← Language
ES EN FR IT PT DE NL SV
HomeArticlesHistory and curiosities

Sabio Tarot · History and curiosities

By Sabio Tarot

Waite, Rider and Smith: what did each contribute to the deck?

The same deck may be advertised as “Rider”, “Rider-Waite”, “Waite-Smith” or “Rider-Waite-Smith”. These names do not describe four interchangeable authors. They point to different roles in one publishing project: Arthur Edward Waite developed the approach and instructions, Pamela Colman Smith created the illustrations, and Rider was the company that printed and marketed the historic deck.

The Victoria and Albert Museum's account distinguishes Colman Smith's design, publication associated with Waite and printing by Rider and Company. Its catalogue entry for a particular copy can also give dates that differ from the general design chronology. Reading each field stops us assigning the whole result to one person.

Waite: direction, texts and an interpretive framework

The V&A places Waite in the British esoteric milieu that studied and reshaped tarot in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. He did more than lend his name: the museum says he provided detailed directions for the Major Arcana designs. As a writer and the project's guide, he helped determine the choice of scenes and meanings.

That does not make Waite the artist of every card. When a manual describes the illustrated Five of Cups, it draws on a visual solution made by Colman Smith. Text and image may work together, but their contributions should be credited accurately.

Smith: the artist you can see in the cards

The British Museum describes Pamela Colman Smith as the illustrator and designer of the famous deck made with Waite. The V&A stresses her greater freedom on the Minor Arcana. Her scenes turn many numbered cards into small situations in which we can inspect actions, objects and composition.

Including her name in the deck's full description is a matter of historical accuracy. “Rider–Waite–Smith” reminds readers that a company, an author of instructions and an artist contributed in different ways. You need not change the commercial name printed on every box, but it is a clear way to explain authorship.

Rider: publishing and circulation

Rider and Company appears as the printer or publisher of the historical copies catalogued by the V&A. The company made it possible for the design to circulate as a product. Its name on the cover does not mean an employee called “Rider” personally devised every scene.

A deck you buy today may come from a different company and date. The British Museum holds, for example, an American deck from 1968 made after Waite and Colman Smith and published by Tarot Productions. Its visual relationship to the historical design is real; its production and date are different.

A chronology that needs room for nuance

The V&A says the deck first appeared in 1909, but describes its own copy as lithographs from a first printing in 1910, reprinted in 1916. That difference teaches us to name what we mean: conception and launch of the project, a first printing attributed to a particular object, a reprint or a later reproduction. An online photograph might show any of these stages.

Before citing an edition, look on its box or in a catalogue for publisher, year of that copy, illustration credit, introduction and restoration notes. A missing name on a commercial cover does not erase documented authorship of the images.

Why this matters when learning tarot

If you study with a book from this tradition, check whether it uses Colman Smith's artwork or a reinterpretation. A sentence about a figure's gesture works only if that figure appears on your card. Take three cards—Justice, Strength and a numbered card—and check their names, numbers and scenes. This will help your reading more than memorising a deck label without looking at the cards.

Read Pamela Colman Smith and her images to explore the artwork, and Marseille versus Rider–Waite–Smith to see how an example changes between systems.

How to give complete credit

When a museum catalogues a deck, it can list designer, publisher, printer, place and date of the physical copy separately. Each field answers a different question. “Who devised the instructions?” is not “Who drew the Minor Arcana?”; “Who printed this box?” is not “Who invented the original design?” The V&A makes exactly these distinctions in its description of the lithographs, and the British Museum does likewise for the later 1968 edition.

A common error occurs when someone sees a recent reproduction and writes “1909 tarot” without explaining that the date refers to the design. The British Museum's 1968 edition shows why the distinction matters. Its design line leads back to Waite and Colman Smith, but the physical materials, printer and circulation belong to a later twentieth-century context. A book listing can give both dates with the right verbs: “based on a design published in the early twentieth century” and “this edition was printed in…”

Accurate credit matters for images on a website too. Even when an illustration is historical, a digital photograph of it or a particular later edition may have reproduction conditions. Crediting Colman Smith as the artist does not, by itself, grant unrestricted use of every photograph of a card based on her images. Before placing an image on a book page, identify the object, edition and rights attached to the file.

A practical case of incomplete credit

Suppose an article presents “Waite's Five of Cups” and describes the posture of a drawn figure. It names the project's guide but leaves out the person who built that visual scene. A better description would be: “In the Rider–Waite–Smith deck, illustrated by Pamela Colman Smith under Arthur Edward Waite's editorial direction, the card shows…” Then name the exact edition being examined.

This correction does not diminish Waite's role. His directions for the Major Arcana and his texts are part of the system. Naming each participant precisely avoids describing a deck's creation as a solitary act when the sources show a joint project.

Try the same check with any modern deck: identify its artist, guidebook author, publisher and the date of your box. If one detail is absent, write “not stated” instead of assigning it to the most prominent name. That way, you can recognise everyone who contributed to the work and avoid repeating a mistaken attribution.

Sources consulted