FOOTNOTES:
[220] He says that the name is pure Egyptian, and that it is composed of the word Tar, signifying road, way; and the word Ro, Ros, Rog, which means royal: thus we have Tarog—Tarocchi—the Royal Road. By such a road as this Mons. Court de Gebelin seems to have arrived at much of his "recondite knowledge of things unknown."—See his Monde Primitif, huitième livraison, Dissertations mêlées: "Du jeu de tarots, où l'on traite de son origine, où l'on explique ses allégories, et où l'on fait voir qu'il est la source de nos cartes modernes à jouer."—Tome i, pp. 365-94. 4to, Paris, 1781.
[221] "Une dernière citation achevra de démontrer que les cartes et les naibi sont bien la même chose; le Traité de Théologie de Saint Antoine, évêque de Florence en 1457, porte: Et idem videtur de chartis vel naibis; et encore dans un autre endroit du même ouvrage: De factoribus et venditoribus alearum et taxillarum et chartarum et naiborum."—Précis Historique et Explicatif sur les Cartes à jouer, prefixed to the specimens of cards published under the title of 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales, du XIVme au XVIIIme Siècle,' by the Society of Bibliophiles Français. Imperial 4to, Paris, 1844.
[222] The word Tarot has been supposed to be a corruption of Tarocchi. Cards marked on the back with lines crossing lozenge-wise, and with little spots, are called Cartes Tarotées; and in France card-makers appear to have been formerly called Tarcotiers. Menestrier conceives that it was from these "lignes frettées en forme de rezeuil" cards were named Tarcuits, and Cartes Tarautées. He says that Tare,—defaut, déchet, tache,—signifies properly a hole, un trou; and he derives it from the Greek τερειν, to bore. From Tare he also derives Tariff, a ruled book for entering the duties on goods. Mons. Duchesne says that Tarot "vient en effet de l'Italien tarrochio, dont à la vérité nous ignorons encore la signification."
[223] Mons. Duchesne thus accounts for those cards being called Atous: "Ces cartes sont dites a tutti, à tous, c'est-à-dire supérieures à toute autre, et n'appartenant à aucune couleur." In other games at cards, the French Atout has the same meaning as the English Trump.
[224] The Empress is supposed to have been substituted for the Pope, who occurs in the old series of figures assumed by M. Duchesne to have been the original Tarocchi. In a similar manner, L'Amoureux is supposed to have been substituted for Apollo; the Chariot for Mars; the Capuchin or Hermit for Saturn; the Wheel of Fortune for Astrology; and Le Pendu for Prudence.
[225] The figures of two or three of the Atous are sometimes differently represented. In a pack now before me, inscribed "Cartes des Suisses," manufactured at Brussels, in No. 2, instead of Juno, there is a figure inscribed "Le 'Spagnol, Capitano Eracasse;" in No. 5, Bacchus supplies the place of Jupiter; and No. 16, which is inscribed "La Foudre," shows a tree struck by lightning, instead of a tower. In this set, the Fou is numbered 22. Tarots are generally about a fourth longer, and a little wider than English cards, and are usually coarsely coloured.
[226] Memorie spettanti alla storià della Calcografia, dal conte Leopold Cicognara. 8vo, Prata, 1831.—Cited in Duchesne's Précis Historique sur les Cartes à jouer, prefixed to the specimens of playing cards published by the Société des Bibliophiles Français.
[227] This book was written by the notorious Pietro Aretine. A second edition was published in 1589, and a third in 1651. The title of the last is 'Le Carte Parlanti; Dialogo di Partenio Etiro; [the anagram of Pietro Aretine] nel quale si tratta del Giuoco con moralità piacevole.'
[228] Though Mons. Duchesne generally speaks of those cards as if it had been positively ascertained that they were painted by Jacquemin Gringonneur, we yet find the following salvo, in the Précis Historique: "Mais le fait de leur haute destination à l'usage d'un roi, ne repose que sur des conjectures incertaines; espérons qu'un jour quelque antiquaire favorisé par un heureux hasard aura peut-être le bonheur de changer nos doutes en certitude."
[229] The Abbé's notice of those cards is by no means precise; and when he speaks of the four monarchies contending with each other, it is evident that he had either an imperfect recollection of them, or that he supposed some old numeral cards, of four suits, to have belonged to the same series.—"J'ai vu chez M. de Ganières un jeu de cartes (je ne sais s'il étoit complet) telles qu'elles étoient dans leur origine. Il y avoit un pape, des empereurs, les quatre monarchies, qui combattoient les uns contre les autres: ce qui a donné naissance à nos quatre couleurs. Elles étoient longues de 7 à 8 pouces. C'est en Italie que cette belle invention a pris naissance dans le XIVe siècle."—Longueruana, tom, i, page 107.
[230] Materiali per servire alla storià dell' origine e de' progressi dell' incisione in rame e in legno, col. da Pietro Zani. 8vo, Parma, 1802. The author's observations relating to cards are to be found at pp. 78-84, and pp. 149-93.
[231] There was also a series of the same subjects engraved in the sixteenth century.
[232] Bartsch, Peintre-Graveur, 8vo, Vienna, 1812.—His notices of old cards are to be found in vol. x, pp. 70-120; and vol. xiii, pp. 120-38.
[233] "Singer fait remarquer, avec raison, qu'on n'a pas d'exemple de cartes à jouer d'aussi grandes dimensions, qu'il n'y a ici des figures sans pièces numérales, et que, d'ailleurs, les sujets ne sont pas ceux des tarots ordinaires. Il aurait pu ajouter que des gravures exécutées avec tant de soins, que les chefs-d'œuvre d'un art nouveau dont le premier mérite s'appréciait par la beauté de l'empreinte, n'ont pu être destinés à recevoir l'enluminure qui entre essentiellement dans la confection du jeu de cartes."—Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer, p. 18.
[234] Observations sur les Cartes à jouer.
[235] This subject is erroneously numbered, both in the Roman characters and in the cyphers, as has been previously observed.
[236] These cards were exhibited to the Antiquarian Society by Dr. Stukeley, in 1763. They were purchased in 1776, by Mr. Tutet, and on his decease, they were bought by Mr. Gough. In 1816 they were in the possession of Mr. Triphook, the bookseller.
[237] Mons. Duchesne expresses himself on this subject, as follows: "Les enseignes employées pour les couleurs out éprouvé beaucoup de variations: cœur, carreau, trèfle et pique sont les plus répandues; mais, en Italie et en Espagne, elles sont encore désignées par coupes, deniers, bâtons, épées. En Allemagne on dit rouge, grelots, glands et cert.[**"cert"?] Quelquefois, en conservant les cœurs, les deniers ont été remplacés par des grelots; puis des glands tiennent lieu des trèfles, et des feuilles de lierre remplacent les piques, dont elles ont la forme."—Observations sur les Cartes à jouer.
[238] Mons. Duchesne says that the mark which the French call Pique was called Capprel in Italy, from its resemblance to the fruit of the Caper.—Précis Historique, prefixed to Jeux de Cartes Tarots et Numérales, p. 11.
[239] Carte Parlanti, p. 57, edit. 1651.
[240] The name of Lancelot did not really appear on the Valet of Trèfle, in the time of Père Daniel; but from a passage in Daneau's 'Liber de Alea, ou Breve remontrance sur les jeux de Cartes et de Dez,' printed in 1579, he concluded,—and, in this instance, correctly,—that Lancelot was the old name. By a royal ordinance of 1619, the card-makers of France were required to put their names and devices upon the Valet of Trèfle; and, from this circumstance, he considers that the name of Lancelot was omitted.
[241] 'The Perpetual Almanac, or a Gentleman Soldier's Prayer-book, shewing how one Richard Middleton was taken before the Mayor of the city he was in for using cards in church, during Divine Service.'
[242] Daniel, 'Mémoire sur l'Origine du jeu de Piquet, trouvé dans l'histoire de France, sous le règne de Charles VII,' printed in the Journal de Trévoux, for May, 1720. A summary of this memoir is given by Peignot, who questions the correctness of Daniel's explanations, but yet does not venture to say what they really are—mere gratuitous conceits. It would seem that the French consider the invention of Piquet as a point of national honour, and that the native author who should call it in question, would render himself liable to a "suspicion of incivism."
[243] "Ces cartes rarissimes faisaient partie d'un jeu de cartes numérales gravées sur bois sous notre roi Charles VII, vers 1425."
[244] Duchesne, 'Observations sur les Cartes à jouer,' in the Annuaire Historique, pp. 204-7, 1837; and Leber, 'Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer,' pp. 6-8, and p. 72, 1842.
Mons. Leber insists that these names confirm the testimony of Covelluzzo—previously quoted at page 23—that the game of cards was brought into Viterbo, in 1379, and that it came from the country of the Saracens. Mons. Leber even calls the figures "Gallo-Sarrazines," evidently wishing it to be supposed that they had been copied from a Saracen or Arabic type.—The following is a summary of his notions of the changes made in the characters, when cards were first introduced amongst Christian nations: "Le roi de Carreau de notre jeu de Charles VII porte le nom de Coursube, prétendu héros sarrazin dont parlent les vieux romanciers; et le nom d'Apollin, inscrit à côté du roi de Pique, est celui d'une idole imaginaire également attribuée aux Sarrazins.
"... On a dû d'abord, à quelques exceptions près, remplacer les idoles par des figures compatibles avec les dogmes et la morale du christianisme. Le pape, chef de l'Eglise chrétienne, a pu être substitué à Vichnou; l'ermite à un dervis; la maison Dieu à une pagode; et, quant aux symboles généraux, tels que le soleil, la mort, le jugement, auxquels sont associés le bâteleur et le bouffon ou fou, il a suffi d'y attacher un nouveau sens mystique sans rien changer aux images. Les mêmes substitutions s'opèrent dans les portraits des princes et des héros, figures d'un autre ordre qui sont passées exclusivement, avec leur suite, dans l'économie du jeu Français."—Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer, p. 72.—Mons. Leber appears here to narrate a dream which he had after rocking himself asleep on his Arabian hobby-horse.
[246] This book was sold, together with others from the Cathedral Library of Peterborough, by Mr. Hodgson, 192 Fleet street, Dec. 13-18, 1841. In his catalogue, No. 1492, it is thus described: "Sermones M. Vincentii (wants end)."
[247] "L'image du valet de pique porte avec elle une preuve de la nationalité ardennoise; Ogier, comme tous les descendants de Saint Hubert d'Ardennes, avait le privilège de guérir l'hydrophobie et d'en préserver.... L'action est réciproque: le chien ne suit pas, il s'élance pour implorer protection et assistance, et le neveu de Saint Hubert accorde son intervention.... Il est à remarquer que le corps du chien est en partie caché par l'escarpement du terrain, caractéristique du pays des Ardennes."—Eléméns Carlovingiens linguistiques et littéraires (par J. Barrois), p. 265, 4to, Paris, 1846.
[248] "Le P. Daniel pose en fait que 'le nom du quatrième valet (le valet de trèfle) est inconnu, parce qu'il n'y a pas longtemps que les faiseurs de jeux de cartes l'ont aboli, en mettant leur nom à la place de celui de ce valet.' Il croit pourtant l'avoir trouvé dans le traité de Daneau, d'où il résultérait, selon lui, que c'était Lancelot. Si Daniel avait pu consulter les pièces du XVIe siècle, il n'aurait pas hasardé ce jugement conjectural; il aurait craint que sa conjecture ne fût pas exacte, parce que les noms des cartes ayant beaucoup varié, Lancelot pouvait n'être point celui du valet de trèfle du temps de l'auteur dont il s'appuie. Il n'aurait pas dit que les faiseurs de cartes ont aboli ce valet pour mettre leur nom à la place du sien, parce qu'il aurait appris que cette substitution de nom leur fût imposée par une ordonnance de Louis XIII, à laquelle ils ont dû se soumettre."—Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer, p. 32.
[249] Charles of Anjou, brother of St. Louis, received the investiture of the kingdom of Naples and Sicily, in 1265.
[250] "Le nom du valet de cœur me paroit extrèmement curieux; car il doit nécessairement rappeler le nom d'Erart de Valeri, le fameux compagnon de Charles d'Anjou, roi de Sicile, celui auquel les contemporains attribuoient en grande partie le gain de la bataille de Tagliacozza, dans laquelle périt Manfred. Nous pouvons donc croire que le jeu aura été fait en Sicile ou en Italie; car les quatre noms Lancelot, Roland, Ogier, et Valeri étoient également familiers aux souvenirs des Siciliens du XIVe siècle. J'ai dit un mot de cet Erard de Valery à l'article de Charles d'Anjou, dans mon Romancero François."
[251] Henry VII ascended the throne in 1485.—Mons. Duchesne observes that, of all the old cards preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi, only one displays a rose,—namely, a king. There is an old coat card, engraved on copper, in the print-room of the British Museum, which, like that alluded to by Mons. Duchesne, has a rose as the mark of the suit.
[252] See the prohibition against the importation of playing cards, in 1463; enacted by Parliament, in consequence of the complaints of the manufacturers and tradesmen of London and other parts of England, against the importation of foreign manufactured wares, which greatly obstructed their own employment, previously referred to at page 96.
[253] Mons. Leber, after having noticed Singer's objection to the so-called Tarocchi cards, from their size and want of numeral cards, thus proceeds: "Il aurait pu ajouter que des gravures exécutées avec tant de soins, que les chefs-d'œuvre d'un art nouveau, dont le premier mérite s'appréciait par la beauté de l'empreinte, n'ont pu être destinés à recevoir l'enluminure qui entre essentiellement dans la confection du jeu de cartes; et cette observation s'applique à plusieurs suites d'estampes du même genre et du même siècle, dont quelques-unes sont conservées au cabinet royal. Là, comme dans les collections de Londres et d'Allemagne, elles sont toutes en feuilles et en noir. Non-seulement l'étrangeté des signes distinctifs des couleurs, mais la forme même de ces gravures, repousserait l'idée d'une destination semblable à celle du jeu de cartes européen. Les unes arrondies en médaillons, rappellent le champ circulaire des cartes indiennes: d'autres couvrent un carré d'in-4o; les plus communes sont des carrés longs; mais au lieu des couleurs propres aux cartes à jouer, on n'y voit que des images d'oiseaux, de quadrupèdes, de fleurs, de fruits; ce sont des perroquets et des paons, des lièvres et des ours, des singes et des lions, des grenades, des roses, et tous autres objets dont le choix devait être purement arbitraire, quand il n'était pas l'expression d'un jeu nouveau."—Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer, p. 18.
[254] Those cards formerly belonged to a Mons. Volpato, and were purchased of him, for the Bibliothèque du Roi, in 1833. He received in exchange some cards of the same pack; and the set, completed with fac-simile drawings of such as were wanting, were recently in the possession of Messrs. Smith, of Lisle-street, Leicester-square, to whom they were sent by Mons. Volpato for sale.
[255] The third character in those coat cards cannot properly be called a Cavalier, and has indeed very little pretensions to the designation of Squire. The Knaves are evidently common foot-soldiers, such as were known in Italy by the name of Fanti.
[256] From the difficulty of giving in a wood-engraving those small letters with sufficient clearness, they are omitted in the annexed specimens. The numerals are also omitted, except in the Two of Pinks.
[257] Bartsch, Peintre-graveur, tom. x, pp. 70-6.—Singer, Researches into the History of Playing Cards, p. 45-6, also pp. 205-8.
[258] In the 'Catalogue Raisonné of the select Collection of Engravings of an Amateur' [Mr. Wilson] a full description is given of those cards, pp. 87-91. 4to, 1828.
[259] One of these cards, a Queen, is evidently copied from the Queen of Deer, but having a kind of flower as the mark of the suit, instead of a Deer. Those two Queens, so precisely the same in form, attitude, and costume, most certainly did not belong to the same pack.
[260] 'Deutsche Piquet-Karten aus den XV Iahrhunderte mit Trappola Blattern.' The use of the word Trappola by writers on the history of playing cards, without clearly explaining the sense in which they employ it, leads to much confusion. It properly signifies a game; which may be played with any kind of numeral cards consisting of four suits, whatever the marks may be. Breitkopf seems here to apply the term "Trappola Blattern" to cards which have Swords, Batons, Cups, and Money as the marks of the suits; in the same manner as the cards now in common use in this country are called by writers on the subject, French Piquet cards. It is never, however, supposed that the game depends in the least on the marks of the suits.
[261] From the time of the marriage of Joanna's sister, Catherine of Arragon, with Arthur, Prince of Wales, till about the time of her separation from his brother, Henry VIII, the pomegranate was frequently introduced as an ornament in the royal decorations and furniture of the English court.
[262] Those cards were purchased of Messrs. Smith, of Lisle street, who also supplied the Museum with the two sets of old Italian engravings, usually called Tarocchi cards.
[263] "Die Karte ist nach Wälscher Art in Spade, Coppe, Danari, (die aber hier als Granatäpfel vorgestellt sind,) und Bastoni getheilet."—Von Murr, Journal zur Kunstgeschicht, iier. Theil, s. 200.
[264] Breitkopf improperly calls those cards "Trappolier-Karte,"—Trappola cards. Aretine, in his 'Carte Parlanti,' makes a distinction between the game of Trappola, and that played with Tarocchi cards.
[265] "Il y a dans chaque couleur un roi, un officier supérieur ou capitaine nommé Ober, et un bas-officier, appelé Unter. On appelle encore de nos jours dans l'empire, où les mots français ne sont pas si en vogue, les officiers supérieurs oberleute, et les bas-officiers unterleute. Les Français ont substitué à la place de l'officier une dame, et à la place des bas-officiers des valets, ou des braves, comme Bullet les nomme. Le bas-officier des glands est nommé en Allemagne, der grosze mentzel, et celui de vert, der kleine mentzel; enfin, l'as porte le nom de daus."—Heineken, Idée générale d'une Collection complète d'Estampes, p. 239.
[266] "Sota. La tercera figura, que tiènen los naipes, la qual representa el infante, ò soldado. Dixose de la voz Italiana soto, que vale debaxo, porque vá despues de las figuras de Rey, y Caballo, que le son superiores."—In a superficial paper on old playing-cards, by the baron de Reiffenberg, printed in the 'Bulletins de l'Académie Royale des Sciences, des Lettres, et des Beaux-Arts de Belgique,' No. 10, 1847, the Sota is transformed into a female: "Dans les jeux de cartes espagnols, la dame et le valet étaient remplacés par le cavallo et la sota, le cavalier et la fille."
[267] Mons. Duchesne, is of opinion that the Marquis Girolamo's cards belonged to the same pack or set as the so-called Gringonneur cards preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi. If Millin's description, however, be correct, Mons. Duchesne is unquestionably wrong.
[268] Millin, Dictionnaire des Beaux Arts, tom. i, p. 201. Paris, 1806. Quoted by Peignot.—Jacobello del Fiore flourished about 1420.—A set of cards, "containing figures of the gods, with their emblematic animals, and figures of birds also," were painted for Philip Visconti, Duke of Milan, who died in 1447. Decembrio, in his life of this prince, in the 20th volume of the 'Rerum Italicarum Scriptores,' says that they cost fifteen hundred pieces of gold, and were chiefly executed by the prince's secretary, Martianus Terdonensis. From the context, it appears that they were not mere pictures, but were intended for some kind of game.—Aretine, in his 'Carte Parlanti,' speaks with admiration of a pack of cards painted by Jacopo del Giallo, a Florentine artist who flourished about 1540.
[269] It is but fair to observe here that the Dutch name for the suit which we call Spades, is Scop, a Shovel, or Spade; and that as this name has been evidently given to the suit from the mark bearing some resemblance to a spade, the same suit might have been called Spades by the English for the same reason. This objection, however, does not affect the conjecture with respect to Clubs. In the Nugæ Venales, printed in Holland, 1648, we meet with the following: "Query. Why are the Four Kings of cards, Diamonds, Trefoil, Hearts, and Spades—Rhombuli, Trifolii, Cordis, et Ligonis—always poor?—Answer. Because they are always at play; and play, according to the proverb, is man's perdition. Their state is also in other respects most miserable; for when through them much money is lost, they are condemned to the flames, and burnt like wizards." The modern Dutch names for the suits of French cards are Hart,—Heart; Ruyt, a lozenge-shaped figure, a diamond-shaped pane of glass,—Diamonds; Klaver, Clover, Trefoil,—Clubs; Scop, a Spade, Shovel, or Scoop,—Spades.
[270] Sharon Turner's History of England, vol. iii, p. 80.
[271] "Here begynneth a traetys callyde the Lordis flayle handlyde by the Bushoppes powre theresshere Thomas Solme."—Without date. At the end: "Prynted at Basyl by me Theophyll Emlos, undere the sygne of Sente Peters Kay."—16mo. In one passage Henry VIII is appealed to as then living.
[272] To the barn or grange of monasteries a chapel was frequently attached, which used to be attended on holidays by country people who lived at a distance from the parish church.
[273] 'The Poems of William Dunbar, now first collected, with notes and a memoir of his life, by David Laing,' vol. ii, p. 67, 1834.—In the notes to this edition, there are several references to the card-playing of James IV of Scotland. His majesty, it would seem, was accustomed to play with the "French Leich," John Damian, whom he afterwards promoted to the abbacy of Tungland. Damian, who broke his thigh in an attempt to fly from the top of Stirling castle, is the person ridiculed by Dunbar as the "Fenyet Friar of Tungland."
[274] A few single cards, apparently belonging to this pack, preserved in the British Museum, are ascribed to Hans Sebald Behaim.
[275] Those cards are the rarest of all Jost Amman's numerous works. The first title of the volume is "Jodoci Ammanni, civis Noribergensis Charta Lusoria, Tetrastichis illustrata per Janum Heinrichum Scroterum de Gustrou." Then follows a long explanatory title in German, and the imprint, "Gedruct zu Nüurnberg, durch Leonhardt Heussler, Anno, 1588." There is a copy of the work in the British Museum.
[276] Breitkopf, Ursprung der Spielkarten, s. 33.
[277] "Voy. les Voyages de Samuel Purchas; ceux de Thomas Herbert en Perse et dans plusieurs parties de l'Orient; le Suppl. t. ii, des Cérémonies relig., avec les figures de B. Picart, et la Pl. de la fête de Huly, t. i, 2e part. des mêmes Cérémonies, p. 138."
[278] "Notamment Exode, c. xxxix, v. 25."
[279] "Voy. D. Calmet, Dictionn. de la Bible, au mot Clochette."
[280] "Lalla Rookh, an oriental romance, by T. Moore."
[281] "Voy. Breitkopf, Ursprung der Spielkarten, p. 33, et la Pl. de Henri VI et de Wulphilde (d'après l'Archéologie, sauf erreur). Les mêmes figures, copiées par Jansen, se retrouvent t. i, de son Essai sur l'Origine de la Gravure en Bois et en Taille-douce. Paris, 1808, 2 vol. in-8. Le costume en a été évidemment rajeuni, mais il est hors de toute vraisemblance qu'on y ait supposé une parure de grelots étrangère au monument original."—Mons. Leber, in citing Breitkopf, spells his name with uniform inaccuracy.
[282] "Gough, d'après Stukeley, Archæologia, t. viii, p. 152; et Singer, p. 73."
[283] "La Fauconnerie de Guillaume Tardif, ch. x, p. 61; et les Oiseaux de Proie, par G. B., p. 122 du recueil de J. du Fouilloux, édit. de Paris, 1614, in-4, fig."
[284] "Quoiqu'on ait souvent traduit les mots crotalum et crusma,—κροταλον, κρωσμα,—par grelot, et réciproquement, on croit que les instruments ainsi nommés par les Grecs et les Romains n'étaient pas ce que nous appelons des grelots; et, en effet, la figure du grelot ne se retrouve dans aucun monument d'une antiquité bien établie. Voy. F. A. Lampe, De Cymbalis veterum, lib. i, cap. 4, 7, 8, et fig., pp. 26 et 44, Holl., pet. in-12."
[285] "Voy. les comp. 2 et 8 de la pl. 56 des Monuments de la Monarchie française, par Montfaucon."
[286] "Ibid. pl. 55, d'après une miniature d'un manusc. angl. du Xe siècle."
[287] "Hist. de la Maison de Montmorency.—Le Grand, Vie privée des Franç. tom. ii."
[288] "Sidonius Apollinaris, Epist. 9, p. 245 de l'édit. in-4 de Savaron. Ce commentateur allègue un passage de Prosper, lib. iii, cap. 17, de Vita contemplativa, où il est aussi question d'oiseaux et de chiens de chasse: 'Utuntur accipitribus ac saginatis canibus ad venatum.'"
[289] "Suivant l'opinion la plus généralement adoptée, et que partagèrent Velser, Duchesne, Fauchet, Du Tillet, Blondel, les frères de Sainte-Marthe, Spelman, le P. Menestrier et autres. Voy. le Traité de l'Origine des Armoiries, de ce dernier. Paris, 1679, in-12, pp. 53 et suiv."
[290] "Sentiment adopté par le président Hénault: 'Mathilde ... broda en laine un monument qu'on voit dans l'église de Bayeux, de l'expédition de son mari en Angleterre; la mort ne lui permit pas de l'achever.' (Hist. de Fr. sous les ann. 1067-74.)"
[291] "Voy. Fauconnerie de G. Tardif."
[292] Leber, Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer, pp. 80-4.
[293] There is every reason to believe that the suit of cards which we call Diamonds was not so named in consequence of the mark being mistaken for the symbol of a precious stone, but merely on account of its form. The Dutch call the same suit Ruyt, in consequence of its form being like a lozenge-shaped pane of glass. The Diamonds on cards are, in Northumberland, more especially amongst the colliers, frequently termed Picks, in consequence of the acute angular points being something like the Picks used in hewing coals. The Spanish name Oros appears to have been originally applied to the suit called by the Italians Denari or Danari, without the least reference to the French Carreaux.—The mistakes on this subject appear to be exclusively Mons. Leber's own.
[294] The probability is on the other side, namely, that the German Grün, or Leaf, was the original of the French Pique. No French cards hitherto discovered are of so early a date as those which have Bells, Hearts, Leaves, and Acorns as the marks of the suits.
[295] The Crequier is a kind of wild plum-tree, and its leaves are borne as the family arms of the house of Crequi. Armorial bearings of this kind are called "armoiries parlantes" by French heralds.
[296] Mons. Leber should have said "Sept de Grün;" but then this would have destroyed the anomaly which he was desirous of illustrating; for there is nothing anomalous in the Leaves on German cards having a resemblance to the leaves of a particular tree.
[297] See the passage at length, p. 135.
[298] On this card the name of the manufacturer appears—P. De Lestre—together with his mark.
[299] In a pack of modern Portuguese cards now before me there is no Queen; and the suits are Hearts, Bells, Leaves, and Acorns. The figures of the coat cards are half-lengths and double—"de duas Cabeças;" so that a head is always uppermost whichever way the card may be held. In a pack of modern Spanish cards,—"Naypes Refinos"—also without a Queen, the figures are also double; but the suits are Copas, Oros, Spadas, and Bastos,—Cups, Money, Swords, and Clubs proper.—On modern German cards the figures are frequently represented double in the same manner.
[300] Peignot, Analyse de Recherches sur les Cartes à jouer, pp. 288-90. Paris, 1826. The following passage relative to the change of manners which succeeded the Revolution is quoted by Mons. Peignot from a periodical entitled 'Le Corsaire:'—"Les cartes en vogue jusqu'à la révolution furent totalement abandonnées pendant les terribles années de notre bouleversement politique. Le boston, le grave wisth, le sémillant reversis, n'étoient plus conservés que chez quelques bons bourgeois, dont ils n'avoient jamais sans doute enflammé les passions, ou dans quelques vieilles maisons du Marais et du faubourg Saint-Germain. La bouillotte n'étoit guère connue que de quelques marchands; et même l'opinion publique flétrissait ceux dont une ignoble avidité compromettoit la fortune. La mode avoit mis en faveur la conversation, les soirées musicales, les soirées dansantes. L'écarté a paru, et ce jeu niais et insipide a fait revivre parmi nous toutes les fureurs du gothique lansquenet. Plus de conversation, plus de danses; la sonate ou la romance du jour sont interrompues par le cri des joueurs; le bal est désert, ou n'est plus peuplé que de vieux amateurs; tandis que la jeunesse s'empresse autour des tables d'écarté."
[301] A description of the same cards by Mons. Amanton, member of the Academy of Dijon, is given in Peignot's Analyse, p. 291: "Dans ce jeu," says Mons. Amanton, "les portraits des rois sont très ressemblans, les costumes du temps bien observés; et même les noms des personnages sont écrits en caractères de l'écriture en usage dans le siècle où ils ont vécu. Malgré la perfection du travail, ces jolis dessins n'ont pu l'emporter sur les anciennes images informes, qui rappellent l'enfance de l'art; tant la force de l'habitude est tyrannique."
[302] Mons. Peignot, in his 'Analyse de Recherches sur les Cartes à Jouer,' 1826, after noticing Cotta's cards, thus speaks of the satirical cards above described: "C'est sans doute ce recueil qui a donné lieu à un jeu de cartes très-malin, publié à Paris il y a sept à huit ans, sous le titre de Cartes à rire; ce doit être, autant que je puis me le rappeler, sous le ministère de M.D.C.... On attribue ce jeu à M.A. ... C.A.D.C.D.D.O. Toutes les cartes, soit à personnages, soit numériques, présentent des dessins charmans, des figures ingénieusement groupées, des attitudes très-plaisantes. Mais l'esprit satyrique y est poussé à l'excès; et ce n'est point avec de pareilles caricatures qu'on parviendra à rétablir l'union parmi les Français." p.297.
[303] According to Père Daniel, the Ace or As is the Latin As,—a piece of money, coin, riches; while Bullet derives it from the Celtic, and says that it means origin, source, beginning, the first. A French writer of the sixteenth century, supposed to be Charles Stephens, in a work entitled 'Paradoxes,' printed at Paris in 1553, says that the Ace, or "Az ought to be called Nars, a word which, in German, signifies a fool." The German word which he alludes to is Narr, which is just as likely to have been the origin of Deuce as of Ace. It has also been supposed that the term Ace has been derived from the Greek word ὁνος, which, according to Julius Pollux, signified One in the Ionic dialect; but as the word ὁνος also signified an Ass, it has been conjectured that the Ace of cards and dice was so called, not as a designation of unity, but as signifying an Ass or a Fool. Those who entertained the latter opinion are said by Hyde to be Asses themselves: "Qui unitatem asinum dicunt errant, et ipsi sunt asini." (De Ludis Orient. lib. ii.)—Leber, Etudes Historiques, pp. 39, 86.
[304] Brockett's Glossary of North Country Words.
[305] Singer's Researches, p. 271.
[306] Dr. Houstoun's Memoirs of his own Lifetime, p. 92. Edit. 1747.
[307] A writer of the age of Queen Elizabeth would appear to have foreseen the great "Card Controversy," which within the last 150 years has occupied so many "learned pens:" "It shall be lawful for coney-catchers to fall together by the ears, about the four Knaves of Cards, which of them may claim superiority; and whether false dice or true be of the most antiquity."—The Pennyless Parliament of Thread-bare Poets.
[308] The French also call the Trump Atou,—"Coupez: Cœur est Atou." Cut: Hearts are Trumps.
[309] "Triomphe: the card-game called Ruff, or Trump; also, the Ruff, or Trump at it."—Cotgrave's French and English Dictionary.
[310] In 'The Toast,' a satirical poem written about 1730, by Dr. William King, Principal of St. Mary's Hall, Oxford, Dr. Hort, Archbishop of Tuam, is called Lord Pam. He is also called Pam by Swift.
"Discincta tunica fugiendum est;
Ne nummi pereant.
Deprendi miserum est."—Horat.
[312] Pascasius Justus mentions in his Alca, first published in 1560, that a certain merchant, having obtained from Charles V a monopoly for ten years of the sale of cards in Spain, became extremely rich in consequence of the great demand for them.
[313] Encyclopédie Méthodique, mot, Cartier. An account of the subsequent legislation in France, with respect to cards, is to be found in the 'Manuel du Cartonnier, et du Fabricant de Cartonnages,' pp. 224-37. Paris, 1830.
CHAPTER V.
THE MORALITY OF CARD-PLAYING.
All writers who have investigated the principles of morality agree in the condemnation of Gaming,—that is, playing at any game of hazard for the sake of gain. With respect to the lawfulness, however, of playing at such games at leisure hours, for the sake of recreation, and without any sordid desire of gain, there is, amongst such authorities, a difference of opinion: some holding that, in the moral code, such games are, at all times, and under all circumstances, unlawful; while others affirm that, under the conditions mentioned, they are innocent. The former opinion has been espoused by many theologians, who, not content with condemning games of hazard as immoral, have also, with more zeal than knowledge, denounced them as sinful, and forbidden by the word of God. The arguments, however, of such teachers have been ably refuted by the learned Thomas Gataker, in his work 'On the Nature and Use of Lots,' the first edition of which appeared in 1619. He has clearly shown that the texts alleged by the opposite party do not bear the construction which had been put upon them; and that, consequently, the so-called word of God was nothing more than the dogma of fallible men.
The controversy respecting the sinfulness of games of hazard, on scriptural grounds, seems to have commenced in England about the latter end of the sixteenth century, with a small tract written by a Puritanical clergyman of the name of Balmford, who appears, at the time of its first publication, to have exercised his ministerial functions at Newcastle-on-Tyne. [314] The title of Balmford's tract is 'A Short and Plain Dialogue concerning the Unlawfulness of playing at Cards or Tables, or any other Game consisting in chance.' The only copy that I have seen occurs in a collection of tracts by the same author, with the general title, 'Carpenters Chippes: or Simple Tokens of unfeined good will, to the Christian friends of James Balmford, the unworthy Servant of Jesus Christ, a poor Carpenters sonne.' 16mo. Printed at London, for Richard Boyle, 1607. The following dedication of the tract on gaming is dated 1st of January, 1593: "To the right worshipfull Master Lionel Maddison, Maior, the Aldermen his brethern, and the godly Burgesses of Newcastle-upon-Tine, James Balmford wisheth the kingdom of God and his righteousnesse, that other things may be ministered unto them.—That which heretofore I have propounded to you (right worshipfull and beloved) in teaching, I doe now publish to all men by printing, to wit mine opinion of the unlawfulness of games consisting in chance."
Balmford's tract is a very short one, consisting of only eight leaves, inclusive of the dedication and title. The speakers in the dialogue are Professor and Preacher. The Professor had read, in the Common-places of Peter Martyr, the declaration that dice-play is unlawful, because depending on chance; but not being satisfied with what is there said about table-playing, he craves the Preacher's opinion concerning playing at tables and cards. The Preacher, after propounding several objections to the games on moral grounds, thus syllogistically determines that games of chance are unlawful: "Lots are not to be used in sport; but games consisting in chance, as Dice, Cards, Tables, are Lots: therefore not to be used in sport." In support of this conclusion, he refers to Joshua, xviii, 10; I. Samuel, xiv, 41; Jonah, i, 7; Malachi, i, 6-7; and Hebrews, vi, 16. Lots, he says, were sanctified to a peculiar use, namely, to end controversies. On those grounds he absolutely condemns all games depending on chance. The plea in favour of play merely for amusement he rejects; being of opinion that, if such games were even lawful, the desire of gain would soon creep in; for, according to the common saying, "Sine lucro friget ludus,—No gaining, cold gaming."
Several continental divines, of the reformed party, had previously expressed similar opinions, [315] but without exciting much remark; and the question seems to have been regarded as one of mere scholastic theology, until the differences between the Puritans and the High-church party, in the reign of James I, caused it to be treated as a question of practical religion. The question appears to have occasioned great heats in the University of Cambridge; for Mr. William Ames, being then Fellow of Christ's College, having preached at St. Mary's, in 1610, against playing at cards and dice, as being forbidden by Scripture, his discourse gave so much offence to persons in authority that he withdrew from the University in order to avoid expulsion. Ames subsequently was appointed Professor of Theology at the University of Franeker, in Friesland; and was one of the principal opponents of Gataker in the controversy on Lots.
The question respecting the lawfulness of games of chance has been thoroughly investigated, both morally and theologically, by Barbeyrac, in his 'Traité du Jeu;' [316] and his determination is, that such games are not in themselves immoral, whether the stakes be small or great; and that they are not forbidden, either directly or indirectly, by the Scriptures. In the Preface he thus speaks of the probable effect of the absolute condemnation of all games of hazard, on the assumed ground of their being both immoral in themselves, and forbidden by the Scriptures.
"I am not surprised that Gataker should have found so much opposition on the points which he maintained, considering the times in which he wrote. It, however, appears strange to me that, in an age when so many prejudices, both philosophical and theological, have been shook off, there should still be found people, who, looking only at the abuses which may arise in the use of things indifferent in themselves, condemn such things as absolutely evil, on grounds either frivolous or extremely doubtful. Such condemnation, so far from correcting those who are addicted to such abuses, is more likely to confirm them in their course. Nothing but the evidence of truth can enlighten the mind, and thus make an impression on the heart. False lights and subtleties, however specious, will never dissipate the illusions produced by favorite passions. Such passions, indeed, acquire new force as soon as a plausible pretext for their indulgence is discovered in the weakness of the arguments with which they are assailed; while, by attacking them in a proper manner, he who has been deluded by them may be induced to open his eyes to the truth, and to perceive his errors. If, by such means, a reformation is not effected, it is in consequence of the same obstacles which render unavailing whatever may be alleged against things which are, from their very nature, unquestionably evil. I doubt much if a gamester were ever deterred from play by the reasons brought forward to persuade him that the practice was a profanation of Divine Providence. If the sermons and writings asserting such principles have produced any good effect, it is in consequence of their containing also solid reasons derived from the abuse of the thing confounded with its mere usage. The former have produced little or no impression; and it is to the latter alone that the victory is to be ascribed."
As Barbeyrac's work is not common, and has never been translated into English, it is presumed that the following extracts from it will not be uninteresting to the reader. "It is certain that Man was not sent into the world to pass his time in eating, drinking, and merry-making. On the contrary, everything shows that he is destined by his Creator to be employed in matters of utility and serious consideration. The natural use of all our faculties has this manifest tendency. We have Mind only that we may think: we have Hands and Feet only that we may move and act. Who could suppose that this industry, this address, this penetration,—all these wonderful talents, capable of producing the Sciences and Arts,—were given to us only to be concealed, or to be shamefully wasted, either in sluggish idleness, or in a perpetual round of dissipation and amusement? The necessity of providing for our wants,—an obligation common to all in a state of nature,—requires that most men should apply themselves to work of some kind or other; and even those who have the means of living without labour are yet not exempt from the duty of applying themselves to some creditable employment, which may not only secure them against the temptations of idleness, but may also render them useful members of society.
"But though the All-wise Creator has made Man for labour, he has not made him for incessant labour, without relaxation. The same constitution of our nature which displays the necessity of action, also shows that we ought occasionally to rest. Our bodies are not of iron, nor our spirits of unwearied activity; and the human machine soon gets out of order when unremittingly worked.... We are not long in perceiving that too intent an application to any work weakens the strength of the body, and lessens the activity of the mind. The way to become disgusted with anything, is to be unremittingly employed about it. Thus, the very obligation to work requires that our labour should be sometimes intermitted, in order that we may not sink under it, but be enabled to resume it with vigour. 'To take recreation, in order to make progress with our work,' was the judicious maxim of an ancient sage. [317] Rest is the seasoning of labour; [318] and we ought to combine them so that a just medium may be preserved. Consult nature, and she will tell you that she has made the day and the night to mark the hours of labour and of repose, [319] and to teach us that each is equally indispensable to life. A life undiversified with a festival is like a long journey without an inn. [320] Such is the language of pagan philosophers, and such are the ideas which pure reason suggests.
"Revelation teaches us the same. The Night was made for the repose of all living things; and the Sabbath was partly instituted for the recreation of slaves and servants, who otherwise might have had masters so harsh as to pay no regard to the weakness of human nature. This festival [Fête], as well as all the others appointed by the law, were times both of rest and enjoyment for the whole of the people of God. Thus, so far from morality or religion forbidding every kind of recreation, it may be asserted that they require us to take such as may be becoming and convenient, whenever it may be requisite to thus re-invigorate our powers when exhausted by labour. It would at least be ungrateful to haughtily reject the innocent pleasures which the kindness of the Deity allows to man; and it would be unjust to arbitrarily condemn those who discreetly avail themselves of such enjoyments.
"There are, however, people who unreasonably suppose that abuse and use cannot be separated, and who, forming to themselves I know not what mystical notions of virtue and piety, would persuade us that every kind of diversion is unworthy of a reasonable being,—'a low amusement,' 'a deceitful pleasure,' 'a consequence of man's fallen nature.' Such persons may be allowed to aspire to a state of perfection which perhaps may be beyond the reach of human nature, and which is certainly unattainable by the great mass of mankind; they ought, however, to allow those who are doubtful of their own powers of arriving at such perfection, to humbly follow the path which Nature and Providence have pointed out, and to possess their souls in peace, and their conscience without scruple.
"We maintain, then, as an irrefragable principle, that, for the sake of relaxation, we may indulge in such amusements as are in themselves free from vice. This being admitted, if a person finds pleasure in playing at Billiards, at Tennis, at Chess, at Cards, at Backgammon, and even at Dice, why may he not amuse himself with them, as well as in Promenading, with Music, in the Chase, in Fishing, in Drawing, and in a thousand other things of a similar kind? The question then is, whether the game be for nothing or for a stake of some value. In the first case, it is a mere recreation, and bears not the slightest semblance of criminality; and with regard to the second, I do not see why there should be any evil in it, looking at the matter simply, without regard to circumstances.
"For if I am at liberty to promise and give my property, absolutely and unconditionally, to whomever I please, why may I not promise and give a certain sum, in the event of a person proving more fortunate, or more skillful than I with respect to the result of certain movements and combinations, upon which we had previously agreed? And why may not this person fairly avail himself of the result either of his skill or of a favorable concurrence of fortuitous circumstances, on the issue of which I had voluntarily contracted an obligation? Even though but one of the parties obtains an advantage, yet there would be nothing contrary to equity in the transaction, providing that the terms had been previously agreed on by both. Every person is at liberty to determine the conditions on which he will cede a right to another, and may even make it dependent on the most fortuitous circumstances. A fortiori, a person may fairly avail himself of his winning, when he has risked on the event as much as he was likely to gain. In fact, play [le jeu] is a kind of contract; and in every contract the mutual consent of the parties is the supreme law: this is an incontestable maxim of natural equity. [321]
"In the Scriptures we do not find games of hazard forbid. The ancient Jews appear to have been entirely ignorant of this kind of recreation, and even the name for it is not to be found in the Old Testament. On the dispersion of the Jews, however, after the Babylonian captivity, they learnt to play from the Greeks and Romans, as may be inferred from the cases of conscience on this subject discussed by the Rabbis. Notwithstanding this, games of hazard are nowhere forbidden in the New Testament, though no tolerance is there shown to any kind of vice. There is, indeed, only one passage that contains the least allusion to play; and even in this, the term—which is metaphorically derived from a game of hazard,—when taken in the worst sense, would only amount to a condemnation of the abuse of play. [322] If in some versions a word,—ραιζειν—used by St. Paul, in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. x, v. 7, has been translated 'jouer,' it is merely in consequence of the equivocal signification of this word, or perhaps from the original term not being fully understood, which in this place signifies 'to dance,' as is apparent from the passage in the Old Testament to which it alludes, Exodus, xxii, 6. From the profound silence of the sacred writers, and from other reasons already advanced, it may, in my judgment, be safely concluded that play considered in itself, and apart from its abuse, is a matter of perfect indifference. [323] —"Carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men."—Ephesians, iv, 14.—Dr. Rennell, quoting the passage in the notes to his sermon against Gaming, observes, that "The connexion between the artifices of gamesters, and the shifting depravity of heretical subterfuge, is strongly marked by the Apostle.">[
"Few persons are so rigid as to condemn absolutely games of every kind; an exception being usually made in favour of those which are determined by skill alone. Most theologians and casuists, however, have pronounced strongly against all games into which hazard enters, as if such were at all times unlawful. The Rabbis, who are of the same opinion, and who even consider them as means of fraud between Jew and Jew, assert that 'a man, during the whole course of his life, should do nothing but devote himself to the study of the law and of wisdom, to the practice of charity, or to some employment or business which may be serviceable to the community.' [324] If this decision be taken literally, it is manifestly absurd, and requires no further notice. Even in putting a reasonable interpretation upon these words, and considering them as condemnatory of such persons as employ themselves in play alone, they still do not apply to play, considered in itself, but merely restrain it to its legitimate use. The Jewish doctors themselves acknowledge that the prohibitions of play in force amongst them, are founded on the regulations of their ancestors; that is, that they are not derived either from the law of Nature, or the positive ordinances of God; but that they depend entirely on the civil law established by those who had the power of making new regulations whenever such might appear to be necessary for the welfare of the state. This is so true, that they in a manner permitted Jews to play at games of hazard with Gentiles: at any rate, their prohibition was extremely feeble, since they declared that, in such a case, a Jew was only culpable of having spent his time about a frivolous thing.
"Among the works of St. Cyprian we find a treatise, or kind of homily, on gaming,—De Aleatoribus,—which though of high antiquity, and evidently written by a Bishop, is probably not the composition of the saint to whom it has usually been ascribed. The author, whoever he may have been, calls games of hazard the nets of the devil; and affirms that they were invented by a certain learned man at the prompting of the evil spirit, and that he placed his portrait and name on the instruments of the game in order that he might be worshipped by those who used them. [325] He, consequently, maintains that whoever plays at such games offers sacrifice to their author, and thus commits an act of idolatry. Such chimerical arguments, when divested of all figure, only show that games of hazard are frequently the cause of disorder. A Flemish clergyman, in a historical treatise on this subject, published about the middle of the seventeenth century, gravely maintains that all games of hazard are contrary to every one of the ten commandments. [326] It may be easily imagined that he is obliged to employ many devices in order to give a colour of plausibility to this paradox; and that whenever he advances anything really pertinent, it applies only to the abuses, which, more or less, may insinuate themselves into every kind of game. A prelate of distinguished merit, Sidonius Apollinaris, Bishop of Clermont, in Auvergne, who flourished in the fifth century, was of a different way of thinking; for he was accustomed to amuse himself at Trictrac, as he relates in his letters without testifying any compunction, and without even saying that he had abandoned the amusement on his being advanced to the office of Bishop, though he mentions that he had then given up poetry.
"Others have imagined that they have discovered in the very nature of games of hazard something which renders them essentially sinful; supporting their views by an argument which, though extremely specious, is yet easily refuted. For instance, they say that God presides over what we call chance, and directs it in a special manner; and that, as chance enters into all games of hazard, such games are manifestly sinful as requiring the intervention of Divine Providence in affairs which are not only trivial, but also subject to many incommodities.
"This conclusion would be demonstrative if the principle from which it is drawn were true; but how is it known that the results of chance are always determined by the special will of the Deity? Is his intervention directly perceptible, or can it be known by any apparent indication? From the knowledge that we have of his goodness and wisdom, can it reasonably be supposed that he does so intervene? On the contrary, is it not derogatory to the Supreme Being to suppose that he should immediately interfere in affairs of such small consequence as most of those are which are determined amongst men by means of lots or chance? The very supposition contains within itself the best reasons for concluding it to be untenable.
"If the Deity indeed were to act by a special will in all matters which are determined by lot or chance, and more especially in games of hazard, it would hence follow: 1. That men have the power to compel, and in a manner, force the Deity to exercise an especial Providence whenever they may think good; for it is certain that they can determine some matters by lot whenever they please. 2. It will also follow that the Deity 'performs miracles every day in favour of persons who are most assuredly undeserving of them, and in places where no one could suspect that his presence would be displayed in a manner so extraordinary.' [327] Besides, what likelihood is there that, when a couple of lacqueys or porters sit down to play at dice or lansquenet, Providence should more especially interfere in their game than in events which affect the destiny of nations, such as battles, revolutions, and other important actions of a similar kind? There is even something ridiculous in supposing that when two men are playing at draughts, or billiards, their game is only the object of common and ordinary Providence, but that when they sit down to play at dice or cards, a special Providence then intervenes, and determines the chances of the game [328]....
"I am, however, willing to allow that even at play there may sometimes be an extraordinary manifestation of Providence, either directly, or by means of some invisible intelligence determining the lot or chance. I can conceive that the Deity should dispose of events in such a manner that a worthy man, for instance, who might be in danger of giving himself entirely up to play, should be cured of his passion by a great and sudden loss. But, even admitting this, there is no reason to conclude that the Deity interferes on all occasions, and in favour of all sorts of people; and, after all, without a direct revelation, it never can be positively known that he really does interfere in such matters. I could just as readily believe what the eloquent Jesuit Maffei relates of Ignatius Loyola, in his life of that saint; namely, that, playing one day at billiards with a gentleman, who had urged him to try the game, he, by a miracle, proved the winner, as he was utterly unacquainted with the game." [329]
In concluding the first book, Barbeyrac observes: "To refute in detail all the objections of rigid moralists would require an entire volume. What I have already said, however, appears to me sufficient to remove any vain scruples which may have been excited on the subject. I am, indeed, rather apprehensive that those who are too fond of play will think that I might have spared myself the trouble of proving that which they had no doubts about; and that it was quite unnecessary to explain to them at so great length that play, considered in itself, contains nothing contrary to the law of Nature or the precepts of the Gospel. The plan of the work, however, required that I should commence with this; and the opportunity being thus afforded of showing the fallacy of the austere portrait which some writers have drawn of Christian morality, I have availed myself of it. On this subject I also feel myself justified in referring to the schools of Pagan philosophy, where we are taught that 'we should do nothing without being able to give a reason for it; in small matters as well as in great.' [330] Now, assuming that out of a hundred persons who are accustomed to play daily, there is scarcely one who has ever asked himself how, or in what manner, it may be lawful, it is not surprising that so many people should convert a thing in itself perfectly harmless into a subject of disorder, employing it as a means of gratifying their inordinate love of pleasure, their idleness, or their avarice."
In the second book, wherein he discusses the essentials of play—le Jeu—he distinguishes three kinds of games: 1, Games of pure skill; 2, Games of pure chance; and, 3, Games which depend partly on skill and partly on chance. Games of skill are those which depend on manual dexterity, bodily agility, or mental acuteness: Billiards, Racket, Quoits, Cricket, Draughts, and Chess are of this kind. Games of pure chance are those in which the event, though brought about by the instrumentality of the players, is yet absolutely beyond their direction or control: of this kind are Dice, and certain games at cards, such as Basset, Brelan, Lansquenet, Rouge-et-Noir, and Faro. In the third kind, such as Backgammon and most of the usual games at cards, [331] the effects of chance may in some degree be counteracted by a skilful application of principles derived from a knowledge of the various combinations which result from the conventional rules of the game. In all games for any considerable stake, that is, with regard to the means of the parties, it is necessary that the players should be as nearly as possible equal in point of skill; for, in this case, the game becomes a kind of traffic, and is subject to all the conditions of an equitable contract.
Most persons who play for high stakes, either at games of pure chance or of chance and skill combined, make more or less a traffic of their amusement; and risk their own money from a desire of winning that of another. In all such cases, gaming is a positive evil to society, and is utterly inexcusable, much less justifiable, on any grounds whatever; and all who thus venture large sums may be justly required to show by what right they possess them. When a fool or a knave is thus stripped of a large property, his loss is a matter of small import to society; the true evil is, that so large a portion of national wealth, created by the industry of others, should be at the disposal of such a character, and should be allowed to pass, on such a contract, to another even more worthless than himself. This objection has not been urged in any of the numerous sermons and essays that have been published against gaming; the authors of which, generally, instead of showing that society has both the power and the right to correct such abuses by depriving the offending parties of the means of continuing them, have contented themselves with declamations on the wickedness of the pursuit, and with vain appeals to the conscience of inveterate gamesters: while they whistle to the deaf adder, they never seem to suspect that it may be easily dispatched with a stick.—But such abuses in society are never remedied till the Heraclidæ acquire a knowledge of their rights, as well as a consciousness of their power.
The appeal to the vanity of men of "rank and education" [332] in order to shame them out of their love of play is as futile in its effects as it is wrong in principle; for it tends only to nourish in them feelings of self-conceit, and to induce them to think rather of the deficiencies of the low-born men, whose money they are eager to win, than to consider their own dereliction of duty, in playing for large sums, with any one. At the gaming-table, a community of feeling levels all the artificial distinctions of rank; and the rude plebeian who covers the high-born noble's stake is just as good, for all intents and purposes of play, as that noble himself. The condescension of the noble to play with a costermonger for the sake of winning his money, is fully compensated by the other's willingness to afford him a chance. The annals of gaming sufficiently show that rank is no guarantee of a gamester's honesty; and in the case of Lord De Ros versus Cumming, tried before Lord Denman, 10th of February, 1837, it would appear that the rank of the fraudulent gamester screened him for several years, with one party at least, from being denounced. Sir William Ingilby, in his examination, stated that he had seen Lord De Ros perform the trick of reversing the cut, and thus secure himself an ace or a king for the turn-up card, at least fifty times; and that he first observed his lordship do it "about four, five, or six years ago." When asked why he did not denounce Lord De Ros after he had become aware of his fraudulent tricks, he gives the following answer: "I did not mention the matter publicly for this reason:—I considered that if an obscure and humble individual like myself, not possessed of his rank, were to attempt to go up to a peer of the realm, who held a high station in society, and who at the same time was regarded by all his associates, and by the world in general, as a man of unimpeachable character, and say, 'My lord, you are cheating;' if, I say, I, that humble individual, had addressed Lord De Ros in these terms,—if I had denounced a peer of the realm, and a man of such general popularity, I should instantly have gathered around me a host of persons; and I take it, as a matter of course, I should have had no choice between the door and the window." Notwithstanding that the honorable baronet was aware of the fraudulent practice of the right honorable peer, it seems that he still continued to play with him; but it does not appear that he was particularly attentive to his lordship's trick of reversing the cut,—sauter la coupe,—when he had him for a partner. [333] If Sir William Ingilby's fears were well founded, it seems reasonable to conclude that those who would have "pitched him out of the window," for exposing the fraudulent tricks of a peer, must have been persons of similar character to the party denounced; and that their conduct in such a case would not have been influenced by a regard for the honour of a peer of the realm, but would rather have been the result of the vexation which they felt at the public exposure of one of their own stamp. On this trial, one of the witnesses admitted that he had won £35,000 at cards in the course of fifteen years. This is certainly a large sum, but nothing to be compared to the winnings of some men by their gambling in railway shares within the last ten years. Lord De Ros failed in his action; the fact of cheating which had been alleged against him having been clearly proved. He did not long survive the disgraceful exposure; and Theodore Hook is said to have embalmed his memory in the following epitaph: "Here lies England's Premier Baron patiently awaiting the last TRUMP." [334]
On the question of the lawfulness of playing at cards for the sake of amusement, and not from the mere desire of gain, many persons of eminent piety have held the affirmative in their writings; and a far greater number of the same class have testified, by their practice, their concurrence in the same opinion. "Many fierce declamations," says Jeremy Taylor, "from ancient sanctity have been uttered against cards and dice, by reason of the craft used in the game, and the consequent evils, as invented by the Devil. And, indeed, this is almost the whole state of the question; for there are so many evils in the use of these sports, they are made trades of fraud and livelihood, they are accompanied so with drinking and swearing, they are so scandalous by blasphemies and quarrels, so infamous by misspending precious time, and the ruin of many families, they so often make wise men fools and slaves of passion, that we may say of those who use them inordinately, they are in an ocean of mischief, and can hardly swim to shore without perishing.... He can never be suspected in any criminal sense to tempt the Divine Providence, who by contingent things recreates his labour, and having acquired his refreshment hath no other end to serve, and no desires to engage the Divine Providence to any other purpose.... A man may innocently, and to good purposes go to a tavern, but they who frequent them have no excuse, unless their innocent business does frequently engage, and their severe religion bring them off safely. And so it is in these sports; there is only one cause of using them, and that comes but seldom, the refreshment, I mean, of myself or my friend, to which I minister in justice or in charity; but when our sports come to that excess, that we long and seek for opportunities; when we tempt others, are weary of our business, and not weary of our game; when we sit up till midnight, and spend half days, and that often too; then we have spoiled the sport,—it is not a recreation, but a sin.... He that means to make his games lawful, must not play for money, but for refreshment. This, though few may believe, yet is the most considerable thing to be amended in the games of civil and sober persons. For the gaining of money can have no influence in the game to make it the more recreative, unless covetousness holds the box.... But when money is at stake, either the sum is trifling, or it is considerable. If trifling, it can be of no purpose unless to serve the ends of some little hospitable entertainment or love-feast, and then there is nothing amiss; but if considerable, a wide door is opened to temptation, and a man cannot be indifferent to win or lose a great sum of money, though he can easily pretend it. If a man be willing or indifferent to lose his own money, and not at all desirous to get another's, to what purpose is it that he plays for it? If he be not indifferent, then he is covetous or he is a fool: he covets what is not his own, or unreasonably ventures that which is. If without the money, he cannot mind his game, then the game is no divertisement, no recreation, but the money is all the sport, and therefore covetousness is all the design; but if he can be recreated by the game alone, the money does but change it from lawful to unlawful, and the man from being weary to become covetous; and from the trouble of labour or study, remove him to the worse trouble of fear, or anger, or impatient desires. Here begins the mischief, here men begin for the money to use vile arts; here cards and dice begin to be diabolical, when players are witty to defraud and undo one another; when estates are ventured, and families are made sad and poor by a luckless chance. And what sport is it to me to lose my money, if it be at all valuable? and if it be not, what is it to my game? But sure the pleasure is in winning the money; that certainly is it. But they who make pastime of a neighbour's ruin, are the worst of men, said the comedy. But concerning the loss of our money, let a man pretend what he will, that he plays for no more than he is willing to lose, it is certain that we ought not to believe him; for if that sum is so indifferent to him, why is not he easy to be tempted to give such a sum to the poor? Whenever this is the case, he sins, that games for money beyond an inconsiderable sum. Let the stake be nothing, or almost nothing, and the cards or dice are innocent, and the game as innocent as push-pin.... In plays and games, as in other entertainments, we must neither do evil, nor seem to do evil; we must not converse with evil persons, nor use our liberty to a brother's prejudice or grief. We must not do anything, which he, with probability, or with innocent weakness, thinks to be amiss, until he be rightly instructed; but where nothing of these things intervene, and nothing of the former evils is appendant, we may use our liberty with reason and sobriety: and then, if this liberty can be so used, and such recreations can be innocent, as they assuredly may, there is no further question, but those trades, which minister to these divertisements, are innocent and lawful." [335]
Nelson, the pious author of the 'Fasts and Festivals of the Church of England,' and of the 'Practice of True Devotion,' had no objection to cards. "Sober persons," says he, in the last-mentioned work, "do not make a business of what they should only use as a diversion." The Rev. Augustus Toplady, so well known for his high Calvinistic principles, used to occasionally amuse himself with a game at cards; and in a letter dated "Broad Hembury, Nov. 19th, 1773," he thus expresses himself on the subject of recreations in which clergymen may innocently indulge. [336]
"I do not think that honest Martin Luther committed sin by playing at Backgammon for an hour or two after dinner in order, by unbending his mind, to promote digestion.
"I cannot blame the holy martyr Bishop Ridley for frequently playing at Tennis before he became a prelate, nor for playing at the more serious game of Chess twice a day after he was made a bishop.
"As little do I find fault with another of our most exemplary martyrs, the learned and devout Mr. Archdeacon Philpot; who has left it on record as a brand on Pelagians of that age, that 'they looked on honeste pastyme as a sinne;' and had the impudence to call him an Antinomian and a loose moralist, because he now and then relaxed his bow with 'huntinge, shootynge, bowlynge, and such like.'
"Nor can I set down pious Bishop Latimer for such an enemy to holiness of life on account of his saying that hunting is a good exercise for men of rank, and that shooting is as lawful an amusement for persons of inferior class.
"I have not a whit the worse opinion of the eminent and profound Mr. Thomas Gataker for the treatise which he professedly wrote to prove the lawfulness of card-playing, under due restrictions and limitations.
"I cannot condemn the Vicar of Broad Hembury [Mr. Toplady himself] for relaxing himself now and then among a few select friends with a rubber of sixpenny Whist, a pool of penny Quadrille, or a few rounds of twopenny Pope Joan. To my certain knowledge, the said vicar has been cured of headache by one or other of those games, after spending eight, ten, or twelve, and sometimes sixteen hours in his study. Nor will he ask any man's leave for so unbending himself—because another person's conscience is no rule to his, any more than another person's stature or complexion."
John Wesley, when a young man at college, and before his thorough conversion, appears to have been fond of a game at cards. Tate Wilkinson, writing in 1790, says: "Mr. Wesley, about four years ago, in the fields at Leeds, for want of room for his congregation in his tabernacle, gave an account of himself, by informing us, that when he was at college, he was particularly fond of the devil's pops (or cards); and said, that every Saturday he was one of a constant party at Whist, not only for the afternoon, but also for the evening; he then mentioned the names of several respectable gentlemen who were with him at college.—'But,' continued he, 'the latter part of my time there I became acquainted with the Lord; I used to hold communication with him. On my first acquaintance, 'I used to talk with the Lord once a week, then every day, from that to twice a day, till at last the intimacy so increased, that He appointed a meeting once in every four hours.... He recollected, he said, the last Saturday he ever played at cards, that the rubber at Whist was longer than he expected; and on observing the tediousness of the game, he pulled out his watch, when, to his shame, he found it was some minutes past eight, which was beyond the time he had appointed to meet the Lord.—He thought the devil had certainly tempted him to stay beyond his hour; he therefore suddenly gave his cards to a gentleman near him to finish the game, and went to the place appointed, beseeching forgiveness for his crime, and resolved never to play with the devil's pops again. That resolution he had never broken; and what was more extraordinary, that his brother and sister, though distant from Cambridge, experienced signs of grace on that same day, on that same hour, in the month of October." [337]
On the subject of card-playing, even for the sake of amusement, two distinguished laymen, John Locke and Dr. Johnson, appear to have entertained different opinions. The former, in his Treatise on Education, says, "As to cards and dice, I think the safest and best way is never to learn any play upon them, and so to be incapacitated for those dangerous temptations and incroaching wasters of useful time." Dr. Johnson, on the contrary, regretted that he had not learnt to play at cards, giving, at the same time, as his reason: "It is very useful in life; it generates kindness, and consolidates society." [338] The opinion of a living Professor of Moral Philosophy, on the subject of card-playing, may be gathered from the following dialogue between Christopher North and the Ettrick Shepherd. [339]
"NORTH.
Gaming is not a vice, then, in the country, James?
SHEPHERD.
There's little or nae sic thing as gamblin' in the kintra, sir. You'll fin' a pack o' cairds in mony o' the houses—but no in them a'—for some gude fathers o' families think them the deevil's buiks, and sure aneuch when ower muckle read they begin to smell o' sulphur and Satan.
NORTH.
Why, James, how can old people, a little dim-eyed or so, while an occasional evening away better than at an innocent and cheerful game at cards?
SHEPHERD.
Haud your haun' a wee, Mr. North. I'm no saying onything to the reverse. But I was sayin' that there are heads o' families that abhor cairds, and would half-kill their sons and daughters were they to bring a pack into the house. Neither you nor me wull blame them for sic savin' prejudice. The austere Calvinistic spirit canna thole to think that the knave o' spades should be lying within twa three inches o' the Bible. The auld stern man wud as soon forgie the introduction into the house o' base ballads o' sinfu' love—and wishes that the precincts be pure o' his ain fire-side. Though I take a ggem o' whust now and then mysel, yet I boo to the principle, and I venerate the adherence till't in the high-souled patriarchs of the Covenant.
NORTH.
Perhaps such strict morality is scarcely practicable in our present condition.
SHEPHERD.
What, do you mainteen that cairds are absolutely necessary in a puir man's house? Tuts! As for auld dim-eyed people, few o' them, except they be blin' a'thegither, that canna read big prent wi' powerfu' specs, and they can aye get, at the warst, some bit wee idle Oe to read out aloud to its grannies, without expense o' oil or cawnel, by the heartsome ingle-light. You'll generally fin' that auld folk that plays cairds, have been raither freevolous, and no muckle addicked to thocht—unless they're greedy, and play for the pool, which is fearsome in auld age; for what need they care for twa three brass penny-pieces, for ony ither purpose than to buy nails for their coffin?
NORTH.
You push the argument rather far, James.
SHEPHERD.
Na, sir. Avarice is a failing o' auld age sure aneuch—and shouldna be fed by the Lang Ten. I'm aye somewhat sad when I see folk o' eighty haudin' up the trumps to their rheumy een, and shaking their heads, whether they wull or no, ower a gude and a bad haun alike. Then, safe on us! only think o' them cheatin'—revokin'—and marking mair than they ought wi the counters!
NORTH.
The picture is strongly coloured; but could you not paint another less revolting, nay, absolutely pleasant, nor violate the truth of nature?
SHEPHERD.
I'm no quite sure. Perhaps I micht. In anither condition o' life—in towns, and among folk o' a higher rank, I dinna deny that I hae seen auld leddies playing cards very composedly, and without appearin' to be doin' onything that's wrang. Before you judge richtly o' ony ae thing in domestic life, you maun understan' the hail constitution o' the economy. Noo, auld leddies in towns dress somewhat richly and superbly, wi' ribbons, and laces, and jewels even, and caps munted wi' flowers and feathers; and I'm no blamin' them—and then they dine out, and gang to routes, and gie dinners and routes in return, back to hunders o' their friends and acquaintance, Noo, wi' sic a style and fashion o' life as that, caird-playing seems to be somewhat accordant, if taken in moderation, and as a quiet pastime, and no made a trade o', or profession, for sake o' filthy lucre. I grant it harmless; and gin it maks the auld leddies happy, what richt hae I to mint ony objections? God bless them, man; far be it frae me to curtail the resources o' auld age. Let them play on, and all I wish is, they may never lose either their temper, their money, nor their natural rest.
NORTH.
And I say God bless you, James, for your sentiments do honour to humanity.
SHEPHERD.
As for young folks—lads and lasses, like—when the gudeman and his wife are gaen to bed, what's the harm in a ggem at cairds? It's a chearfu', noisy, sicht o' comfort and confusion. Sic luckin' into ane anither's haun's! Sic fause shufflin'! Sic unfair dealin'! Sic winkin' to tell your pairtner that ye hae the king or the ace! And when that wunna do, sic kickin' o' shins and treadin' on taes aneath the table—aften the wrang anes! Then down wi' your haun' o' cairds in a clash on the board, because you've ane ower few, and the coof maun lose his deal! Then what gigglin' amang the lasses! What amicable, nay, love-quarrels, between pairtners! Jokin', and jeestin' and tauntin', and toozlin'—the cawnel blawn out, and the soun o' a thousan' kisses! That's caird-playing in the kintra, Mr. North; and where's the man amang ye that wull daur to say that its no a pleasant pastime o' a winter's nicht, when the snaw is cumin' doon the lum, or the speat's roarin amang the mirk mountains?
NORTH.
Wilkie himself, James, is no more than your equal.
SHEPHERD.
O man, Mr. North, sir, my heart is wae—my soul's sick—and my spirit's wrathfu' to think o' thae places in great cities which they ca'—Hells!
NORTH.
Thank Heaven, my dear James, that I never was a gambler—nor, except once, to see the thing, ever in a Hell. But it was a stupid and passionless night—a place of mean misery—altogether unworthy of its name.
SHEPHERD.
I'm glad you never went back, and that the deevil was in the dumps; for they say that some nichts in thae Hells, when Satan and Sin sit thegither on ae chair, he wi' his arm roun' the neck o' that Destruction his Daughter, a horrible temptation invades men's hearts and souls, drivin' and draggin' them on to the doom o' everlasting death.
NORTH.
Strong language, James—many good and great men have shook the elbow.
SHEPHERD.
Come, come now, Mr. North, and dinna allow paradox to darken or obscure the bright licht o' your great natural and acquired understandin'. 'Good and great' are lofty epithets to bestow on ony man that is born o' a woman—and if ony such there have been who delivered themselves up to sin, and shame, and sorrow, at the ggeming-table; let their biographers justify them—it will gie me pleasure to see them do't—but such examples shall never confound my judgment o' right or wrang. 'Shake the elbow indeed!' What mair does a parricide do but 'shake his elbow,' when he cuts his father's throat? The gamester shakes his elbow, and down go the glorious oak trees planted two hundred years ago, by some ancestor who loved the fresh smell o' the woods—away go—if entail does no forbid—thousands o' bonny braid acres, ance a' ae princely estate, but now shivered down into beggarly parshels, while the Auld House seems broken-hearted, and hangs down its head, when the infatuated laird dies or shoots himself. Oh, man! is nae it a sad thocht to think that my leddy, aye sae gracious to the puir, should hae to lay down her carriage in her auld age, and disappear frae the Ha' into some far-aff town or village, perhaps no in Scotland ava'; while he, that should hae been the heir, is apprenticed to a writer to the signet, and becomes a money-scrivener i' his soul, and aiblins a Whig routin' at a public meetin' about Queens, and Slavery, and Borough Reform, and Cautholic Emancipation."
St. Francis Xavier, though disapproving of all games of chance, yet did not absolutely condemn them as forbidden by the word of God; but endeavoured to reclaim, by gentle means, those who were addicted to play. "That he might banish Games of Chance," says his biographer, "which almost always occasion quarrels and swearing, he proposed some little innocent diversions, capable of entertaining the mind, without stirring up the passions. But seeing that in spight of his endeavours they were bent on Cards and Dice, he thought it not convenient to absent himself, but became a looker-on, that he might somewhat awe them by his presence; and when they were breaking out into any extravagance, he reclaimed them by gentle and soft reproofs. He showed concernment in their gains, or in their losses, and offered sometimes to hold their cards.
"While the ship that carried Xavier was crossing the Gulph of Ceylon, [in 1545] an occasion of charity was offered to the Saint, which he would not suffer to escape. The mariners and souldiers pass'd their time, according to their custome, in playing at cards. Two souldiers set themselves to it more out of avarice than pleasure, and one of them plaid with such ill fortune, that he lost not only all his own money, but the stock which others had put into his hands to traffick for them. Having nothing more to lose, he withdrew, cursing his luck, and blaspheming God. His despair prevail'd so far over him, that he had thrown himself into the Sea, or run upon the point of his sword, if he had not been prevented. Xavier had notice of these his mad intentions, and execrable behaviour, and immediately came to his relief. He embrac'd him tenderly, and said all he cou'd to comfort him: But the souldier in the transports of his fury, thrust him away, and forbore not even ill language to him. Xavier stood recollected for some time, imploring God's assistance and counsel; then went and borrow'd fifty Royals of a passenger, brought them to the souldier, and advis'd him once more to try his fortune. At this the souldier took heart, and play'd so luckily, that he recover'd all his losses with great advantage. The Saint, who look'd on, took out of the overplus of the winnings, what he had borrow'd for him; and seeing the gamester, now return'd to a calm temper, he who before refus'd to hear him, was now overpower'd by his discourse, never after handled cards, and became exemplary in his life.
"He was particularly free in his converse with souldiers who are greater libertines, and more debauch'd in the Indies, than elsewhere. For, that they might the less suspect him, he kept them company; and because sometimes when they saw him coming, they had hid their cards and dice, he told them, They were not of the clergy, neither cou'd they continue praying all the day; that cheating, quarrelling and swearing, were forbid to gamesters, but that play was not forbid to a souldier. Sometimes he play'd at chess himself out of complyance, when they whom he study'd to withdraw from vice, were lovers of that game: And a Portuguese gentleman, whose name was Don Diego Norogna, had once a very ill opinion of him for it. This cavalier, who had heard a report of Xavier, that he was a saint-like man, and desir'd much to have a sight of him, happen'd to be aboard of the same galley. Not knowing his person, he enquir'd which was he; but was much surprised to find him playing at chess with a private souldier. For he had form'd in his imagination, the idea of one who was recollected and austere, and who never appear'd in publick but to discourse of eternity, or to work miracles." [340]
St. Francis de Sales was, in his younger days, a card-player, though subsequently he condemned all games at cards as being in themselves unlawful. [341] According to the Duchess of Orleans, the old Marshal Villeroi, who had known him in his youth, could never bring himself to call him Saint. As often as the name of St. Francis de Sales was mentioned in his presence, he would observe, "I was delighted to learn that Mons. de Sales was a Saint. He was fond of saying smutty things, and used to cheat at cards; in other respects he was a perfect gentleman, though a ninny." [342] The excuse that he made for his cheating was, that whatever he won was for the poor. Cardinal Mazarine, another dignitary of the church of Rome, was much given to cheating at play as well as in politics; and it is related by an eye-witness, that when he was on his death-bed, he still continued to play at cards, one of the company holding his "hand;" and that he was thus employed when he received the Pope's plenary indulgence, together with the viaticum, as a prince of the church, from the Papal nuncio. [343]
In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, many of the clergy of all degrees in France, Spain, and Italy appear to have been much addicted not only to card-playing but to gaming in general, notwithstanding the determinations of casuists and the prohibitions of councils. Masses and prayers were sometimes staked by the priest against the hard money of the layman; and even devout people, following the example set them by their pastors, used to play with each other for Aves and Pater-nosters. On the subject of the clergy staking masses at play, Barbeyrac, a Protestant, observes, "These are in truth frivolous matters, and of no effect, to say no worse; nevertheless, as those who traffic in them believe, or, at least, pretend to believe that a kind of sanctity and supernatural virtue are attached to their use, all play for such stakes is unlawful; and he who thus profanely ventures them is evidently guilty both of sacrilege and simony." With respect to playing for prayers, Thiers says that the practice is not condemned by Dr. Navarre, and that Père Raynaud bears witness of its being admitted among the devout; for his own part, however, he disapproves of it as "a heteroclite refinement of devotion;" and is of opinion that there is some degree of irreverence in playing for Psalms, Pater-nosters, and Aves. [344] The Spanish phrase, "Jugar los Kiries" shows that such a practice was not unusual among the clergy of that country: though the explanation of the phrase in some dictionaries is, that it relates to a clergyman who plays away the alms that are given him for praying, it yet properly relates to a clergyman who plays away prayers,—not the money given for them.
Among the vices generated by gaming, that of swearing is especially noted by most authors who have written on the subject. [345] The French appear to have minced and frittered their oaths, swearing "like a comfit-maker's wife;" the English and Germans to have sworn grossly; and the Spaniards and Italians to have blasphemed in a spirit of refined impiety. Pascasius Justus, in this respect, calls the gaming-table the devil's farm, and says that it always yields him a most abundant crop. In his time, gamesters do not appear to have merely sworn from vexation, but even to have delighted in pouring forth a volley of oaths. He relates that, when he once told a gambler that he himself could never utter an oath, the other replied, "Then you are ignorant of a great pleasure." A French writer, speaking of the oaths of the Spaniards, gives the following anecdote, as an instance of their impiety. On one occasion, when an order had been issued to the Spanish army against swearing, a soldier having lost all his money at cards, and not daring to violate the letter of the order, gave vent to his feelings by exclaiming, "Beso las manos, Señor Pilato," "I thank you, Mr. Pontius Pilate."—"Il devoit être brûlé," is the judgment of the relater. A similar instance of blasphemy, on the part of an Italian who had lost his money at cards, is recorded by Henry Stephens, in the introduction to his 'Traité de la Conformité des Merveilles anciennes avec les modernes.' [346]
With respect to the passions excited by gaming, the learned and pious Jeremy Collier expresses his opinion in the following manner, in his 'Essay on Gaming,' in a Dialogue: "I can't help observing that playing deep sets the spirits on float, strikes the mind strongly into the face, and discovers a man's weakness very remarkably. Cards and dice, &c. command the humour no less than the moon does the tide; you may see the passions come up with the dice, and ebb and flow with the fortune of the game; what alternate returns of hope and fear, of pleasure and regret, are frequently visible upon such occasions?
Ενθα δ' ἁμ' οιμωγη τε και ευχωλη πελεν ανδρων,
Ολλυντων τε, και ολλυμενων.
"As you say gaming is an image of war, the sudden turns of success are easily discernible; the advances of victory or ill luck, make a strange revolution in the blood. The countenance takes its tincture from the chance, and appears in the colours of the prospect. With what anxiousness is the issue expected. You would think a jury of life and death was gone out upon them. The sentence for execution is not receiv'd with more concern, than the unlucky appearance of a cast or a card. Thus some people are miserably ruffled, and thrown off the hinges; they seem distress'd to an agony; you'd pity them for the meanness of their behaviour; others are no less foolishly pleas'd; break out with childish satisfaction, and bring the covetousness of their humour too much into view.
"Now since play is thus arbitrary over the passions, who would resign the repose of his mind, and the credit of his temper, to the mercy of chance? Who would stake his discretion upon such unnecessary hazards? And throw the dice, whether he should be in his wits or not?"
On Dolomedes, the other speaker in the dialogue, observing, that this does not always follow; that some people play without the least offensiveness or ruffle, and lose great sums with all the decency and indifference imaginable, the author, in the character of Callimachus, thus proceeds:
"Alas! this is often but a copy of the countenance: things are not so smooth within, as they seem without. Some people when they bleed inwardly have the art to conceal the anguish; and this is generally the most of the matter; but if they are really unconcern'd; if so heavy a blow brings no smart along with it, the case is still worse: these men have no sense of the value of money, they won't do the least penance for their folly, they have not so much as the guard of a remorse. This stoicism is the speediest dispatch to beggary; nothing can be more dangerous than such a stupid tranquillity. To be thus becalm'd presages Short allowance. This sedateness makes the man foolhardy, renew the combat, and venture a brush for the remainder; for he that can be beaten at his ease, and feels no pain upon a wound, will fight, most likely, as long as his legs will bear him.
"But this insensibleness is rarely met with: very few are proof against a shrewd chance to this degree. When misfortune strikes home, 'tis seldom decently receiv'd; their temper goes off with their money. For, according to the proverb, Qui perd le sien, perd le sens. And here one loss usually makes people desperate, and leads to another: and now the gentlemen of your function are extremely vigilant to improve the opportunity, and observe the current of the passions. You know very well when a man's head grows misty with ill luck, when the spleen comes over his understanding, and he has fretted himself off his guard, he is much the easier conquest: thus, when your bubbles are going down the hill, you manage accordingly, lend them a push, tho' their bones are broken at the bottom. But I forget myself; there's neither mercy nor justice in some people's business.
"To return: you know I may take it for granted, that your gaming sparks are horribly ruffled when things with a promising face sicken, and sink on the sudden, when they are surprizingly crossbitten, and success is snatch'd from their grasp; when this happens, which is not unfrequent, the spirits are up immediately, and they are a storm at the first blast: the train takes fire, and they kindle and flash at the touch like gunpowder. And when the passions are thus rampant, nothing is more common than oaths, and execrable language: when instead of blaming their own rashness, and disciplining their folly, they are cursing their stars, and raging against their fate. [347]
"These paroxysms of madness run sometimes so high, that you would think the Devil had seiz'd the organs of speech, and that they were possess'd in every syllable: and to finish farther, these hideous sallies are sometimes carry'd on to quarrelling and murther. The dice, it may be, are snatch'd too quick, the cast is disputed, the loading and legerdemain is discover'd.
"Jamque faces et saxa volant:—
Upon this, they run to arms, and after some artillery discharg'd in swearing, come to a close encounter. And thus one of them is run through the lungs, and left agonizing upon the place: or, as it happen'd not long since, the gamester is knocked down with a pint-pot, and his skull broken: he is forced to be trepan'd, and then relapsing into play and drinking, dies of a frenzy.
"As to the hazards, they are frightful, and sufficient to overset the temper of better principled people than gamesters commonly are. Have we not heard of ladies losing hundreds of guineas at a sitting? And others more slenderly stock'd, disfurnish their husbands' studies, and play off the books which, it may be, help'd to feed them. And when the women are thus courageous, the men conclude their own sex calls for a bolder liberty: that they ought to go farther in danger, and appear more brave in the methods of ruin: thus a manor has been lost in an afternoon; the suit and service follow the cast, and the right is transfer'd sooner than the lawyer can draw the conveyance. A box and dice are terrible artillery, a battery of cannon scarcely plays with more execution. They make a breach in a castle, and command a surrender in a little time. " [348]
A curious Rabbinical tract on the subject of Gaming, entitled, סור מרע,—Sûr Mera,—that is, "Depart from Evil," [349] seems to require some notice here. It was first printed at Venice, about 1615; was reprinted at Leyden about 1660; and a third edition, accompanied with a German translation, was published at Leipsic in 1683. None of the editors mention either the name of the author, or the time when he lived. The work is in the form of a dialogue between two young Jews, one of whom, named Medad, maintains the lawfulness of Gaming, and is opposed by the other, named Eldad. The work is divided into six chapters. The first is merely introductory, giving a brief account of the speakers in the dialogue;—Medad, a merchant's son, addicted to play; and Eldad, his friend, who endeavours to reclaim him. The second chapter contains the argument which they had on the subject of gaming and commerce; Medad endeavouring to show that play is commendable and similar to commerce; while Eldad maintains the contrary. In the third chapter, Eldad undertakes to prove from the Scriptures that a gamester breaks all the Ten Commandments, and Medad ingeniously answers him. In the fourth chapter, Eldad, on the authority of the Talmud and other Rabbinical works, maintains that a gamester can neither be a judge nor a witness; and Medad answers him, citing opposite passages from the same authorities. In the fifth chapter, Eldad recites a piece of poetry descriptive of the miserable state of a gamester; and Medad, in return, recites another, wherein the pleasures of a gamester's life are highly extolled. In the sixth and last chapter, Eldad seriously exhorts his friend to assent to truth; Medad yields, and acknowledges that the cause which he had maintained was bad.
The following are a few of the more remarkable passages in the argument of Medad, the advocate of gaming: "Play is commendable, the same as all other human inventions. It is like a bright mirror in which many excellent things are to be discovered, exciting to a sluggish man, and causing him to forget the cares incident to daily life. Though it be undeniable that he whose whole pleasure consists in keeping the commands of the Lord, and who is neither vain nor ambitious, is a better man than he who plays; yet of the various pursuits in which men engage in order to obtain wealth or power, Play is one which may be allowed to those who, without pretending to be absolutely righteous, yet endeavour to be as righteous as they can. Through much trafficking man becomes knowing; and wares are in Hebrew called סחורה—Sechorah—a word which means 'circulation,' or 'that which circulates,' on account of their passing from one person to another by way of barter or sale. Why should Play not be estimated the same as any other business, at which money is sometimes lost and sometimes gained? [350] The determining of matters by lot or chance is even of Divine institution: the high priest's sin-offering was to be determined by lot; the land was to be divided amongst the Twelve Tribes by lot; David, in the sixteenth Psalm, says that the Lord maintains his lot; and in Proverbs, chap. xviii, we are told that 'the lot causeth contentions to cease, and parteth between the mighty.'—It is answered, that traffic or commerce is productive of mutual benefit. But hearken: in anticipation of a dearth you purchase a hundred quarters of corn of your neighbour, and lock it up in your granaries, in the hope of gaining double. You raise your face to Heaven, but it is to look out for the signs of bad weather; and you are content that there should be a famine in the land, provided that you thrive by it. When your wine-vats are full to overflowing, you enjoy the storm of thunder and hail that destroys the vintage of the year; for you will thus be enriched. But is this just? is there any mutual benefit in this? Can you make your profit without the rest of the world being injured? And yet you are held to be an honourable fair-dealing man. [351]—In the third chapter of the tract Sanhedrin, gamesters and usurers are indeed classed together; but it is known that in the Scriptures usury is strongly condemned, while play is not even forbidden. But now, those who live by usury are honoured; and so far from being deprived of the right of acting as judges or of giving testimony as witnesses, they are magistrates and rulers: a word of theirs is worth a hundred witnesses. Gamesters, on the contrary, are unjustly vilified; and he who does not speak evil of play runs the risk of being excommunicated.—Even the losing gamester may derive great advantage from his play: he is thus taught to bear losses with patience; and when in other matters he has been unlucky and has lost much money, he consoles himself with the thought that it is only what has often happened to him at play. He perceives that nothing is stable or perpetual in human affairs, and takes the good and the bad with even temper. From his games he also acquires the elements of science; he learns arithmetic without a master; and also becomes a proficient in logic and rhetoric, from his exercise of those arts on his opponents. From the cards he may acquire a knowledge of painting, and from the dice, which are exactly squared, he may learn mathematics. In short, he who plays at cards and dice, has a hand in all arts. The Hebrew word בכל--Bekol--which signifies 'in all,' is, in its numerical value, equal to 52: that is, ב = 2; כ = 20; and ל = 30: in all 52,--the number of cards in a French pack. The Hebrew word ויד--Va-yod--which signifies 'a Hand,' is, in the same manner, reckoning the word itself as 1, equal to 21: that is, ו = 6; י = 10; ד = 4; the word itself = 1: in all 21,—the number of the spots on a die. Thus, from his play, may a man learn righteousness, and how to conduct himself with moderation."
Though the game of cards has not been so elaborately moralised as the game of Chess, yet the Pack has not wanted spiritual expounders, who have ingeniously shown that it might serve, not only as a perpetual almanack, but also as a moral monitor, and a help to devotion. The most popular and best known of such expositions, or rather applications, is that entitled 'The Perpetual Almanack, or Gentleman-Soldier's Prayer Book;' which has been long circulated in this country as a penny chap-book. Mons. Leber says that it is an imitation of a French tract on the same subject, entitled 'Explication morale du Jeu de Cartes, anecdote curieuse et intéressante, sous le nom de Louis Bras-de-fer, engagé au service du roi,' which seems to have been first published at Brussels, in 1778. The history of Bras-de-fer is referred to by Breitkopf; and Mons. Renouard, speaking of Singer's 'Researches into the History of Playing Cards,' in the Catalogue of his Library, observes, "Cet auteur, qui a tout recherché, n'a probablement pas tout rencontré, car s'il l'eut seulement entrevue, auroit-il laissé échapper l'explication morale du jeu de cartes par le soldat Bras-de-fer, l'une des pièces le plus notables de la bibliothèque à deux sols?" In order that a similar objection may not be brought against the writer of this work, the whole of the Perpetual Almanack is here given, verbatim, from a broadside, "printed by J. Catnach, 2, Monmouth Court, Seven Dials."
"The Perpetual Almanack; or Gentleman-soldier's Prayer Book: shewing how one Richard Middleton was taken before the Mayor of the city he was in for using cards in church during Divine Service: being a droll, merry, and humorous account of an odd affair that happened to a private soldier in the 60th Regiment of Foot.
"The serjeant commanded his party to the church, and when the parson had ended his prayer, he took his text, and all of them that had a Bible, pulled it out to find the text; but this soldier had neither Bible, Almanack, nor Common-Prayer Book, but he put his hand in his pocket and pulled out a pack of cards, and spread them before him as he sat; and while the parson was preaching, he first kept looking at one card and then at another. [352] The serjeant of the company saw him, and said, 'Richard, put up your cards, for this is no place for them.'—'Never mind that,' said the soldier, 'you have no business with me here.'
"Now the parson had ended his sermon, and all was over: the soldiers repaired to the churchyard and the commanding officer gave the word of command to fall in, which they did. The serjeant of the city came, and took the man prisoner.—'Man, you are my prisoner,' said he.—'Sir,' said the soldier, 'what have I done that I am your prisoner?'—'You have played a game at cards in the church.'—' No,' said the soldier, 'I have not play'd a game, for I only looked at a pack.'—'No matter for that, you are my prisoner.'—'Where must we go?' said the soldier.—'You must go before the Mayor,' said the serjeant. So he took him before the Mayor; and when they came to the Mayor's house, he was at dinner. When he had dined he came down to them, and said, 'Well, serjeant, what do you want with me?'—'I have brought a soldier before you for playing at cards in the church.'—'What! that soldier?'—'Yes.'—'Well, soldier, what have you to say for yourself?'—'Much, sir, I hope.'—'Well and good; but if you have not, you shall be punished the worst that ever man was.'—'Sir,' said the soldier, 'I have been five weeks upon the march, and have but little to subsist on; and am without either Bible, Almanack, or Common-Prayer Book, or anything but a pack of cards: I hope to satisfy your honour of the purity of my intentions.'
"Then the soldier pulled out of his pocket the pack of cards, which he spread before the Mayor; he then began with the Ace. 'When I see the Ace,' said he, 'it puts me in mind that there is one God only; when I see the Deuce, it puts me in mind of the Father and the Son; when I see the Tray, it puts me in mind of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; when I see the Four, it puts me in mind of the four Evangelists, that penned the Gospel, viz. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; when I see the Five, it puts me in mind of the five wise virgins who trimmed their lamps; there were ten, but five were foolish, who were shut out. When I see the Six, it puts me in mind that in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth; when I see the Seven, it puts me in mind that on the seventh day God rested from all the works which he had created and made, wherefore the Lord blessed the seventh day, and hallowed it. When I see the Eight, it puts me in mind of the eight righteous persons that were saved when God drowned the world, viz. Noah, his wife, three sons, and their wives; when I see the Nine, it puts me in mind of nine lepers that were cleansed by our Saviour; there were ten, but nine never returned God thanks; when I see the Ten, it puts me in mind of the Ten Commandments that God gave Moses on Mount Sinai on the two tables of stone.' He took the Knave, and laid it aside.—'When I see the Queen, it puts me in mind of the Queen of Sheba, who came from the furthermost parts of the world to hear the wisdom of King Solomon, for she was as wise a woman as he was a man; for she brought fifty boys and fifty girls, all clothed in boy's apparel, to show before King Solomon, for him to tell which were boys, and which were girls; but he could not, until he called for water for them to wash themselves; the girls washed up to their elbows, and the boys only up to their wrists; so King Solomon told by that. And when I see the King, it puts me in mind of the great King of Heaven and Earth, which is God Almighty, and likewise his Majesty King George, to pray for him.'
"'Well,' said the Mayor, 'you have a very good description of all the cards, except one, which is lacking.'—'Which is that?' said the soldier.'—'The Knave,' said the Mayor.—'Oh, I can give your honour a very good description of that, if your honour won't be angry.'—'No, I will not,' said the Mayor, 'if you will not term me to be the Knave.'—'Well,' said the soldier, 'the greatest that I know is the serjeant of the city, that brought me here.'—'I don't know,' said the Mayor, 'that he is the greatest knave, but I am sure that he is the greatest fool.'—'When I count how many spots there are in a pack of cards, I find there are three hundred and sixty-five; there are so many days in a year. When I count how many cards there are in a pack, I find there are fifty-two; there are so many weeks in a year. When I count how many tricks in a pack, I find there are thirteen; there are so many months in a year. You see, sir, that this pack of cards is a Bible, Almanack, Common-Prayer Book, and pack of cards to me.'
"Then the Mayor called for a loaf of bread, a piece of good cheese, and a pot of good beer, and gave the soldier a piece of money, bidding him to go about his business, saying he was the cleverest man he had ever seen."
Another chap-book, entitled 'A New Game at Cards, between a Nobleman in London and one of his Servants,' is merely a variation of the 'Perpetual Almanack:' a servant being denounced to his master as a gambler, denies the fact; and on a pack of cards being found in his pocket, he asserts that he is unacquainted with their use as mere cards, and that he uses them as an almanack, and sometimes converts them into a prayer-book. The four suits answer to the four quarters of the year; there are thirteen cards in each suit, and thirteen weeks in each quarter; the twelve coat cards correspond with the twelve months in a year; and there are just as many weeks in the year as cards in a pack. The King and Queen remind him of his allegiance; the Ten reminds him of the Ten Commandments; the Nine, of the nine Muses; the Eight, of the eight altitudes, and the eight persons who were saved in the ark; the Seven, of the seven wonders of the world, and the seven planets that rule the days of the week; the Six, of the six petitions contained in the Lord's Prayer, and of the six working days in a week; the Five, of the five senses; the Four, of the four seasons; the Three, of the three Graces, and of the three days and nights that Jonah was in the whale's belly; the Two, of the two Testaments, Old and New, and of the two contrary principles, Virtue and Vice; and the Ace, of the worship of one God. With respect to the Knave, which, like the soldier, he had laid aside, and had omitted to notice in its proper place, he says, on being asked its meaning by his master, that it will always remind him of the person who informed against him.
A variation of the history of Bras-de-fer was published at Paris in 1809, with notes by a Mons. Hadin, under the following title: 'Histoire du Jeu de Cartes du Grenadier Richard, ou Explication du Jeu de cinquante-deux cartes en forme de Livres de Prière.' [353] Mons. G. Brunet, in his 'Notice Bibliographique sur les Cartes à jouer,' says that this livret is not devoid of originality, and that it is not easily met with. From the passages which he quotes, it would appear that the "Grenadier Richard" was equally well read in sacred and profane history, and that he had thumbed both his Concordance and his Classical Dictionary to some purpose. The Ace reminds him, amongst various other things, of the unity of the Deity; that Noah left the ark one year after the deluge; and that there is only one Catholic Church. When he sees the Nine, he thinks of the nine orders of angels; and is reminded that Christ died at the ninth hour of the day. A Queen reminds him of Eve, Judith, Dalilah, the Queen of Sheba, and the Virgin Mary; a Knave, of the centurion in the Gospel; and a King, of Adam, Solomon, or any king mentioned in Holy Writ. The twelve coat cards remind him of the twelve fountains of Elim, the twelve precious stones in the breastplate of the high priest, the twelve loaves of shew-bread, the twelve stones with which Eli built an altar, the twelve patriarchs, the twelve oxen that sustained the brazen sea in Solomon's temple, the twelve apostles, the twelve articles of the creed, and the twelve feasts which are more particularly celebrated by the Church of Rome in honour of Christ. Diamonds—le Carreau,—make him think of the place where the cross was fixed; Spades—le Pique,—of the lance which pierced the side of Christ; and Clubs,—le Trèfle,—with their triple leaves, of the love of the three women who went early in the morning with perfumes to the holy sepulchre.
On subjects of heathen mythology, cards are equally suggestive to his well-stored memory. The Three reminds him of the three sons of Saturn,—Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto; of the three Furies, the three Graces, the three Hesperides, the three daughters of Mineus, and the three horses of the chariot of Pluto. The Four reminds him of the four ages, the four horses of the chariot of the sun, and the four labyrinths, namely, of Egypt, Crete, Italy, and Lemnos; and whenever he sees the Nine, he is vividly reminded of the nine Muses, and the nine acres of land covered by the body of the giant Tithius. The twelve coat cards are suggestive of the twelve gods and goddesses, the twelve labours of Hercules, and sundry other twelves besides. [354]
The following historical anecdote, apropos, of a pack of cards, is extracted from a little book in duodecimo, entitled 'The Social and Instructive Companion,' printed for T. Field in Paternoster Row, 1765. The same story is also inserted in the 'Whitehall Evening Post,' of the 27th September, 1767; and the editor says that it is related in the manuscript memoirs of Richard, Earl of Cork, and of Henry Usher, primate of Armagh. He further adds that its truth was ascertained by James Usher, Archbishop of Armagh, nephew of the aforesaid Henry. Whether true or false, a great many more improbable things have passed current as authentic history upon no better evidence.
"Queen Mary having dealt severely with the Protestants in England, signed a commission about the latter end of her reign, for taking the same course with them in Ireland; and to execute the same with greater force, she nominated Dr. Cole, who had recommended himself by wholesome severities in England, to be one of the commissioners, sending the commission by the doctor himself.
"In the way, Dr. Cole lodged one night at Chester, where, being visited as the queen's messenger, and a churchman of distinction by the mayor of that city, he informed this magistrate of the contents of his message; and taking a box out of his cloak-bag, said, 'Here is a commission that shall lash the heretics' (meaning the Protestants of Ireland).
"The good woman of the house being well affected to the Protestant religion, and having also a brother named John Edmonds, then a citizen in Dublin, and a Protestant, was greatly disturbed at the doctor's words; but waiting a convenient time whilst the mayor took his leave, and the doctor complimented him down stairs, she ventured to open the box, and taking the commission out, she in its place put a sheet of paper, and a pack of cards, with the Knave of Clubs faced uppermost, wrapped up. The doctor, at his return to his chamber, suspecting nothing of what had been done, put up the box again into his cloak-bag; and next day the wind setting fair, he sailed for Ireland, and landed at Dublin, the 7th of October, 1558.
"The doctor having notified his arrival at the Castle, the lord deputy Fitz-Walters sent for him to come before his excellency and the privy council; to whom the doctor made a long speech relating to the subject of his commission, and then presented the leather box with its contents to the lord deputy. But when the deputy opened it for the secretary to read the commission, lo! to the great surprise of all present, and the doctor's confusion, there was nothing found but a pack of cards with the Knave of Clubs faced uppermost. The doctor assured the deputy and council that he had a commission, but knew not how it was gone, 'Then,' said the lord deputy, 'let us have another commission, and we will shuffle the cards in the meanwhile.'
"The doctor withdrew in great trouble of mind; and hasting back to England, obtained a fresh commission: but being detained some time at the water side for a fair wind, he was prevented from putting it into execution by the news of the queen's death.
"This account of the providential deliverance of the Protestants in Ireland from the Marian persecution is attested in the memorials of Richard, Earl of Cork, by the Lord Primate Usher; and in Sir James Ware's MSS.; who also writes that Queen Elizabeth, being informed of the truth thereof by the lord deputy Fitz-Walters, her Majesty was so delighted, that she sent for the good woman, named Elizabeth Edmonds, but by her husband (whom she afterwards married) named Mathershead, and gave her a pension of forty pounds during life, for having saved her Protestant subjects of Ireland."
Having now laid before the reader a store of facts and speculations on the origin and history of cards, a sketch of the progress of card-playing in different countries in Europe, and a collection of the opinions of several eminent men on the lawfulness of the game theologically and morally considered, together with sundry other matters either naturally, or artificially, associated with cards,—I shall conclude the work by a brief recapitulation of a few of the leading facts and circumstances relating to the origin of cards and the time of their first introduction into Europe.
In Hindostan, the tradition is, that cards were known in that country at a remote period,—upwards of a thousand years ago; but I have not been able to learn that they are mentioned in any Hindostanee work of an early date, and I am informed, on the authority of the Sanscrit professor at Oxford, that there is no Sanscrit word for playing cards. This last fact is, however, of but little weight as negative evidence of cards being unknown in Hindostan a thousand years ago; for long before that time Sanscrit had become obsolete as a vernacular language. In China, if any credit can be attached to the two dictionaries, or rather cyclopædias, of the greatest authority in that country, "Dotted Cards" were invented in 1120, in the reign of Seun-ho, and began to be common in the reign of Kaou-tsung, who ascended the throne in 1131. Cards—Carte—are mentioned in an Italian work, said to have been composed by Sandro di Pipozzo in 1299; but as the MS. is not of an earlier date than 1400, there is good reason for concluding the word to be an interpolation, seeing that in several works of the earlier part of the fourteenth century, which had been cited to prove that cards were then known in Europe, it has been discovered that the term cards was an interpolation introduced at a later period by a transcriber. The author of the 'Güldin Spil,' a work written about the middle of the fifteenth century, and printed at Augsburg, in 1472, says that he had read that the game of cards was first brought into Germany in 1300. No fact, however, confirmatory of the correctness of this account has been discovered; and the omission of all notice of cards by European authors of the earlier half of the fourteenth century, even when expressly treating of the games in vogue at the period, may be received as good negative evidence of their not being then known as a popular game in Europe: "De non apparentibus et non existentibus eadem est ratio." Admitting cards to be of Eastern invention—a fact which appears to be sufficiently established by the evidence adduced in the first chapter,—it would seem that they first became known in Europe as a popular game between 1360 and 1390. Covelluzzo, an Italian chronicler of the fifteenth century, says, that the game was first brought into Viterbo in 1379; in 1393, three packs of cards were painted by Jacquemin Gringonneur for the amusement of Charles VI of France; [355] in 1397, the working people of Paris were forbid to play at cards on working days; and in the same year card-playing was prohibited by the magistrates of Ulm. Such are the principal facts relative to the introduction of cards into Europe. The game appears to have rapidly spread amongst all classes of people. The manufacture of cards was a regular business in Germany and Italy prior to 1425; the importation of foreign cards into England was prohibited by act of parliament in 1463; and about 1484, cards, as at present, was a common Christmas game. It is unnecessary to recapitulate the more prominent incidents which mark the progress of card-playing; it may be sufficient to observe, that no other game was ever so generally played, with people of both sexes,—young and old, rich and poor. Even the "red man" of America, the "Stoic of the Woods," has acquired a knowledge of cards, from his neighbours of European descent, and ceases to be apathetic when engaged in the game. It is, perhaps, as extensively diffused as the use of tobacco; and is certainly indulged in by a greater variety of persons.
