray, Eden.  (1971). Mastering the Tarot.  New York: New American Library.
Greer, Mary K.  (1984). Tarot for your self: A workbook for personal transformation.  North
Hollywood: Newcastle.
Greer, Mary K.  (1995). Women of the Golden Dawn: Rebels and priestesses.  Rochester, VT: Park
Street.
Halbronn, Jacques.  (1992).  Recherches sur l’histoire de l’astrologie et du Tarot [Research on the
history of astrology and Tarot].  Paris: La Grande Conjonction.  Quoted excerpts translated from the
French by James W. Revak.  Bound with Etteilla, L’Astrologie du Livre de Thot (q.v.).
Hawkins, Roger, & Towell, Richard.  (1997).  French grammar & usage.  Lincolnwood, IL: NTC.
Howe, Ellic.  (1972). The magicians of the Golden Dawn: A documentary history of a magical
order 1887-1923.  York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser.
Jorgensen, Danny L.  (1992).  The esoteric scene, cultic milieu, and occult Tarot.  New York:
Garland.
Kaplan, Stuart R.  (1978).  The encyclopedia of Tarot (Vol. 1).  Stamford, CT: U.S. Games Systems.
Kaplan, Stuart R.  (1986).  The encyclopedia of Tarot (Vol. 2).  Stamford, CT: U.S. Games Systems.
King, Francis. (1989). Modern ritual magic: The rise of Western Occultism (rev. ed.). Garden City
Park, NY: Avery.
Küntz, Darcy (Ed.).  (1996).  The Golden Dawn source book.  Edmonds, WA: Holmes.
Lévi, Eliphas.  (1854-55/1910).  (A. E. Waite, Trans.).  Transcendental magic: Its doctrine and
ritual. Kila, MT: Kessinger.  Orginally published as Dogme de la haute magie and Rituel de la
haute magie.
Lévi, Eliphas.  (1860/1913).  (A. E. Waite, Trans.).  The history of magic.  Kila, MT: Kessinger. 
Originally published as Histoire de la magie.
Library of Congress.  (2000).  http://lcweb2.loc.gov/catalog.  Catalog, consulted January 24, 2000.
Lo Scarabeo.  (c. 1870/1996). Antichi Tarocchi esoterici [Ancient Esoteric Tarot].  Torino: Lo
Scarabeo.
Louis, Anthony.  (1998). Tarot: Plain and simple.  St. Paul: Llewellyn.
Mackenzie, Kenneth (attrib.).  (c. 1870/1996).  (Darcy Küntz, Ed. & Trans.).  The Complete Golden
Dawn Cipher Manuscript.  Edmonds, WA: Holmes.
Master Therion, The.  Pseudonym for Aleister Crowley, q.v.
Mathers, S. L. MacGregor.  (1888/1993).  The Tarot: A short treatise on reading cards. York Beach,
ME: Samuel Weiser.  Originally published as The Tarot: Its occult signification, use in fortune-
telling, and method of play and republished under this title by Samuel Weiser in 1969 and 1971.
Mathers, S. L. MacGregor.  (c. 1888a).  Book “T”—the Tarot.  In Israel Regardie (Ed.), (1989), The
Golden Dawn: A complete course in practical ceremonial magic four volumes in one (6th ed.) (pp.
540-565).  St. Paul: Llewellyn.
Mathers, S. L. MacGregor.  (c. 1888b).  On the Tarot Trumps.  In Kenneth Makenzie (attrib.),
Dorothy Küntz (Trans. & Ed.), (1996), The complete Golden Dawn Cipher Manuscript (pp. 175-
178).  Edmonds, WA: Holmes.
Mathers, S. L. MacGregor.  (c. 1888c).  The Tree of Life as projected in a solid sphere.  In Israel
Regardie (Ed.), (1989), The Golden Dawn: A complete course in practical ceremonial magic four
volumes in one (6th ed.) (pp. 594-621).  St. Paul: Llewellyn.
Morgan, Lloyd & Greer, Bill.  (1979).  Morgan-Greer Tarot.  Stamford, CT: U.S. Games Systems.
O’Neill, Robert V.  (1986).  Tarot symbolism.  Lima, OH: Fairway.
Palladini, David.  (1970).  Aquarian Tarot.  Stamford, CT: U.S. Games Systems.
Papus.  (1889/1910).  (A. P. Norton, Trans.; A. E. Waite, Ed.). The Tarot of the Bohemians: The
most ancient book in the world (3d ed.).  North Hollywood: Wilshire.  Originally published as Le
Tarot des Bohémiens: Le plus ancien livre du monde.
Papus.  (1909). Le Tarot divinatoire: Clef du tirage des cartes et des sorts [Divination by Tarot: Key
to reading cards and lots] (17th ed.).  St-Jean-de-Braye, France: Dangles. Quoted excerpts
translated from the French by James W. Revak (copyright © 2000 by James W. Revak).
Mathers, S. L. McGregor, Papus & Waite, A. E.  (1888, 1909, 1911/2000).  (James W. Revak, Ed. &
Trans.).  Tarot divination: Three parallel traditions. http://www.crosswinds.net/~jrevak.
Pollack, Rachel.  (1997). Seventy-eight degrees of wisdom: A book of Tarot (rev. ed.).  San
Francisco: Harper Collins.
Regardie, Israel (Ed.).  (1989).  The Golden Dawn: A complete course in practical ceremonial
magic four volumes in one (6th ed.). St. Paul: Llewellyn.
Regardie, Israel.  (1932/1999).  (Chic Cicero & Sandra Tabatha Cicero, Eds.). A garden of
pomegranates: Skrying on the Tree of Life.  St. Paul: Llewellyn.
Riley, Jana.  (1995). Tarot dictionary and compendium.  York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser.
San Emeterio, E.  (1997). Le grand livre du jeu Etteilla [The big book about Etteilla’s deck].  Paris:
Trajectoire.
Silvestre-Haéberlé, Colette.  (1996).  Le Grand Etteilla et le Tarot Egyptien: Méthode pratique
d’interprétation [The Grand Etteilla and Egyptian Tarot: Practical method of interpretation].  Paris:
Grancher.
Waite, A. E. (1909). A manual of cartomancy and occult divination (3d ed.).  Kila, MT: Kessinger.
Waite, A. E. (1921/1996). A new encyclopaedia of Freemasonry (ars magna latomorum) and of
cognate instituted mysteries: Their rites literature and history.  New York: Wing.
Waite, A. E.  (1910). The pictorial key to the Tarot (being fragments of a secret tradition under the
veil of divination).  New York: Barnes & Noble.  Illustrated by Pamela Colman Smith.
Waite, A. E.  (1938). Shadows of life and thought: A retrospective review in the form of memoirs. 
Kila, MT: Kessinger.
Waite, A. E. & Smith, Pamela Colman.  (1909/1971).  The Rider Tarot deck.  Stamford, CT: U.S.
Games Systems.  A revised edition of the original deck.
Waite, A. E. & Smith, Pamela Colman.  (1909/1987).  Albano-Waite Tarot deck.  Stamford, CT:
U.S. Games Systems.  A revised edition of the original deck by Frankie Albano.
Waite, A. E. & Smith, Pamela Colman.  (1909/1990).  Universal Waite Tarot deck.  Stamford, CT:
U.S. Games Systems.  A revised edition of the deck with coloring by Mary Hanson-Roberts.
Wang, Robert. (1978). An introduction to the Golden Dawn Tarot: Including the original documents
on Tarot from the Order of the Golden Dawn with explanatory notes. York Beach, ME: Samuel
Weiser.
Wang, Robert. (1987). The Qabalistic Tarot: A textbook of mystical philosophy. York Beach, ME:
Samuel Weiser.
Westcott, Wynn W.  (c. 1888).  The historical lecture.  In Darcy Küntz, (Ed.), (1996), The Golden
Dawn source book (pp. 46-51).  Edmonds, WA: Holmes.
Wirth, Oswald.  (1927/1985). The Tarot of the magicians.  York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser. 
Originally published as Le Tarot, des imagiers du Moyen Age.
Wood, Robin.  (1991). The Robin Wood Tarot.  St. Paul: Llewellyn.