AUTHOR’S NOTE: The five-card French Cross spread (traditionally known as the tirage en croix) is one of my favorite smaller layouts because it reveals what needs to be known about a situation without being overly analytical. It provides a slightly different level of detail than my customary five-card line, and through constant use I’ve tweaked its position meanings to be less prescriptive.

The four “arms” of the cross typically flow from left-to-right and then top-to-bottom. As I learned it, Card #1 at the left is commonly seen as the “positive” aspects of the matter while Card #2 at the right shows more “negative” factors. Card #3 at the top offers advice for the querent and Card #4 at the bottom reveals the outcome. The fifth card in the center can either be drawn randomly as an indication of more general or longer-range consequences, or calculated as the “quintessence” of the other four by summing their face values and reducing the total to a number that will identify an associated trump card as the high-level summary of the forecast.

The concept of “positive” and “negative” interpretation has become something of a sticking point for modern readers who aim to provide constructive guidance for their sitters. I’ve already changed the “crossing” card in the Celtic Cross spread to convey “major motivators” influencing the querent’s circumstances (either obstacles or opportunities, and sometimes both in a single card), so I decided to bring the same approach to the French Cross using the correlation between the two horizontal cards.

Consequently, I now consider the left-hand position to represent an opening the seeker can exploit in addressing the matter, while the right-hand position is focused more on challenges that can also offer a motivating “window of opportunity.” This creates a “best-case scenario” that still acknowledges the work that must be done to integrate these options into a seamless whole.

The top card I interpret as showing how the differences between Cards #1 and #2 can be reconciled, and the bottom card as the results of that reconciliation, keeping in mind the range of experience depicted by all four cards. This model taps into the same inspiration that underlies my recent “functional dimension” paradigm in spread design: Cards #1 and #2 comprise a stage-setting phase that shows what is “in play” in the matter; Card #3 introduces a catalyst that impels the double-ended potential toward enactment; and Card #4 indicates zeroing in on the pivotal “target” that is acquired by this interactive thrust.

The fifth card I choose to calculate as a numerical essence, but on the site where I studied the spread the author pulled the card randomly and calculated a sixth card to be placed outside the pattern. Personally, I like to see the “quintessence” in the thick of things since that’s where it originates as a numerical (and therefore philosophical and archetypal) extension. Since it represents a broad overview of the situation, I’ve just decided that I will treat it as signifying “external factors” influencing the subject of the reading.