The Influence of Etteilla &
His School on Mathers & Waite
By James W. Revak
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 SEs 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 Waites 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 Waites DMs were apparently original or derived from sources other than those which were selected as source authorities for the SE.
Results indicated that of Waites 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 9Matching Divinatory Meanings from the School of Etteilla, Mathers & Waite
Percentages Major Arcana Minor Arcana Selected Card Combinations All DMs Strong
Modest Matches Strong Matches Modest Matches Strong Matches Modest Matches Strong Matches Modest Matches Mathers DMs(a) Matching those of the SE(b) 1 2 48 5 38 4 Waites 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
(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.
One might speculate that the subset of Waites 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 SEs DMs.
Table 10Divinatory 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
Total DMs from Waite, the SE, and Mathers are the
same as those of Table 9 (above).
NEXT PREVIOUS CONTENTS REFERENCES E-MAIL AUTHOR HOME
Copyright © 2000 James W. Revak. All rights reserved. Version 1.1 (8/19/00).