A Frenchman, Père Menestrier, studied the history of the cards that were known to him as early as 1704, when he published “Des Principes des Sciences et des Arts Disposé en Forme de Jeux.” Others followed his example, but they all looked upon cards simply as gambling instruments, or regarded them as interesting historical fashion plates picturing French celebrities, or else as rare engraved plates; so they treated the cards of their own countries only from this point of view. Of course, most of the writers knew only the cards of their immediate surroundings, and, if they ever were cognizant of the ancient Tarots, disregarded them entirely.
When, in 1836, Samuel Weller Singer published his “History of Playing Cards,” he was interested in engraving, with its kindred arts, and he found that the earliest work on wood or metal had been done to reproduce cards. This book was followed by the “History of Playing Cards,” by William Andrew Chatto; “Origin of Playing Cards” (1865); “History of Playing Cards,” by Rev. Edward Taylor, and many others. Although two persons in the priesthood devoted time to studying cards, they did not do so with reference to their religious influence on their congregations. Still, they acknowledged with surprise that these unbound leaves offered an interesting study, and, while each one pointed out the probable connection of Playing Cards with the Book of Thoth and the cult of Mercury, not one of them proved the statement, but slurred it over, as if rather ashamed of the idea, although the fact could easily have been proved through a careful examination of the marks, the pips, and the emblems on the cards themselves, that are so undoubtedly the heraldic devices through which Mercury is always recognised, and which he received from the most ancient forms of worship in Babylonia.
These authors, with other German, French, and Spanish writers, unanimously decided that, since there is no legal record or trustworthy mention of cards intended for use in games before the year 1392 (the one that they seemed to agree upon, ignoring the account given of the martyrdom of St. Cyprian in 258, who was killed for remonstrating against playing cards), and since chance has not disclosed a hitherto unknown monument to their birth and cradle, that these playthings were suddenly invented just about the date when they appeared simultaneously all over Europe for the amusement of pleasure-loving mortals. However, they quarrelled a bit as to whether cards were first known in the Occident or in the Orient, but none of the authors studied divination, and the rules known to astrologers, fortune-tellers or gypsies that are carefully preserved, as well as the evident connection of Playing Cards with the tools of the diviners of ancient days.
These authors proved entirely too near-sighted and would not read what the cards themselves displayed before their semi-opened vision, probably because they despised the professional prophets. Besides, the French, Spanish, German, and English writers each claimed for his own country the first knowledge of Playing Cards used for games, without recognising that their bantlings all came from a common mother stock, the great Tarot pack. Thus the arguments, deductions, and theories of these writers can command respect only to a limited degree.
Merlin and Chatto have treated cards as interesting examples of the xylographic art, and it is certainly true that they were an important factor in developing it; but this period in the history of Playing Cards was by no means its childhood, as the writers seem to consider. Many of them did not know that almost every one of the European countries had emblems peculiar to the locality, which is also the case in Asia. None of the museums have even now any packs except those peculiar to their own State.
In the Middle Ages games became necessary amusements in camp and home, so there was a demand for a rapid and inexpensive form of reproduction that should take the place of the expensively painted replicas of the Book of Thoth, which before had been within reach only of the wealthy.
Of course, the original emblems had never been entirely lost or forgotten, but had been concealed in the hands of the initiates, who regarded them with reverence and transmitted them secretly from one to the other, but did not use cards for gambling or amusement. These persons did not reveal the history or import of the Book of Thoth to the triflers of the outside world, and had no desire to see their treasured secrets cheaply reproduced, to be carelessly handled by curious or pleasure-loving people.
The author of “The Game of Gold,” published at Augsburg in 1472, says he has read that “the game of cards was introduced into Germany in 1300.” This is one of the first written accounts of Playing Cards used for games. It was pointed out by Chatto that there is a Chinese legend claiming Playing Cards as being used in China some two thousand years before Christ. Doubtless the Chinese recognized that their games of divination, as still commonly played, were identical with the cards used for chance, as the little flat cards are still used for both purposes.
When Columbus made his first voyage across the Atlantic, his men gambled continually, and, although the superstitious sailors threw the cards overboard when they feared that they would never reach land, they manufactured new ones immediately on their arrival in America, and taught the savages their game, so we know without question that cards reached America in 1492. They were called Naypes and bore the emblems of Swords, Money, Cups, and Rods.
After these records of Playing Cards come some that are of later date. In “Capitolo del Gioco della Primera,” by Berni, published in Rome in 1526, the author claims that “playing cards were invented by King Ferdinand,” which statement may be regarded with amusement, since other Italian records prove an earlier date.