← Language
ES EN FR IT PT DE NL SV
HomeArticlesDecks and systems

Sabio Tarot · Decks and systems

By Sabio Tarot

Tarot de Marseille versus Rider–Waite–Smith: four cards compared

Put two Fives of Cups side by side. In a traditional Marseille deck, you see cups and ornament; in Rider–Waite–Smith, you see a scene with a figure and objects in space. Both cards occupy the same place in a 78-card deck, but they do not give you the same visual information. Comparing systems starts with what is on the paper.

The Marseille family has a history of many editions, as shown by Gallica's selection from the Bibliothèque nationale de France. The V&A documents Pamela Colman Smith's contribution to the illustrated Rider–Waite–Smith Minor Arcana. Here we compare recognisable features of the two families without claiming that every edition uses exactly the same line or colour.

The Fool: name, number and direction

In many Marseille decks, Le Mat or the Fool appears without an ordinary number in the trump sequence. In Rider–Waite–Smith, it usually has a zero. Before turning that difference into meaning, notice it as an editorial choice: numbering organises a sequence in the book's contents and changes where a reader looks for the card.

Now describe the figure in your edition: what it carries, which way it seems to move and what is near its feet. Do not assign a Marseille card a detail you saw only on the other card. In a question about starting a project, both may suggest movement, but your reason should refer to the present image and the spread position, not a universal “original meaning”.

The Lovers: composition matters

Many Marseille editions show a figure between other people beneath an element above them; the Rider–Waite–Smith card presents another scene. A reading about a relationship decision may focus on connections between several figures in the first design and a different arrangement of relationship and choice in the second. “Love” alone explains neither.

One useful method is to write three concrete observations before interpreting: how many figures you see, how they relate visually and what occupies the centre. Then ask what changes if the card falls in “resource” instead of “obstacle”. This second question stops you turning an image into a verdict about a real relationship.

Justice: the same figure can have another number

In the Marseille convention, Justice is VIII and Strength XI. Rider–Waite–Smith swaps those places: Strength is VIII and Justice XI. The British Museum holds a reproduction of a Marseille design attributed to Conver, and the V&A holds Rider–Waite–Smith examples. The number is a quick way to spot the convention a book follows.

If a manual refers to “Arcanum VIII” without a name, check its system first. Reading the wrong chapter can look like a deep disagreement about meaning when the problem is really an index. Justice's image still invites attention to the scales, posture and other details of the specific edition. A changed number does not automatically turn it into Strength.

Five of Cups: numbered card versus scene

This is the most practical distinction for a beginner. In a Marseille deck with unillustrated suits, you work with suit, number, the cups' arrangement, decoration and neighbouring cards. In Rider–Waite–Smith, a figure and situation give you additional narrative clues. The Met notes that historical numbered cards showed value through repeated suit symbols; the V&A explains the later importance of Colman Smith's illustrated Minor Arcana.

Suppose the card falls in the “what I have already observed” position. With Marseille you might start with “five cups, an arrangement I need to describe, a suit my method connects with feelings” and then check neighbouring cards. With Rider–Waite–Smith you may add “figure, posture and cups in different positions” if those details appear on your copy. Neither reading should claim a specific event in another person's life from this card alone.

Which system should you study?

Choose a visual language you are comfortable describing and a manual that names the edition it uses. If you enjoy relationships of number and arrangement, Marseille can offer a rich field of observation. If action scenes help you, Rider–Waite–Smith offers many starting points. You can study both, but note which deck each association came from so you do not assign to one image what you learned by looking at the other.

The comparison leaves one simple rule: when an explanation names a detail absent from your card, check whether it comes from another system. Continue with how to identify your deck and why Justice and Strength change numbers.

A fifth comparison: the Ten of Wands in one question

Suppose you ask, “What should I check before accepting another project?” and set the card's position as “a cost I may not see”. In Rider–Waite–Smith, you can describe a figure carrying several Wands. An interpretation about workload is grounded in a gesture and the chosen position. In Marseille, do not invent that person. You can observe ten Wands, their arrangement and the end of a numbered series. Using your method, ask whether an accumulation of tasks leaves room for a new one. In both cases, the practical step is to review real resources and commitments, but the visual reasoning differs.

Changing the position changes the answer too. If the same card appears as “a resource I already have”, it might invite you to recognise experience that helps you sustain a task, or to consider what support you need. Neither deck tells you to accept or reject the project. The card helps you frame an interpretation to check against information from work.

This example avoids giving one system a false superiority. A scene offers an intuitive entry point; a pip-card composition makes you spell out number, suit and its relationship to the rest. One may suit a particular reader better, but no historical proof makes one “the true reading” and the other a deviation.

Three mistakes when moving between decks

The first is copying an absent detail, such as describing a figure seen from behind on a Marseille card that shows only cups. The second is applying a number on its own without checking Justice and Strength. The third is assuming that a word in your manual has always belonged to the image. The V&A's and Met's histories remind us that tarot uses and vocabulary changed over time.

To correct these mistakes, keep a comparison note for each card. Record each deck's edition, title, number, three visible details and a tentative interpretation for the same spread position. If both interpretations agree, say which different observations led you there. If they diverge, do not force them into one statement. Each deck may make a different question visible.

This practice also helps you choose a guide specific to your deck. When studying the Marseille Five of Cups, check that the explanation does not assume the Rider–Waite–Smith scene. If you use Rider–Waite–Smith, look for a book that describes what its illustration actually shows. One generic sentence for both versions leaves you without a method.

Sources consulted