What are some good resources on Roman polytheism? Books, YouTube Channels, websites, etc. I’ve been feeling drawn to Roman polytheism specifically.
hey there! thank you for asking this question — I'm always happy to share resources on Roman polytheism.
first things first, I will go ahead and link my personal list of resources. there, you will find all of the books, papers and websites I've gone through and have found particularly useful when it comes to learning about Roman culture/polytheism.
I will nonetheless give you some recommendations on resources I would look into if I were to start my path over again!
DISCLAIMER: I am a revivalist. because of this, I will be recommending historical/academical resources. keep in mind that this is just the way I do things, though: every path is valid and you are more than welcome to follow another — no matter whether reconstructionist or modern.
1. "Roman Religion" by Valerie Warrior
this is a great book for those who are starting to approach cultus deorum. it gives you a wonderful introduction, after which you can focus on the aspects of Roman polytheism that intrigue you/draw your attention the most.
2. Nova Roma (Roman Religion section)
now, this website is the second resource I recommend to you. here, you will find plenty of informative articles on Roman polytheism — both the private and the public cults. even though many – including myself – don't endorse this organisation because of some past allegations, its members are very well-versed on Roman culture. keep in mind that they have a reconstructionist approach!
3. "The Dancing Lares and the Serpent in the Garden" by Harriet I. Flower
now, this book is exceptional especially if you're looking forward to delving into the private cult — which, in reconstructionist/revivalist approaches, mainly focuses on the domestic deities. you will find a lot of info on Penates, Lares and the like. my very humble and very personal advice is that of starting with this kind of worship, for one very simple reason: since domestic deities are within reach, many Roman polytheists agree on the fact that you do not need to perform a ritus Romanus — Roman ritual — in order to leave an offering/interact with them.
this book can be very dense — both because it is academical and because the font is very small. I personally recommend taking your time going through it. if you need to stop, do so.
4. "Ritus romanus: make an offering to your gods"
this pdf will be ever-so precious whenever/if you will feel ready to include ritus Romanus in your practice. also, it also gives you an introduction on domestic Roman practices — how to set up a shrine, which deities to worship, etc.
BONUS: "Archaic Roman Religion" by George Dumézil and TIMOTHEVS
"Archaic Roman Religion" is a wonderful book when it comes to the history of Roman polytheism. even though many of Dumézil's theories are outdated, it is still very useful when wanting to learn about the differences between Archaic Roman religion, Republican Roman religion and Imperial Roman religion.
TIMOTHEVS, on the other hand, is a YouTube channel that shows you the way the theory of other resources may work in someone's practice. if I'm not wrong, there should be a couple of videos of them leaving an offering to Lares. to those who find it useful to have a visual reference, like myself, such videos are sooooo precious.
and I think this is it! I hope that this recommendations are going to be useful to you! feel free to ask more questions if anything's unclear and I'll be happy to help 🙌🏻💗
EDIT: if you are just approaching Roman polytheism, you may want to look into the differences between this path and Hellenism. you can read more about this topic here.
Hi Sybil, I had a question and I hope you'd be able to answer or give your thoughts on? I've started researching Roman polytheism (thank you sm for all your resources, working my way through Roman Religion (the book)!) and something i've come across is the essential-ness of covering their head during ritual/sacrifice.
I haven't fully delved into researching that specifically yet so please bare with me if this is an already pretty agreed upon thing, but I was wondering how that might apply in a modern, revivalist setting? For example, if you wanted to offer a morning coffee or it's steam as a small offering, would that be deemed disrespectful if the head wasn't covered?
As well for any quick, spur of the moment prayers - "Please help my communication be fluent in this work meeting" - how would that kind of thing fit in, or is the headcovering purely for bigger rituals like public worship would have been?
Thank you!
hey there! thank you for asking these questions!
I'd like to start out with a lil' disclaimer: keep in mind that what follows is my interpretation of ancient practices and the way it applies to the modern world - so others might answer differently to these questions. and, on top of that, I am no expert: I am still learning myself. last thing last, do keep in mind that whenever I talk of "Romans" I am mainly referring to free citizens of middle-high class: many things that were true for this category of people might have not applied to slaves, for example.
first and foremost, let's try to understand what the veil really was in Ancient times by taking a look at the following bas-relief:
here, you can see Marcus Aurelius making an offering to the gods. what I want you to focus on is the veil itself, though: as you can see, this piece of clothing was part of the toga. so we could say that the veil is part of his daily "outfit"... so the veil would be much closer to a modern-day hoodie than an entirely separate piece of clothing. the same thing would apply to ancient Roman women, as their veil was part of the palla - a mantle that used to be wrapped around the body, similarly to the toga.
why am I saying all of this? well, first: I love fashion. secondly: by reflecting on this, we understand that
the veil was nothing special: Romans probably saw it as one of the many pieces of their outfit, the same way we would feel about a hoodie or a t-shirt. translating this in today's practice, we could say that you don't really need to use anything fancy as your veil. sure: one must always dress properly when interacting with the gods; but acknowledging this gives you the opportunity to take into consideration the use of hoodies as veils, for example - other than a rectangular piece of fabric, which is still preferable but not mandatory.
the veil was always within reach: all a Roman had to do to put their veil on and, thus, get ready for ritual action was pull their toga/palla over their head. that only took a few seconds, maybe a minute. this partly answers your question already: since Romans always carried their veil with them, they used it for all ritual actions - no matter how "small": adoratio, prayers and the like were all done with capite velato.
however. we don't really get the chance to always have a veil around nowadays. so if you don't have one with you but feel the necessity to do something "small" - and by this I mean a prayer or adoratio - just go ahead and do that. in my personal experience, as long as your intentions are good, nothing bad will happen. me, I have performed several adorationes whenever I run into statues of the gods... which usually happens in museums. due to those being public and crowded places, I feel much more comfortable performing the gesture without capite velato; that has been working just fine so far.
as for offerings, I have a stricter view on the matter. offerings are a tool to create a direct channel to the gods. even though I am an hardcore defender of the idea that all gods are good and want the best for humans - see Balbus' thesis in Cicero's De Natura Deorum - they must to be approached with the correct ritual gestures. I'm not saying this because I want to be a gatekeeper, but because Romans themselves put a lot of emphasis on performing the rituals correctly - which is the reason why this religion is considered orthopraxical, not orthodox. so in my opinion, ritus romanus* is needed whenever a physical offering is made - no matter how big or small. at least when it comes to celestial gods. so, in this case, the veil would be mandatory.
*if you need an example of ritus romanus, you can check out the following blog: Rito Romano XII: Rito Base - Ad Maiora Vertite. it is written in Italian; however the authors of this website have recently added a feature that allows you to translate the whole thing.
I would really like to highlight the fact that, in the previous paragraph, I said "at least when it comes to celestial gods". that's because celestial gods live relatively far from mankind - not physically, but spiritually. in order to approach them in an effective and "safe" way, you need to ask Ianus/Janus to "open the doors" to the divine for you and ask Iuppiter/Jupiter to watch over. this is my humble interpretation of how ritus romanus works.
for domestic gods things are pretty different: they're near, which is the reason why offerings to them seem to be less complex. for example: Romans used to always have a flame burning in their hearth - which was employed to cook food, to warm up the house when it was cold and, last but not least, to leave offerings for domestic gods. the most pious families would leave offerings to the household gods daily by sharing the food they were about to eat and/or putting on the Lararium flowers and small trinkets - we have a great example of that in Plautus' Aulularia. generally, there seems to be a lack of descriptions of complex rituals directed towards domestic gods... which is peculiar, considering the amount of ritual descriptions we get for celestial gods. thus, in my humble opinion, it is possible that in order to leave offerings to Lares, Penates and the personal Genius/Iuno you do not need ritus romanus nor, perhaps, capite velato. personally, though, I still wear my veil whenever I offer something to Lares as it helps me prepare mentally for religious action - and also because I want to be safe-not-sorry.
the use of the veil and the complexity of rituals can be overwhelming at first, I'm not going to lie. I'll tell you what: I was about to quit Roman polytheism in favour of less-structured beliefs. more than once. but, with time and patience, I can assure you you will get used to it. sure: some days it will be easy to wake up, leave an offering and go about your day; some days you may forget; others you may feel so unmotivated that you will just skip your religious routine. it is going to get easier, eventually: veiling is going to be as easy as tying your shoes; you are going to remember ritual formulas by heart, the same way you remember the lyrics of your favourite song. my advice is: just enjoy the process!
(I know that this advice was probably unrequested... but I'm putting it out there just in case other Roman polytheists need to hear it!)
aaaand this would be all! thank you guys for coming to my TED Talk /j. if you have any questions or observations, please share them in the comments or in my asks! please, bear in mind that I just woke up - so if anything doesn't make sense, blame it on my sleepy brain. 😭
thanks again to clavicus for asking these questions! it gave me a lot to think about! 💗
Hey there, all! It is Sybil (fka Clever Crow) speaking!
A couple of weeks from now, I will go on holiday. This may seem completely unrelated, but it actually the reason why I was inspired into writing this post. In fact, I have decided to build a portable Lararium, and I want to take you with me on this "journey".
Before delving into the making of the shrine, though, I want to say this: even though, *to me*, this Lararium will be portable; others may use the same project to make a standard Lararium. And that 👏🏻 is 👏🏻 valid 👏🏻. Actually, your shrine could be even more modest: a candle with a bowl is as much of a Lararium as mines'. A Lararium doesn't have to be fancy in order to work.
The only reason why I made my Lararia complex/extremely detailed is because I was lucky enough to have a very supportive family who does not mind me showing my shrines (furthermore, I'm a Libra rising *and* an art history student: I adore aesthetics). I am aware that a big portion of the pagan/witchy community might not be as lucky (nor be as interested in aesthetics), and this is why I felt the need to write dowm the following disclaimer: your safety > functionality > aesthetics.
Now, without further ado, let us see what a Lararium is, shall we?
"The lararium was a shrine to the guardian spirits of the Roman household. Family members performed daily rituals at this shrine to guarantee the protection of these domestic spirits, the most significant of which were the lares." [source: VRoma]
"The Lararium (pl. lararia) altar is the sacred place of the home where offerings and prayers are made to the Gods." [source: Nova Roma]
These two quotes summarise ever-so perfectly the definition of "Lararium". We are, indeed, talking about a place where Ancient Romans used to leave offering to the domestic gods. For the sake of conciseness, I will only name them and will refrain from introducing them:
➳ Lares (that is where the word "Lararium" comes from);
➳ Penates;
➳ Vesta;
➳ Genius (or Genii, plural) loci;
➳ Personal Genius/Iuno (on the practitioner's birthday).
With the definition of "Penates" going from "deities who watch over the penus [= pantry]" to "any deity that the paterfamilias [= the father, the head of the family] felt like including in his devotional workings", deities from the public cult started to be worshipped in these private shrines as well. Thanks to this, archaeologists were able to retrieve some remarkable statues (as well as paintings) of "major" deities (Bacchus, Vulcan, Diana and Apollo, to name some) angloside imagery of domestic, "minor" deities (Lares).
Lararia were built in a wide variety of materials (wood, marble, silver), ranging from entire devotional rooms to smaller shrines depending on the income of the family. They were usually set up in the kitchen and, most of the times, they resemble a temple. Usually, they also include decorations connected to the ritual sphere in the pediment (bucranium, patera, garlands, etc).
But now, to the pièce of résistance: in Comacchio, Emilia-Romagna, Italy, a portable silver Lararium was found. This discovery is revolutionary to say the least: this is the proof that Romans used to worship their gods when abroad as well (which is what inspired me into making my own portable Lararium).
for a more detailed answer, I would recommend checking out this post: Making a Lararium - Part I.
that being said, the Lararium – pl. Lararia – is the Ancient Roman altar. back then, it was used to leave offerings for domestic gods, such as Lares, Penates, Vesta and the personal Genius/Iuno.
with time, these altars also started including the deities from the public cult – like Vulcan, Diana, Bacchus, etc – according to the head of the family's preference.
nowadays, Roman polytheists tend use the Lararium for every ritual – not only offerings, that is – due to the lack of alternative places where to practice their religion.
hope everything is clear enough! let me know if it isn't. wish you a wonderful day! 🙌🏻💗
Hello there! It's me, the Silly Sybil (fka Clever Crow). I've been wanting to do this post for months, but life got in the way and I eventually forgot about it. But hey: better late than never, right?
Now, to the post.
In this foreword, I do want to address the nature of my resources. In fact, I am not writing all of this off of articles or academic works, but off of a questionnaire I had published back in July 2023. The answers given by fellow pagans are the main resources for this blog, whose objective is that of determining the main characteristics of two different approaches to lost practices: reconstructionism and revivalism.
Why choose such a peculiar approach to resources? Reconstructionism and revivalism are part of a spectrum, which can be intended and defined differently by different practitioners. Every pagan will have a slightly different idea of these terms. That means that these labels do not have a universal meaning - there is no institution recognised worldwide that gives us the requirements to be a revivalist or a reconstructionist: it is up to the practitioner and their understanding of the term. This is the reason why I've decided to opt for a form rather than articles as a resource. After all, who, better than a pagan who lives and practices paganism daily, can instruct us about paganism-related terms?
One last important thing I want to do is introduce you to our “cast”* - the wonderful pagans who took the time to compile the form, that is:
➳ anonymous contibutor (revivalist)
➳ Dead (revivalist)
➳ Guenevere (reconstructionist)
➳ Magpie (reconstructionist)
I do feel like thanking the people above is the least I can do. For this reason, I thank all of those who participated from the bottom of my heart: this post wouldn't exist without you.
*The "cast" is formed by aquaintances from a closed Amino community.
On paganism
In order to understand the definition of paganism-related labels, we must first define paganism. My personal research led me to two definitions I will provide you with:
An umbrella-term that indicates non-Abrahamic religions*;
An umbrella-term that indicates religions that are not main world religions**.
The options above might seem similar - if not identical. However, the subtle difference between them is extremely important.
According to Dr. Angela Puca¹, pagan beliefs/religions show the following characteristics:
A polytheistic and animistic approach to spirituality;
A direct relationship with the divine - which sometimes translates with little interest to scriptures and interactions in a non-institutionalised way;
The belief of immanence - the belief that the divine is everywhere and, thus, is not external to the natural world but within the same;
As a consequence of (3.), the reverence for everything as everything holds divine power.
For the reasons above, pagans are very likely to believe in magick - if not practice it. Quoting Dr. Puca, one could say that some of the most popular beliefs that fall under paganism are “Wicca/Witchcraft, Druidry, Heathernry, Asatrù, Goddess worship, ethnic reconstructions and other animist earth-based traditions”.
Now that we have defined, very broadly, what paganism is, let us get to reconstructionism and revivalism.
*Abrahamic religions include Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
**Main world religions include, among the others, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism.
On reconstructionism
“Reconstructionism is about recreating an ancient or dead religion as closely as possible to the original source. This means learning about, understanding, and incorporating historical traditions. Being a Reconstructionist involves a lot of time and research.” - Magpie
“A reconstructionist seeks to find the historic pieces of practice and remain true to that as best they can.” - Guevevere
As the two members of the cast above already said ever-so-clearly, reconstructionism puts a lot of emphasis on historical accuracy - which revivalism also does but to a lesser extent, as we will see later on. The key characteristic of this approach to pagan traditions is the will to practice a dead religion as it was by ancient peoples.
For example: a modern Hellenic polytheist who considers themselves a reconstructionist will do a ritual as a 3rd century BCE Hellenic polytheist would have - if that is indeed the era they mean to reconstruct: the same pagan religion can show different characteristics depending on the century.
The modern reconstructionist practitioner will not alter the rituals and, sometimes, nor will they attempt to fill the gaps with their own UPG*². For this reason, many reconstructionists affirm that it takes a lot of time and research for them to add new practices to their own, as they must research thoroughly the subject and reconstruct it exclusively thanks to historical accounts - for this reason, they rely on academical and primary resources**. Sometimes, if gaps make it impossible to reconstruct a, say, ritual, reconstructionists might decide not to include it in its entirety - in place of, as said before, use any UPG to fill said gaps.
*Unverified Personal Gnosis: a belief that is not backed up by mythos and is exclusively theorized/recognised by the single practitioner.
**Primary resources: texts that were written in the historical period that one is researching. Eg: Saint Augustine of Hippo's texts are a primary resource to those who are researching 4th/5th century Christianity.
On revivalism
“Revivalism is a sort of subcategory of Reconstruction. It has the same goals and also has an emphasis on historical accuracy but tends to be on the less strict side and not as culturally focused*. While Recon. as a whole would include people that expect near-total adherence to historically or culturally attested practices, Revivalism is more theologically focused and has more room for adaptation to one's existing culture and environment. *cultural context is still important, revivalism just doesn't expect participation/membership to a specific culture.” - Dead
“Revivalists keep a sense of tradition within their practice but still allow room for UPG/SPG* and modern practices while still keeping it within the religion.” - anonymous contributor
As we anticipated before, revivalism, too, heavily focuses on historical accuracy. However, there is more room to add one's personal beliefs and/or alter some parts of the practice. This is the very big - and very important - difference between the two approaches: while reconstructionism hardly accepts UPG or SPG to fill the gaps - and, so, adjust part of a practice to one's needs/beliefs -, revivalism is much more flexible on that bit.
For example: a modern Gaulish polytheist who considers themselves a revivalist might decide to fill the gaps given by the little - and biased - resources on their practice by adding their own UPG to what is already historically attested.
Just because revivalism accepts UPG and SPG, it doesn't mean that it is a less-demanding approach than reconstructionism. In fact, it does require the same amount of research and of digging into academic and primary texts. Revivalism is about *adapting* an historical practice; it is not about eradicating it from its original historical and/or cultural context, which has to be researched nonetheless. One could say that revivalists want to reconstruct ancient practices as if they were never destroyed in the first place, taking into account the evolutions such practices would have gone through in the contemporary world. Thus, using one of the examples above, if I am a revivalist I am not practicing Hellenic polytheism as a 3rd century BCE polytheist would have, but I am practicing it as a potential 2024 Hellenic polytheist would have after all of the probable changes religion could have gone through.
To better explain the difference between reconstructionism and revivalism: Roman deities used to be offered incense and wine. If I were to use a reconstructionist approach, I might want to stick to these offerings as they are two of the few offerings that are historically attested. If I were to use a revivalist approach, I might prefer using incense or wine, but I could opt for a strawberry beverage from time to time.
*Shared Personal Gnosis: a belief that is not backed up by mythos and is exclusively theorized/recognised by a group of practitioners.
Conclusion
I personally, to this day, do not know whether to consider myself a reconstructionist or a revivalist. That is because, depending on the pagan community you're interacting with, the "requirements" to label yourself as reconstructionist or revivalist might change - and this is something I already mentioned in the foreword. What I - and the other contributors - tried to do is give you some very broad guidelines in order to let you establish whether you fall under one or the other category.
If you do not find any of these two approaches fitting for you, there is no need to worry: as I stated in the foreword, we are talking about a spectrum. Some people lean towards one of the two extremes of this spectrum and there might be people who find themselves outside of it, which is valid nonetheless.
This being said, I thank you all for reading this blog. Let me know in the comments whether you describe yourself as a reconstructionist, a revivalist or something else entirely!
Wish you a pleasant day/evening/night.
The Silly Sybil
Resources
Informative
¹ Dr. Angela Puca's video on paganism
² Dead's post on UPG and SPG
Paintings
¹ "Priestess of Delphi" by John Collier
² "Magic Circle" by John William Waterhouse
³ "Roman Woman Lighing a Lamp at the Home Altar" by Stephan Wladilawowitsch Bakalowicz
Like many – if not all – Tarot readers, I happened to struggle with understanding court cards in my journey. The difficulty in interpreting these cards lies in their very nature: it is not the Major Arcana’s archetypes or the Minor Arcana’s scenes we are talking about, but people! And, as human beings, we all know how difficult it can be to understand the way other human beings feel, think and behave. Because of that, it can be difficult to tell apart a rank – Page, Knight, Queen or King – from another.
This is what inspired me into writing this blog. After 5 years of experience and countless readings, I created a method that makes it easier for me to understand these cards. I do want to say this: just because it works *for me*, it doesn’t mean that it will – or should – work for everyone. Every Tarot reader is different and, willingly or not, puts together their own way to decipher the 78 cards which 👏🏻 is 👏🏻 valid 👏🏻.
So… let’s dive into it, shall we?
By “qualities” I mean a “distinctive attribute or characteristic possessed by someone or something”¹, which doesn’t have positive or negative connotations. The way I see it, two sets of qualities can be attributed to the court cards. The first one, is characterised by the dichotomy “Passive/Active”; the second, by the dichotomy “Beginner/Advanced”. Let us look into both.
1.1 - Receptive vs. active
I will start with a very brief detour. During the Renaissance, when Tarot cards were first created, people were very strict when it came to gender roles. The majority of women were ordered to submit to their husbands and held little to no power, whereas men were ordered to conceal their emotions and act tough no matter what. In 1909, when the Rider-Waite-Smith deck first came out, the situation was not that different.
Nowadays, we know that gender roles are not as fixed as we thought they were in the past: men are allowed to be fragile, women are allowed to be independent. Not only that, but we also started acknowledging that there are more than two genders around – shout-out to all non-binary folks. Because of that, labels like “feminine” and “masculine” are not that adaptable to modern times. In place of those we can use, respectively, “receptive” and “active” – or, as Benebell Wen suggests, “yin” and “yang”². The same concepts are expressed, but this wording allows us to be open to the constant changing of time.
Now that we went through this extremely important premise, we can look into the dichotomy.
𝐑𝐄𝐂𝐄𝐏𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐄 || “able or inclined to receive”³. Individuals who are receptive are great listeners – and, because of that, they’re often said to be intuitive. They are sponges to everything that’s around them. They prefer staying still over running around, waiting over doing. They share an important connection with the moon: just like the satellite does with tides, receptive people can change the world around them in a subtle-yet-powerful way simply by existing.
𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐈𝐕𝐄 || “engaging or ready to engage in physically energetic pursuits”⁴. Individuals who are active are speakers – maybe even debaters. They see the world as a place full of objectives to achieve and mountains to climb. Contrarily to receptive people, they enjoy running around over staying still, doing over waiting. They share an important connection with the sun: just like the star and its solar flares, active people use their bursts of energy to change the world around them in a fairly loud way.
1.2 - Beginner vs. advanced
𝐁𝐄𝐆𝐈𝐍𝐍𝐄𝐑 || “a person just starting to learn a skill or take part in an activity”⁵. An individual who identifies as a beginner is unfamiliar with the matter at hand, but excited to get to know it. They can be naive and/or reckless. They are likely to make mistakes and fall to the ground, but they will soon be back on their feet – mistakes are precious lessons after all!
𝐀𝐃𝐕𝐀𝐍𝐂𝐄𝐃 || “far on or ahead in development or progress”⁶. An individual who identifies as advanced is very familiar with the matter at hand, and knows how to wield it in their favour. They are wise and experienced. They are unlikely to err – since they’ve already had their fair share of mistakes in the past – and because of that they are great at giving advice. As we will see when analysing the ranks, advanced characters are the only ones who know how to merge, to an extent, receptiveness and activeness.
1.3 - To sum up
Personally, I love having a visual reference when learning new, abstract concepts. For this reason, I have decided to provide you with the following table. Through that, you will better understand how the qualities above are distributed in the Tarot court.
Thanks to this table, we can see that both the Page and the Queen are receptive, whereas the Knight and the King are active. So… let’s do something different, shall we? Let’s start by analysing the courts using the “passive/active” dichotomy instead of the usual progression from the lowest rank to the highest – Page to King, that is.
For shortness’ sake, I have decided not to include an explanation of every single court card, just the ranks. You can find the meanings on your own by doing a simple addition, which is
RANK + . . .
𝐖𝐀𝐍𝐃𝐒 || creativity, new projects, energy, willpower
Being receptive, Pages are all about listening to the lessons the element they are approaching is willing to teach them. They’re beginners, which means they learn with an open mind and excitement. It is the phase of acquainting, right before moving the first step.
They are the beginner witch who watches videos and reads books on the basics.
2.2 - Queens
(Receptive + advanced)
Think . . . nurturer, artist, poet.
The Queen is nothing more than an experienced Page. They know perfectly well what the element of their suit is about, and they use it to give birth to new, creative ideas. This doesn’t sound very receptive, right? That’s because, being advanced, the Queens have learnt how to bring some activeness to their receptiveness.
They are the experienced witch who creates a new spell.
The Knight is someone who’s starting to put into practice the potential of their element. They are doing so without having collected enough knowledge, though, and they are very likely to mess-up because of that. They are chaotic beings who don’t realise that with every action comes consequences. The Knights either do too much or too little, they are foreign to moderation.
They are the beginner witch who decides to perform a way-too-complex ritual that backlashes.
2.4 - Kings
(Active + advanced)
Think . . . entrepreneur, CEO, leader.
The King is nothing more than an experienced Knight. They know perfectly well what the element of their suit is about, and use its power in their favour. They do so by putting what they’ve learnt so far through experience into practice. However, they are much less impetuous than the Knight. That is because, being advanced, the King has learnt how to bring some receptiveness to their activeness, moderating the fiery temper of their beginner counterpart.
They are the advanced witch who casts a spell successfully.
Now that we have described the Court cards through the “passive/active” dichotomy, it is time to reorder them from lowest to highest rank. This will allow us to give a more coherent sense of progression, which will consequently help us remember the cards more easily. But let’s spice things up: let’s reorder the ranks by telling a tale using the same character we ran into before, the witch.
𝐏𝐀𝐆𝐄 || Our witch just ran into witchcraft for the first time thanks to a friend of theirs. They were recommended to start learning about protection and cleansing, so they decided to buy a few books on the subject.
𝐊𝐍𝐈𝐆𝐇𝐓 || The witch then decides to cast their first spell, which happens to be a curse they had read about online. Because of its complexity and the absence of protections the spell backfires, bringing bad luck to the novice practitioner. Fortunately enough, their friend helped them face and fix everything.
𝐐𝐔𝐄𝐄𝐍 || After that, they decided to go back to studying. Once enough knowledge is collected, the witch feels confident enough to create a spell themselves: a protection spell jar. They study properties of plants, crystals and colours to help them achieve their objective.
𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆 || After the initial hardship and having researched thoroughly, our novice witch puts what they’ve learnt into practice. Unlike the first time, this spell is successful!
Now, this was a lengthy post. Nonetheless, I hope you enjoyed reading this! I hope everything was clear – if not, feel free to hop in the comment section with your question.
That being said, I wish you a lovely rest of the day/night!
Sybil
Footnotes
¹ Google Dictionary
² B. Wen, "Holistic Tarot"
³ Merriam-Webster Dictionary
⁴ Google Dictionary
⁵ Google Dictionary
⁶ Google Dictionary
Resources
1. Tom Benjamin: Reading the Courts
2. Tom Benjamin: Court Cards - A Reliable System!
3. Lightwands Tarot: Quick Guide to Court Cards
4. My list of Tarot resources (Docs)
The pictures of the RWS deck that I have used can be found on Wikipedia.
Now that we know what a Lararium is, it is time to start making your own. Let us see how to go about doing that, shall we?
1. Find inspiration
The Internet will be your best friend. In order to find inspiration, I would personally recommend searching for Lararia from Pompeii or Herculaneum (due to the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 CE, these archaeological sites show perfect examples of Ancient Roman shrines, untouched by time).
You may want to select the Lararia that draw your attention the most and put them all either in a moodboard or in a Pinterest board. You will look at these pictures frequently, so keeping them all in one place might come in handy.
2. Draw your project
Start your project by drawing the Lararium you would like to make. It will take quite some creativity from you, so take your time with it and keep brainstorming until you are satisfied with your sketch. This is mine:
3. Start planning
Now is the time to figure out the measurements of your project and, after that, collect the supplies you will need. Me, I had to gather some wood, glue, acrylics, paper, a ruler and a pencil. As for the measurements...
4. Cutting process
Shoutout to my grandfather who helped me with this process.
Take your time to cut all of the pieces of your project and sand them down, if needed. Be particularly mindful when working with wood.
5. Assemble your shrine
Glue all the pieces together. You can use hot glue, vinyl glue or similar solutions depending on your preference.
6. Take care of the details
Time to colour your Lararium! After all, Romans did love colourful things (just look at any house in Pompeii). The palette is really up to you and your preference. Me, I will go for earthy tones.
Also, remember to print a picture of the domestic gods so that you can glue it on your shrine! In alternative, you can also attempt to painting it yourself.
And voilà! There you have your personal Lararium!
I hope that you liked this "DIY" and that you found this post informative! If searching for further readings, check out the "IV. Resources" section.
- Silly Sybil
🌿 Posted in honour of my twin Lares. 🌿
➳ vRoma /Lararium
➳ Nova Roma /Lararium
➳ Nova Roma /Making a Lararium
➳ Ad Maiora Vertite /Suppellettili Sacre
➳ Ritus Romanus: Make an offering to your Gods (pdf)
➳ Saturnia Tellus /Il mistero dei larari d'argento naufragati a Comacchio: sono doni di Augusto?
➳ Viotti E., "La via romana agli dèi"
➳ Orr D. G., "Domestic Roman Religion"
➳ Flower H. I., "The Dancing Lares & the Serpent in the Garden"
I have been a Tarot reader since 2019. Yet not once was I told of the existence of different Tarot systems, if not in early 2023 (when I officially started studying Marseille-based decks). That is because, being an Rider-Waite-Smith reader surrounded by Rider-Waite-Smith resources, I had never even assumed there could be different systems out there.
I guess you could say that this is the beauty of learning: the more you learn, the more yu question everything and (if you are lucky) the more you find out that what you used to take for granted should not have been taken for granted at all.
The objective of this blog is to illustrate the main differences between two of the most popular Tarot systems: the Tarot de Marseille (shortened, TdM) and the Rider-Waite-Smith Tarot (shortened, RWS). To do so, I have decided to divide this post into three “chapters”. First and foremost, we are going to take a look at the history of Tarot and the origin of both types of deck: this way, we will be able to better understand the differences that gave birth to the two systems. Secondly, I will be discussing how to tell a TdM-based deck from an RWS one. Lastly, I will indeed explain how the two systems work differently when it comes to divination.
I have purposefully decided not to include Aleister Crowley’s Thoth Tarot (which would be the third most popular Tarot system), due to my lack of knowledge on the subject.
One disclaimer I feel like adding is the following: not everybody is going to agree with what I have to say, and that is fine. Matter of fact, Tarot is heavily based on personal preference and personal beliefs: there is no Tarot reader that reads the same way another does. For this reason not only are there going to be cartomancers who claim that there is no thing such as “different Tarot systems”, but there will eventually also be Marseille readers just like myself who claim that there are many more differences between TdM and RWS (that I might have omitted). Still, each and every point of view is valid and should as such be respected.
Without further ado, let us get started.
Chapter 1 - History
For the sake of staying on topic, I will only provide you with a summarised history of Tarot. For a further reading, I recommend you to visit Tarot Heritage.
Games based on playing cards were most probably imported from China to the Islamic world in the last few centuries of the Middle Ages. Such decks (called Naibes) were later on distributed by Mameluks to Europe: thus, the Minor Arcana (and their four suits) were born.
We will run into the birth of a fifth suit (the now-called Major Arcana, which were then named “Trionfi”) only in 1425 circa, when duke Filippo Maria Visconti of Milan decided to commission a Tarot deck. He had asked specifically for representations of Christian allegories, including values (Strength, Temperance) and temptations (the Devil).
The deck we have just mentioned, the Visconti-Sforza Tarot, is the ancestor of the Tarot de Marseille (both the iconography and the structure of the Italian deck seem to have passed the trial of time). In fact, sheets of uncut cards dating to the first years of the 16th century have been found in Northern Italy and they might just have been the first ever decks to have been distributed to the common folk. Around the mid-16th century, Marseille is going to become the most important center of production of Tarot decks: for this reason, the decks printed here will be called “Tarot de Marseille” or “Marseille Tarot”.
Eventually, with time, the production of Tarot decks will cease in most European countries (Italy being an exception) in favor of more simple suit designs and a smaller amount of cards (we are talking about the ancestors of Poker decks, that is). Only occultists will keep on using Tarot decks, mainly for divination purposes (an honorable mention is Jean-Baptiste Alliette, Etteila).
Things will change in 1909, when former Golden Dawn member Arthur Edward Waite will publish his own Tarot deck, drawn by Pamela Colman Smith and later on distributed by the Rider company. Shortly after that, Waite will also write “The Pictorial Key to Tarot”, a “guidebook” to his deck. The creation of this deck is revolutionary to say the least: the Minor Arcana are now scenic (they represent people and stories, which makes the interpretation process easier. To this day, the RWS deck remains a worldwide success.
Now that we have covered the history of both the Marseille and the Rider-Waite-Smith Tarots, there are a couple of final considerations that we must address:
The two decks, having been created in different time periods, are influenced by different philosophies (TdM is heavy on Christian, alchemical and Pythagorean themes; RWS, on the other hand, mixes together Christian and Esoteric elements). Nonetheless, we do have to keep in mind that the Marseille Tarot was taken as inspiration for the RWS deck (and this is the reason why, even though we are talking about different systems, they still have a lot in common).
While the Rider-Waite-Smith deck was created specifically as a divination tool and has an “official guidebook” written by A. E. Waite, the Marseille Tarot was created as a game (thus, not only does it lack a guidebook, but for centuries it was not used as a divination tool at all).
The Tarot de Marseille slowly became the Poker playing cards deck, so there is a strong connection between the two.
Chapter 2 - Differences within the structure
Now that we have discussed the history behind the two systems, we should also take a look at the structure. The objective of this part is to answer the question "How do I know if I'm looking at a Tarot de Marseille/Rider-Waite-Smith deck when I see one?".
The main difference between the two decks is in the Major Arcana; specifically, in the position of the following cards: the Strength and the Justice. Tarot de Marseille-based decks will, in fact, be characterized by the Justice in the eighth position ("VIII. Justice/La Justice") and the Strength in the eleventh ("XI. Strength/La Force"). These two cards will be swapped with time, to better fit the Qabbala (which many occultists used as a guide to interpret the Major Arcana). Consequently, in Rider-Waite-Smith decks, the Strength will be placed in the eighth position while the Justice holds the eleventh position.
Furthermore, a deck can be considerable "Marseille" when the Minor Arcana are not scenic (when the Minor Arcana are pips, that is, and they only show the element of the suit repeated as many times as the number of the card). Rider-Waite-Smith decks can, too, have non-scenic Minor Arcana. However, in this case the pips are not mandatory (the same cannot be said about the Marseille Tarot, since the pips play a major role in interpretation).
So, to summarize this paragraph:
Tarot de Marseille: VIII. Justice; XI. Strength; non-scenic Minor Arcana pips (mandatory).
Rider-Waite-Smith: VIII. Strength; XI. Justice; either scenic or non-scenic Minor Arcana.
Chapter 3.1 - Differences within the systems: interpretation
Finally, we get to the most important part of this blog: how do all of these historical and structural differences translate into a divination context?
First, let us describe the differences that have to do with interpretation and card-meanings.
As we have said at the end of "Chapter 1 - History", even though the RWS and the TdM systems are different in many ways, they do have a lot in common. This is the reason why the Major Arcana are read almost identically in both systems. An exception, in this case, would be the "VI. The Lovers/L'Amoreux" card, which Marseille readers tend to interpret as "choosing" rather than "being in a loving relationship" (even though recent debates would argue otherwise).
As mentioned before, the very big difference between the two systems lies in the way the reader interprets the Minor Arcana. In this case, I need to stress again the fact that Tarot de Marseille does not have an official guidebook. Hence, there are no official/set meanings of the cards. This is not much of a problem when discussing the Major Arcana, since we can decrypt their message via iconography; the same process cannot be applied to the pips. Thus, we have to come up with another key to the interpretation. There are many ways to interpret pips, which can be used separately or together. Here, I will describe the two most-popular ones:
In the majority of the cases, the key to interpreting pips is numerology. By adding together the meaning of the numbers to the characteristics of the suit, the reader can come up with some quite interesting meanings for each Arcana. This method draws a lot inspiration from traditional cartomancy (it is not uncommon for a Marseille reader to use playing cards' number meanings). Let me provide you with an example: the 2 of Pentacles. 2s stand for duality, balance, partnerships. Pentacles is the suit revolving around finances and money. 2 of Pentacles must, in this case, stand for a business partnership.
Another key to interpret pips is the Open Reading method. By using this method, Tarot readers let intuition and imagination take over, coming up with brand-new meanings for each reading. In his book about Tarot, Yoav Ben-Dov suggests that the 8 of Pentacles can be seen as a building where each employee must stick to their assigned role.
At a first glance, you will see that there are no established meanings no matter which way you interpret pips (you will always discover more number meanings to apply to your readings, let alone using the Open Reading method). The same cannot be said about RWS' scenic Minor Arcana, since you can come up with your own meanings only to an extent (due to the fact that there is already a set meaning, both in "The Pictorial Key to Tarot" and iconographically).
Last but not least, there is a slight difference between the RWS suit of Swords and the TdM suit of Swords. While the first one revolves around heartbreak, difficulties and problems, the second one focuses on the mind, academic studies and thought-process. Let me provide you, once again, with an example: the 3 of Swords. First, let us interpret it "the Marseille way": 3 is growth, creativity and fertilization; Swords revolve around the academic world; hence, the 3 of Swords represents an idea that is growing and is quickly drawing our attention and effort (or, at least, that is how I would interpret it). If we are to interpret the same card "the RWS way", we would necessarily have to talk about heartbreak and/or a disappointing emotional connection.
Chapter 3.2 - Differences within systems: reading
Not only are there differences meaning-wise between the two decks, but there also are some differences in the way one usually does a reading.
On many Marseille Tarot-focused books, you will find that readers tend not to use pre-made spreads (very popular in the RWS world). In fact, it is much more common for a Marseille reader to draw as many cards as needed and connect them to one another in order to formulate a response without looking at a spread at all. Many of them do so because they feel that each card must support one another to build a complete meaning and they do not have a strong-enough meaning alone (this is why many Marseille readers also tend not to draw just one card of the day). However, as everything in Tarot, this is more of a rule of thumb rather than a rule. Other Marseille readers might feel comfortable using pre-made spreads just as much as their RWS counterparts.
Lastly, many "bilingual" readers (who read both RWS and Marseille, that is) tend to say that Marseille readings are very straight-forward and condensed, while RWS readings can be much more complex and articulated.
Epilogue
There is a lot to say about the differences between RWS and Marseille Tarots. The ones I have included here are, in my opinion, the most important ones. Both worlds are ever-so fascinating and both journeys can be equally rewarding.
I would like to end this blog by doing a metaphor: Tarot systems are just like languages. Languages sound, act and perform differently, just like Tarot systems. There are some "languages" that we might feel more comfortable speaking in and others that we might just never learn, but no language is "better" than the other. There might be a language you prefer to read poetry in and another to read novels in, just like I might prefer using Marseille for pragmatic readings and RWS to explore the complexity of the Great Mystery. You can "speak both systems", or you can decide to only "speak" one.
At the end of the day, though, what really matters is communicating no matter the language.
Resources
Forum discussions
➢ Forum post on differences
➢ Reddit post on differences
➢ Tumblr blog
YouTube videos
➢ The Simple Tarot Video
➢ Wolf of Coins Video
➢ Hummingbird Tarot Video
➢ Tom Benjamin Video
➢ Tom Benjamin: Pip vs. TdM
➢ Antithesis: Just one system (TIERRA: Princess of Wands)
Books
➢ Jodorowsky, A; Costa, M. "The Way of Tarot"
➢ Ben-Dov, Y. "The Marseille Tarot Revealed"
➢ Morsucci, A; Aloi, A. "Tarot of Marseille: A Guide to Interpretation"
➢ Elias, C. "Towards the Art of Reading"
➢ Elias, C. "Read Like the Devil: Marseille Tarot"
