top of page
Search
Dr.T

The Chariot that bears a human soul

It's taken me a while to 'get' this card. It seemed like it ought to be easy as the meanings/keywords assigned to the card (for the Waite/Smith deck at least) are fairly consistent.

  • Control, willpower, success, action, determination (Biddy Tarot)

  • Success, determination, willpower, control, self-discipline, focus (Labyrinthos)

  • Drive, will power, direction, ambition, confidence, victory, success (Tarot Elementals)

But what would be the archetype behind these keywords?


I needed to look a little deeper. But then it just got confusing! Was the chariot stationary or moving? It is sometimes depicted full of energy, sometimes at rest, sometimes immovable. At times the charioteer is depicted in control but other times seems to be just hanging on. ...and what to make of the Waite card? Waite fully accepts the debunking of the tarot/Egyptian connection and has little more than contempt for Gébelin yet includes a blatant connection to Egypt by instructing Smith to depict the chariot attached to two sphinx.


Let's have a look at a couple of alternate Chariot cards while I ponder where to begin!


The Light Seers Tarot by Chris-Anne


Definitely shows speed. But the Charioteer is not (at least not obviously) the one in control, despite the quote from the guidebook (below).


"I choose who I am becoming, and I run toward it with conviction and consistent motion." Chris-Anne from The Guidebook


Tarot of The New Vision by Lo Scarabeo (Author), Pietro Alligo (Author), Raul Cestaro (Illustrator)


A look from behind, similar to Vice-Versa, offers a more disturbing insight into the Chariot. Triumph and success often comes at someone else's loss. Here the victory results in the 'losers' being reduced to slaves.




Tarot Z by Alejandro Colucci / Jaymi Elford


Very, very, immovable!


In this card the swift action and momentum is all in the past. The military did their part but "victory" belongs to the undead.



Steampunk Tarot by Barbara Moore / Aly Fell


Certainly a full head of steam and potential energy. But is the Chariot moving?


"Despite any concerns you may have, I am in control of this situation" Barbara Moore from The Guidebook


...and then there's the Rider-Waite-Smith Chariot.


Why the two sphinx?


That's the place to start, and to understand that we're going to have to delve into the history of the card (and Philosophy is going to pop up a little early this time!).


The Chariot and an actual Egyptian connection.


While there is no (academic) doubt that tarot cards:

  1. originated in Italy during the 15th century

  2. have no direct historical connection with Egypt

that is not to say there is an absence of justified Egyptian influence. Symbols and ideas can be traced across time and are often incorporated within new cultures. The Chariot is one such occasion and Waite's inclusion of the two sphinx makes perfect sense ... but it's a bit of a journey to understand why.


Waite doesn't have a lot to say in the Pictorial Guide to the Tarot. A very brief

that the question of the sphinx is concerned with a Mystery of Nature and not of the world of Grace, to which the charioteer could offer no answer

does not go a long way to understanding the card or the sphinx significance.


For that we have to go back to an older deck the "Tarot of Marseille"

In the Marseille decks we see the same cube chariot as depicted in the Waite deck but with a few differences.


In the 1650 deck (by Jacques Viéville) the chariot is pulled by two creatures (possibly horses) that have human heads


In the 1760 deck (by Nicholas Conver, pictured) the horse pulling the chariot have no hind legs. Rather, they are merged into the chariot.


The reason for these depictions will become obvious when we travel back even further in time. The work of Plato was very likely the inspiration for these depictions.


Phaedrus and the Allegory of The Chariot.


Plato (through his mouthpiece Socrates) tells the tale of The Chariot in the Phaedrus:


As I said at the beginning of this tale, I divided each soul into three -- two horses and a charioteer; and one of the horses was good and the other bad: the division may remain, but I have not yet explained in what the goodness or badness of either consists, and to that I will proceed.


The right-hand horse is upright and cleanly made; he has a lofty neck and an aquiline nose; his colour is white, and his eyes dark; he is a lover of honour and modesty and temperance, and the follower of true glory; he needs no touch of the whip, but is guided by word and admonition only.


The other is a crooked lumbering animal, put together anyhow; he has a short thick neck; he is flat-faced and of a dark colour, with grey eyes and blood-red complexion; the mate of insolence and pride, shag-eared and deaf, hardly yielding to whip and spur.


The tale goes on, but in brief shows "the soul is portrayed as a compound of three components: a charioteer (Reason), and two winged steeds: one white (spiritedness, the irascible element, boldness) and one black (the appetitive element, concupiscence, desire). The goal is to ascend to divine heights — but the black horse poses problems.

The chariot image arguably supplies a better tripartite model of the human psyche than Freud's divisions of ego, id and super-ego, However the chariot itself is just the beginning; the story of its journeys is a revealing allegory of the spiritual or philosophical life." - Uebersax, John S. Plato's Chariot Allegory. Works on Psychology (John Uebersax). February 2007. Web. Accessed 29/11/2021.


It's worth reading the entire Allegory and analysis for insights into The Chariot but the purpose here is to demonstrate ideas as part of a historical chain. The Allegory did not originate with Plato. It is a retelling of a tale that comes from Egypt or Mesopotamia.


Given that,

  1. the Chariot allegory was almost certainly the major influence for the design of the Marseille cards

  2. the connection Waite wants to draw between the card's meaning and the 'Riddles of the Sphinx' as they relate to nature and the human condition, then;

Waite's justification for using the two sphinx starts to come into focus.


The strange creatures of the Tarot of Marseille

Returning to the 1650 Viéville deck and applying Plato's allegory we can see that "the meaning of this is that the human will is controlling the animal drives."


On both Viéville and the 1760 Conver decks the creatures have no hind legs; rather, they are merged with the chariot. "This symbolizes that the horses and the chariot cannot be viewed separately. The chariot represents the body of man (vehicle of the soul) and the horses represent the animal instincts, which we experience through the body – a consequence of our animal origin." - Anne-Marie


So far we have gathered a lot of information about the image:

  • Its relationship to the three aspects of mankind

  • the chariot itself as integral (the body, the conveyance)

  • the solving of the sphinx riddles

  • an allegory that goes back (indirectly) to Egyptian times.

Many of the keywords listed at the start of the blog seem far more fitting when considered alongside this information. However, despite this clearer view of the card we still don't have a specific archetype.


Who is our Charioteer?


The Pictorial Guide to the Charioteer


Given Waite's use of the two sphinx seems well justified, the Pictorial Guide seems a worthy place to look for more insights. Despite Waite's overly brief prose, the Pictorial Guide provides a list of things we ought and ought not understand about The Chariot.


From the guide we learn the charioteer is not hereditary royalty and he is not priesthood.


The charioteer is one of us, an everyday person who has risen through the ranks by skill and talent alone.


We are also informed:

  • the question of the sphinx is concerned with a Mystery of Nature ...

  • that the planes of his [sic*] conquest are manifest or external ...

  • that the liberation which he [sic] effects may leave himself in the bondage of the logical understanding

  • that the tests of initiation through which he [sic] has passed in triumph are to be understood physically or rationally

  • that if he [sic] came to the pillars of that Temple between which the High Priestess is seated, he could not open the scroll called Tora, nor if she questioned him could he answer.

That offers us some insights. Combined with what we have learned so far we can infer:


The charioteer acts 'in the world' and the actions are understandable (do not rely on intuition or spiritual knowledge).


The charioteer acts from experience (learned knowledge) not from the higher learning as might be given by the High Priestess.


The charioteer (physically) puts into play things that will work without the use or necessity of logical explanation (which it is unlikely the charioteer could give).


Wow! The Charioteer is a pragmatist.




*sic; a word that appears odd or erroneous but quoted exactly as it stands in the original. In this case the unnecessary use of the masculine. The Charioteer was often depicted as female.


On the funnier side of Google Search


More for a laugh than any form of serious research I typed 'Idealist' and 'Pragmatist' into a Google search. I wasn't really expecting much but the page I hit was The Pragmatic-Idealist on The Chariot Group page. Maybe the universe has a funny bone! Hmmm, decided I better read the page!


Pragmatic-Idealism represent the two components of a journey.


Being pragmatic, the path, is how we navigate to the destination, the ideal outcome. This path of pragmatism, like any path on a journey is made up of a series of choices. Perhaps a longer route is required because of the steepness of the terrain or because of the resources we have available, i.e., will we walk, drive or fly?


Occasionally, we may be delayed and need to layover due to weather. Regardless, it is our approach that should be modified, not the destination. - Rick Thomas


Nothing to do with Tarot, but absolutely nails our charioteer.


The Chariot is the conveyance, the means, by which the charioteer puts things into action in the world. The Emperor may know the why (logic), the Hierophant may know the greater reason (faith), the Lovers may hold the goal (ideal) but it is the Chariot that makes it happen.


John Dewey (1859 – 1952)


Dewey is considered the father of Pragmatism. Dewey believed that a pragmatic approach could be applied to morals and politics, not just manual labour. Dewey argued that philosophy had become an overly technical and intellectualistic discipline, divorced from assessing the social conditions and values dominating everyday life. He sought to reconnect philosophy with the mission of education-for-living - Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy


Practical Idealism is a term that was coined by Dewey (and later used by Ghandi) in that while the Pragmatist must hold an ideal (the goal) it is equally immoral to:

  • discard ideals in the name of expediency

and

  • to refuse to make the compromises necessary to realise those high ideals

Ideals ought not be tossed aside just because the path is difficult. However, perhaps the methods being employed to reach that ideal need to be changed? Just because you cannot drive to a particular destination does not mean you cannot reach it.


The Pragmatist Chariot - An Archetype


The charioteer put things into action in the world. It is always moving forward towards an ideal. It is always prepared to compromise in the now, if doing so offers a way forward towards the ideal.


The archetype is neutral. We see the movement and the type of movement but nothing more.


The charioteer's actions might be seen as worthy when the ideal is worthy. How we might judge an ideal is a moral dilemma (and not one I'll wade into here). At best, we might say one needs to examine the ideals they strive for carefully to ensure they truly are worthy as an end.


I say the charioteer's actions might be seen as worthy because the pragmatist is a consequentialist; that is, they put the goal (ends) before the means of attaining the goal. Compromise is often necessary, but where an ideal (goal) is the justification for the compromise there is the risk that the pragmatist condones horrific acts in order to attain an ideal.


The pragmatist must always question if the specific end really does justify the means. Of course, if the ideal (end) isn't the justification for action it's hard to imagine what is.


The Charioteer will get things done. A very powerful archetype. But take another look at the Chariot cards pictured at the start of this blog, with both the positive and negative aspects in mind. They paint both a wondrous and scary landscape.


The Philosophers' Journey (Cards I to VII - a recap)


To have the courage to doubt and rebuild a world without bias or preconceptions (I The Magician).


To share and empower others through knowledge without creating false dichotomies or artificial hierarchies (II The High Priestess).


To nurture and care for all (III The Empress), to bring balance through wisdom and reason (IV The Emperor), to have belief, faith and value (V The Hierophant) then (VI Lovers) to be able to combine these in a single covenant and act out of love and for unity (completion).


To put all this into action, in the world, and strive towards these ideals (VII The Chariot)



Thanks for reading

Dr.T


Now in search of Strength.





152 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


bottom of page