Facts and Speculations on the Origin and History of Playing Cards

by William Andrew Chatto

In an article on Cards, in the 'Magasin Pittoresque' for April, 1836, an illustration is given, of which the annexed cut is a fac-simile. The writer of the article says that it is exactly copied from a miniature in a MS. of the Cité de Dieu, translated from St. Augustine by Raoul de Presles, who began the translation in 1371, and finished it in 1375. The writer, considering the MS. to be of the same date as the translation, says that the miniature represents persons of distinction of the reign of Charles V. [86] As he adduces, however, no evidence to show that the MS. is of so early a date, his so-called demonstration that cards were well known in 1375, is essentially defective; for, in transcripts of books, nothing is more common than to find, in the illustrations, things which were unknown when the works were first written. The costume, indeed, appears more like that of persons of distinction about the latter end of the reign of Charles VI, 1422, than of the reign of Charles V, 1364-1380. From the kind of cards which the parties are seen playing with, no safe conclusion can be drawn with respect to the age of the manuscript; for it is not positively known what kind of cards were chiefly used in France between 1392 and 1440. But, whatever may be the date of the manuscript, it is evident that numeral cards marked with "pips" and honours, similarly to those now in common use, were known in France at the time when the drawing was made.

The following account of the introduction of cards into Viterbo, in 1379, previously referred to in Chapter I, is here given as it is to be found in Leber's 'Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer.' "Feliciano Bussi relates, in his 'History of Viterbo,' [87] a work but little known, that in 1379, the epoch of the schism caused by the opposition of the anti-pope Clement to Urban VI, the mercenary troops of each party committed all manner of annoyances and spoliations in the Roman States, and that a great number of cattle, which had been stolen by the marauders, and driven to Viterbo for the provisionment of that city, were there seized, and carried off in a moment. 'And yet,' adds the historian, 'who could believe it! In this same year of so much distress there was introduced into Viterbo the game of cards, or, as I would say, playing cards, which previously were not in the least known in that city;' the words of Covelluzzo, are, folio 28, verso: 'In the year 1379, was brought into Viterbo the game of cards, which comes from the country of the Saracens, and is with them called Naib.'" As the introduction of cards into Viterbo is here directly recorded as a historical fact, there can be little doubt, if the passage in Covelluzzo be genuine, that cards were known to the Italian condottieri in 1379. In the chronicle of Giovan Morelli, of the date 1393, Naibi is mentioned as a kind of game; and, from the context, it has been concluded that it was one at which children only played. [88] At any rate it appears there as a game at which older people might play without reproach. Long after cards were condemned by synods and civic ordinances, as a game of hazard, grave writers allowed that sober, decent people might enjoy the game provided that they played purely for the sake of recreation, and not for the chance of winning their neighbour's money.

Heineken quotes from the 'Güldin Spil,' a book written about the middle of the fifteenth century by a Dominican friar, of the name of Ingold, printed at Augsburg, by Gunther Zainer, in 1472, the following passage relating to cards: [89] "Nun ist das Spil vol untrew; und, als ich gelesen han, so ist es kommen in Teutschland der ersten in dem iar, da man zalt von Crist geburt, tausend dreihundert iar." That is: "The game is right deceitful; and, as I have read, was first brought into Germany in the year 1300." The title of 'Güldin Spil,'—the Golden Game,—appears to have been given to the work by the author, on account of its being a kind of pious travesty of the principal games in vogue in Germany at the period when he wrote: having given each game a moral exposition, that which was formerly dross is converted into gold: the "old man" is put off, and the reformed gambler, instead of idling away his precious time at tric-trac, dice, or cards for beggarly groschen, "goes" his whole soul at the 'Güldin Spil.'

That the author had read somewhere of cards having been first brought into Germany in 1300, may be admitted without question; for to suppose that he told an untruth, would require to be backed by a supplementary conjecture as to his motives for falsifying,—a mode of eliciting the "truth," in frequent use indeed with philosophic historians when discussing questions of great import in the history of nations, but not exactly suitable for determining a trifling fact in the history of Playing Cards. Having admitted the good faith of the author of the 'Güldin Spil,' the next question that presents itself is, whether what he had read about the introduction of cards into Germany was in itself true; it is, however, unnecessary to discuss it here, for even if cards were known in Germany at so early a period, there is no satisfactory evidence of their having been common in that country until about a century later.

Von Murr, who also cites from the 'Güldin Spil' the preceding passage relating to cards, thinks that the epoch assigned, 1300, is at least fifty years too early. [90] He, however, states that he found cards—Carten—mentioned in an old book of bye-laws and regulations of the city of Nuremberg, to which he assigns a date between 1380 and 1384. The word occurs in a bye-law relating to gaming—'Vom Spil'—from the penalties of which the following games are, under certain circumstances, excepted: "Horse-racing, shooting with cross-bows, cards, shovel-board, tric-trac, and bowls, at which a man may bet from two pence to a groat." Whether the date assigned by Von Murr be correct or not, I am unable to determine. His reason for concluding that it was between the years 1380 and 1384, is as follows: "There is indeed no date to this bye-law, but it is written in the same hand as a law relating to the Toll-houses before the New Gate; and at folio 4 there is a precise date, namely the second day before Walpurg's day, 1384." The reason is not a very good one; for, even admitting the identity of the hand-writing in the ordinance relating to gaming, and in the act of 1381 relating to the toll-houses, yet both might have been copied into the book at a subsequent period. It is also to be observed, that, according to Von Murr's own account, the date 1384 occurs in the fourth folio, while the ordinance in which cards are mentioned, is in the sixteenth folio. But though the date assigned by Von Murr to the Nuremberg regulation, may be a few years too early, there is good reason to believe that cards were well known in Germany towards the conclusion of the fourteenth century. According to Mons. Neubronner, administrator at Ulm, (about 1806,) there was in the archives of that city an ancient parchment volume, called the Red Book, on account of its red initial letters, which contained a prohibition against Card Playing, dated 1397. [91]

Having now laid before the reader the principal authorities which have been alleged by various writers,—whether for the purpose of showing the antiquity of card-playing in Europe generally, or with the design of supporting their own opinion as to the invention of cards in some particular country—it is now time to enter on what may be termed the positive history of cards, beginning from the year 1393.

Charles VI of France lost his reason in consequence of a coup-de-soleil, in 1392; and during the remainder of his life continued insane, though with occasional lucid intervals. In either the same or in the following year, 1393, this entry occurs in the accounts of his treasurer, Charles Poupart, or, as he is named by Monstrelet, Charbot Poupart: "Given to Jacquemin Gringonneur, painter, for three packs of cards, gilt and coloured, and variously ornamented, for the amusement of the king, fifty-six sols of Paris." [92] Menestrier, who was the first to point out this passage, concluded from it that the game of cards was then first invented by Gringonneur for the purpose of diverting the king's melancholy; and his account of the invention long passed as authentic in the politely learned world. That the game of cards was invented by Gringonneur is in the highest degree improbable; for the general tenor of the passage in which they are named by Poupart implies that the game was then already known, though from the notice of the gilding and colouring of the cards, it may be supposed that Gringonneur had a special order for them, and that they were not then in general use.

"If," says Piegnot, "Père Menestrier had paid attention to the manner in which the passage is drawn up, he would have perceived that the expression 'for three packs of cards,'—'pour trois jeux de cartes'—clearly announces, from its very simplicity, that cards were already known, and that their invention was of a much earlier date. The writer would not have mentioned so simply a collection of figures, just conceived and painted by Gringonneur on small pieces of paper, and very remarkable, as well from their symmetry and regularity, as from the characters represented on them. " [93]

The Hon. Daines Barrington, in his 'Observations on the Antiquity of Playing Cards in England,' doubts if Poupart's entry actually relates to Playing Cards. He is of opinion that the words "trois jeux de cartes" mean three sets of illuminations upon paper, "carte originally signifying nothing more." If Mr. Barrington had produced any authority to show that, either in the time of Charles VI, or at any other period, "un jeu de cartes" was used to signify a set of illuminations, or that the term ever signified anything else than a pack, or a game, of cards, his doubt would not have had so much the appearance of a starved conceit.