Facts and Speculations on the Origin and History of Playing Cards

Should a person who has never bestowed a thought on the subject ask, "What can there be that is interesting in the History of Cards?" it is answered, "There may be much." There is an interest, of a certain kind, even in the solution of a riddle, or the explication of a conundrum; and certain learned men, such as Père Daniel, and Court de Gebelin, having assumed that the game of Cards was originally instructive, and that the figures and marks of the suits are emblematic, speaking to the intelligent of matters of great import, their amusingly absurd speculations on the subject—set forth with all the gravity of a "budge doctor" determining ex cathedra—impart to the History of Cards an interest which, intrinsically, it does not possess. But putting aside all that may relate to their covert meaning, cards, considered with respect to what they simply are—the instruments of a popular game, and the productions of art—suggest several questions, the investigation of which is not without interest: Where and when were they invented, and what is the origin of their names? When were they introduced into Europe? What has been their progress as a popular game; and what influence have they had on society? What changes have they undergone with respect to the figures and the marks of the suits; and to what purposes have picture and fancy cards been made subservient, in consequence of those in common use being so generally understood? And lastly, what have been the opinions of moralists and theologians with respect to the lawfulness of the game?—Such are the topics discussed, and questions examined, in the following pages.

Of the works of previous writers on the origin of Cards I have freely availed myself; using them as guides when I thought them right, pointing out their errors when I thought them wrong, and allowing them to speak for themselves whenever they seemed instructive or amusing. Having no wish to appropriate what was not my own, I have quoted my authorities with scrupulous fidelity; and am not conscious of an obligation which I have not acknowledged. Should the reader not obtain from this work all the information on Cards which he might have expected, it is hoped that he will at least acquire from its perusal a knowledge of the true value of such investigations. Between being well informed on a subject, and knowing the real worth of such information, there is a distinction which is often overlooked, especially by antiquaries.

In the Illustrations will be found a greater variety of Cards than have hitherto been given in any other work on the same subject, not excepting the splendid publication of the Society of Bibliophiles Français, entitled 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales du Quatorzième au Dix-huitième Siècle.' All the cards—with the exception of the French Valets, at p. 250, and the Portuguese Chevaliers, at p. 252,—have been copied by Mr. F. W. Fairholt; and all the wood-engravings—with the exception of the tail-piece, by W. J. Linton, at p. 330,—have been executed by Mr. George Vasey.

W. A. C.

London;
17th April, 1848.

ORIGIN AND HISTORY

of

PLAYING CARDS.

Man has been distinctively termed "a cooking animal;" and Dr. Franklin has defined him to be "a tool-making animal." He may also, with equal truth, be defined to be "a gambling animal;" since to gamble, or venture, on chance, his own property, with the hope of winning the property of another, is as peculiar to him, in distinction from other animals, as his broiling a fish after he has caught it with his hands, or making for himself a stone hatchet to enable him to fell a tree. Whether this gambling peculiarity is to be ascribed to the superiority of his intellectual or of his physical constitution, others may determine for themselves.

Other animals, in common with man, will fight for meat, drink, and lodging; and will do battle for love as fiercely as the ancient knights of chivalry, whose great incitements to heroic deeds—in plain English, killing and wounding—were ladye-love and the honour of the peacock. There is, however, no well-authenticated account of any of the lower orders of animals ever having been seen risking their property at "odd or even," or drawing lots for choice of pasturage. No shepherd has ever yet succeeded in teaching his sagacious colley to take a hand at cards with him on the hill side; the most knowing monkey has never been able to comprehend the mysteries of "tossing;" and even the learned pig, that tells people their fortune by the cards, is never able to learn what is trumps.

Seeing, then, that to gamble is exclusively proper to man,—secundum essentiam consecutive,—and admitting that,

"The proper study of mankind is man,"

it plainly follows, that as Playing Cards are the instruments of the most fascinating species of gambling that ever was devised by the ingenuity of man, their origin and history are a very proper subject for rational discussion. The cooking, tool-making, gambling animal displays its rationality, according to Dr. Franklin, by its knowing how to find or invent a plausible pretext for whatever it has an inclination to do.

Judging from the manner in which the origin and history of Playing Cards have been treated by various authors within the last hundred and fifty years, it is evident that the subject, whatever they may have made of it, is one of great "capability," to use the favorite term of a great designer in the landscape-gardening line; and it seems no less evident that some of those authors have been disposed to magnify its apparent insignificance by associating it with other topics, which are generally allowed to be both interesting and important. In this respect they have certainly shown great tact; for though many learned men have, at different periods, written largely and profoundly on very trifling subjects, yet it does seem necessary for a man, however learned and discreet, to set forth, either in his title-page or in his proemium, something like an apology for his becoming the historiographer of Playing Cards,—things in themselves slightly esteemed even by those who use them most, and frequently termed by pious people "the devil's books." The example which has thus been set I am resolved to follow; for though, in the title-page, I announce no other topic for the purpose of casting a borrowed light on the principal subject, I yet wish the reader to understand that I am writing an apology for it now; and in the progress of the work I doubt not that I shall be found as discursive as most of those who have previously either reasoned or speculated on Playing Cards.

A history of Playing Cards, treating of them in all their possible relations, associations, and bearings, would form nearly a complete cyclopædia of science and art; and would still admit of being further enlarged by an extensive biographical supplement, containing sketches of the lives of celebrated characters who have played at cards,—or at any other game. Cards would form the centre—the point, having position, but no space,—from which a radius of indefinite extent might sweep a circle comprehending not only all that man knows, but all that he speculates on. The power of reach, by means of the point and the radius, being thus obtained, the operator has his choice of topics; and can arrange them round his centre, and colour them at his will, as boys at school colour their fanciful segments of a circle.

To exemplify what has just been said about the capability of cards as a subject of disquisition:—One writer, Père Menestrier, [1] preluding on the invention of cards, says, apropos to the term Jeu—ludus, a game—that, to the Supreme Being the creation of the world was only a kind of game; and that schoolmasters with the Romans were called Ludi Magistri—masters of the game or sport. Here, then, is a fine opportunity for a descant on creation; and for showing that the whole business of human life, from the cradle to the grave, is but a game; that all the world is a great "gaming-house,"—to avoid using a word offensive to ears polite,—

"And all the men and women merely players."

Illustrative of this view of human life, a couple of pertinent quotations, from Terence and Plutarch, are supplied by another brother of the same craft, M. C. Leber. [2]

According to Père Daniel, [3]—a reverend father of the order of Jesuits, who wrote an elaborate history of the French Military Establishments,—the game of Piquet is symbolic, allegorical, military, political, and historical, and contains a number of important maxims relating to war and government. Now, granting, for the sake of argument, that the game, with respect to its esoteric principles, is really enigmatic, it may be fairly denied that Père Daniel has succeeded in explaining it correctly; his fancied discoveries may be examined in detail, and shown, with very little trouble, to be the mere seethings of his own working imagination; others may be proposed, and, as a matter of course, supported by authorities, ancient and modern, on the origin, use, and meaning of symbols and allegories, and illustrated with maxims of war and state policy, carefully selected from the bulletins, memoirs, and diplomatic correspondence of the great military chiefs and statesmen of all nations: thus a respectable volume—in point of size at least—might be got up on the subject of Piquet alone, without trenching on the wide field of cards in general.

Court de Gebelin, [4] a Gnostic, at least in the philosophic, if not in the religious, sense of the word, finds in the old Italian Tarocchi cards the vestiges of the learning of the ancient Egyptians, somewhat mutilated and disguised, indeed, by Gothic ignorance, which suspected not the profound knowledge concealed in its playthings, but still intelligible to the penetrating genius which initiates itself into all ancient mysteries, is fond of exploring the profoundly obscure, and becomes oracular, talking confidently of what it sees, when it is only groping in the dark. Court de Gebelin's theory suggests at once a general history of science and art, which, as everybody knows, had their cradle in ancient Egypt, and induces dim, but glorious visions of the ancient Egyptian kings,—Sesonch, Rameses, and Amonoph: the chronologers, Sanchoniathon, Manetho, and Berosus, follow, as a matter of course, whether originally known from Bishop Cumberland, or from Mr. Jenkinson, in the 'Vicar of Wakefield.' Then who can think of the knowledge of the ancient Egyptians, and of its essence being contained in the symbolic characters of a pack of cards, without hieroglyphic writing coming into his mind? [5] and this subject, being once started, leads naturally, in chronological order, to Clemens Alexandrinus, Horapollo, Athanasius Kircher, Bishop Warburton, Dr. Thomas Young, and Mons. Champollion. To write properly a history of Playing Cards in connexion with the learning of the Egyptians, as suggested by the dissertation of Court de Gebelin, would require the unwearied energy of one of those brazen-bowelled scholars who flourished at Alexandria when ancient science and art, sinking into a state of second childhood, had again found a cradle in Egypt. Oh, Isis, mother of Horus, how is thy image multiplied! Though changed in name, millions still worship it, ignorant of the type of that before which they bow. [6] All is symbol: the cards of the gamester are symbolic; full of meaning of high import, and yet he is ignorant of it, cares not to know it, though Court de Gebelin would teach him; is indifferent about his soul, and prays only that he may hold a good hand of trumps,—symbol again! [7]

As cards are printed on paper, from engraved blocks of wood, and as wood-engraving appears to have suggested the art of typography, or printing from moveable types, Breitkopf combines in one general essay his inquiries into the origin of playing cards, the introduction of linen paper, and the beginning of wood-engraving in Europe; [8] this essay being but a portion of the author's intended History of Printing. Singer [9] follows very nearly the same plan as Breitkopf; but though his Researches form a goodly quarto, both in point of size and appearance, he yet has not looked into every corner. The wide field of Playing Cards still admits of further cultivation; for, though often turned up by the heavy subsoil plough of antiquarian research and well harrowed by speculation, it remains undrained.

In the 'Nouvelles Annales des Voyages,' [10] we find a dissertation by M. Rey, on Playing Cards, and the Mariner's Compass; apparently two incongruous things, yet indissolubly connected by the fleur-de-lis, which is to be seen on the drapery of some of the court or coat cards, and which also forms an ornament to the north point. It appears that this dissertation on cards and the compass is but a fragment of a work composed by M. Rey, on the flag, colours, and badges of the French monarchy. Judging of his talents, from this "fragment," he appears to have been admirably fitted to write a general history of cards; and it is to be regretted that he did not give to his so-called "fragment," that comprehensive title, and introduce the essay on the mariner's compass and the history of the French flag as incidental illustrations of the fleur-de-lis, for certainly the fragment on cards,—rent from a history of the French flag,—does seem a little out of place, in a general collection of voyages and travels, unless, indeed, it be there introduced as a traveller's tale.

Mons. C. Leber, one of the most recent writers on Playing Cards, [11] is an author, whom it is very difficult to follow in his devious course; for though he is always picking up something that appears to relate to his subject, he yet does not seem to have had any clear idea of what he was seeking for. The grand questions, he says, are, "Where do cards come from; what are they; what do they say; and what ought we to think of them?" These questions, however, Mons. Leber, by no means undertakes to answer. He confines himself, as he says, to a very narrow path—a very crooked one too, he might have added—avoiding the wide and flowery field of conjecture, but diligently amassing facts to guide other inquirers into the origin and primary use of Playing Cards. He is certain that they are of ancient origin, and of Eastern invention; and that primarily they constituted a symbolic and moral game. He professes to be guided in his researches by the evidence of cards themselves; but though a diligent collector of cards of all kinds, he does not appear to have been successful in extracting answers from his witnesses. They all stand mute. In short, Mons. Leber, notwithstanding his diligence as a collector of cards, and his chiffonier-like gathering of scraps connected with them, has left their history pretty nearly the same as he found it. In the genuine spirit of a collector, he still longs for more old cards,—but then, how to find them? Such precious reliques are not to be obtained by mere labour; they turn up fortuitously, mostly in the covers of old books, and as none that have hitherto been discovered explain their origin and presumed emblematic meaning, it is a chance that the materials for a full and complete history of Playing Cards will ever be obtained. "In the mean time," says Mons. Leber, "we must wait till this work of time and perseverance shall be accomplished." [12] To interpret his words from his own example, "to wait," may mean, to keep moving without advancing, like a squirrel in a wheel. Notwithstanding all the old cards that have been discovered, and all that has been collected on the subject, from both tale and history, "how far are we from possessing," exclaims Mons. Leber, "and who shall ever amass, all the elements necessary for a positive history of playing cards." [13] Thus much may serve by way of introduction, and as evidence of the "capability" of the subject.

Man, as a gambling animal, has the means of indulging in his hopeful propensity, as soon as he has acquired a property either real or personal, and can distinguish odd from even, or a short straw from a shorter. The first game that he played at, in the golden age of happy ignorance, would naturally be one of pure chance. We have no positive information about this identical game in any ancient or modern author; but we may fairly suppose, for no one can prove the supposition to be false, that it was either "drawing lots," or guessing at "odd or even." [14] Imagination suggests that the stakes might be acorns, or chesnuts; and though reason may "query the fact," yet she cannot controvert it. It is evident that at either of the two simple games above named, a player, when it came to his turn to hold, might improve his chance of winning, by means of a little dexterous management, vulgarly called cheating, and thus, to a certain extent, emancipate himself from the laws of blind Fortune,—a personification of chance which a gambler, most assuredly, first elevated to the rank of a divinity. [15] That cheating is nearly coeval with gaming, cannot admit of a doubt; and it is highly probable that this mode of giving an eccentric motion to Fortune's wheel was discovered, if not actually practised, at the first regular bout, under the oaks of Dodona, or elsewhere, before the flood of Thessaly. [16]

Man, having left the woods for the meadows, progressing from the sylvan or savage state to that of a shepherd, now not only roasts his chesnuts, but also eats a bit of mutton to them; and after having picked the leg clean, forms of the small bones, between the shank and the foot, new instruments of gaming. Taking a certain number of those bones, three for instance, he makes on four sides of each a certain number of marks: on one side a single point, and on the side opposite six points; on another side three points, and on the opposite four. Putting these bones into a cow's horn, he shakes them together, and then throws them out; and accordingly, as the points may run high, or as the cast may be of three different numbers, so does he count his game. [17] Conventional rules for playing are now established; definite values, independent of the number of points, are assigned to different casts; some being reckoned high, while others are counted low, and sometimes positively against the player, although the chance of their turning up be the same as that of the former. The game now becomes more complicated; and the chances being more numerous, and the odds more various, a knowing gamester who plays regularly, and makes a calculation of the probability of any given number, or combination of points, being thrown, either at a single cast, or out of a certain number, has an advantage in betting over his more simple-minded competitors. "Luck is all!" exclaims the novice,—and guesses; the adept mutters, "Knowledge is power,"—and counts.

The cutting of bones into cubes, or dice, and numbering them on all their six sides, would probably be the next step in gaming; and there are grounds for supposing that the introduction of dice was shortly followed by the invention of something like backgammon; a game which affords greater scope for calculation than dice, and allows also of the player displaying his skill in the management of his men. Should it be asked, what has any of those games to do with the origin of cards? I answer, in the words of an Irish guide, when pointing out to a traveller several places which he was not wanting to find,—"Well, then, none of them's it."

The next game, which it seems necessary to notice, is the Πεττεια of the Greeks, and the Latrunculi of the Latins; as in the sequel it may perhaps be found to have some positive, though remote, relation to the game of cards. It would be superfluous here to inquire if the game of Πεττεια, or Latrunculi, were really that which was invented by Palamedes during the Trojan War; it may be sufficient to remark, that it is mentioned by Homer, who, in the first book of the Odyssey, represents Penelope's suitors playing at it:

In whatever country the game may have been invented, or however it may have been originally played, it was certainly not a game of chance. It was a scientific game requiring the exercise of the mind, and wholly dependent as to its result on the comparative skill of the two players; he who displayed the greatest judgment in moving his pieces, according to the rules of the game, being the winner. [19]

This game appears to have been similar to that described in Strutt's 'Sports and Pastimes,' under the name of Merrels, which is still played in many parts of England, and which was, and may be still, a common game in almost every country in Europe. It appears to have branched out into several species, with the Greeks and Romans; and though, in some of them, the game was very intricate, it yet never attained with those people to the perfection of chess. One of those varieties of Petteia, or Latrunculi, seems to have been very like the game of draughts; it was played with pieces or men, of two different colours, placed on a board divided into several squares, and a man of one party could be taken by the opponent when he succeeded in inclosing it between two of his own. [20]

Whatever may have been the origin of chess, it seems to be generally admitted that the game, nearly the same in its principles as it is now played,—with its board of sixty-four squares, and men of different grades,—was first devised in India; and, without giving implicit credit to the well-known account of its invention by an Indian named Sissa, we may assume that the date assigned to it, namely, about the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era, is sufficiently correct for all practical purposes: a difference of two or three hundred years, either one way or the other, is of very little importance in a conjecture about the game, as connected with Playing Cards. Having now arrived at Chess, we fancy that we see something like "land," though it may be but a fog-bank after all. To speak without figure, it seems likely that the game of cards was suggested by that of chess.

The affinity of the two games, and the similarity between the coat cards and the principal pieces in the game of chess, have already been pointed out by Breitkopf; [21] and he is so copious on the latter topic, that he has left but little for any of his successors to do, in this respect, except to condense his diffuse notes; for, as was said of William Prynne, his brains are generally to be found scattered about the margin of his works, and not in the text.

A side, or suit, of chessmen consists of six orders, which in the old oriental game were named—1, Schach, the king; 2, Pherz, the general; 3, Phil, the elephant; 4, Aspen-suar, the horseman, or chevalier; 5, Ruch, the camel; and, 6, Beydel or Beydak, the footmen or infantry. In this suit there was no queen, as the introduction of a female into a game representing the stratagems of war would have been contrary to the oriental ideas of propriety; and long after the introduction of chess into Europe, the second piece, now called the Queen, retained its Eastern name under the form of Fierce, Fierche, or Fierge, even after it had acquired a feminine character. [22] Fierge at length becomes confounded with the French Vierge, a maid; and finally, the piece is called Dame, the lady, and so becomes thoroughly European, both in name and character. With respect to the changes which the other pieces have undergone in the European game of chess, it is only necessary to observe that Phil, the elephant, is now the Fol or Fou of the French, and the Bishop of the English; Aspen-suar, the horseman, is the French Chevalier, and the English Knight; Ruch, the camel, is the French Tour, and the English Rook or Castle; and the Beydel or Beydak, the footmen, are now the French Pions, and the English Pawns.

Now the very same change that has taken place in the second piece in chess—namely, from a male to a female—has also happened to the second principal figure in French and English cards. Among the oldest numeral cards that have yet been discovered no Queen is to be found; the three principal figures or coat cards being the King, the Knight, and the Valet or Knave. There was no Queen in the old Spanish pack of cards; nor was there usually in the German in the time of Heineken and Breitkopf. In the Spanish, the coat cards of each suit were the King (Rey), the Knight (Cavallo), and the Knave, groom, or attendant (Sota); in the German, the King (König), a chief officer (Ober), and a Subaltern (Unter). [23] The Italians, instead of making any change in the old coat cards, sometimes added the Queen to them, so that they had four instead of three, namely, Re, Reina, Cavallo, and Fante.

The following extracts from an Essay on the Indian Game of Chess, by Sir William Jones, printed in the second volume of the 'Asiatic Researches,' seem to establish more clearly than anything that has been expressly written on the subject, either by Breitkopf or others, the affinity between cards and chess: "If evidence be required to prove that chess was invented by the Hindus, we may be satisfied with the testimony of the Persians; who, though as much inclined as other nations to appropriate the ingenious inventions of a foreign people, unanimously agree, that the game was imported from the west of India, together with the charming fables of Vishnusarman in the sixth century of our era. It seems to have been immemorially known in Hindustan by the name of Chaturanga, that is the FOUR angas, or members of an army, which are said, in the Amaracosha, to be elephants, horses, chariots, and foot-soldiers; and in this sense the word is frequently used by epic poets in their descriptions of real armies. By a natural corruption of the pure Sanscrit word, it was changed by the old Persians into Chatrang; but the Arabs, who soon after took possession of their country, had neither the initial nor final letter of that word in their alphabet, and consequently altered it further into Shatranj, [24] which found its way presently into the modern Persian, and at length into the dialects of India, where the true derivation of the name is known only to the learned. Thus has a very significant word in the sacred language of the Brahmans been transferred by successive changes into Axedras, Scacchi, Echecs, Chess; and, by a whimsical concurrence of circumstances, given birth to the English word check, and even a name to the Exchequer of Great Britain.

"Of this simple game, so exquisitely contrived, and so certainly invented in India, I cannot find any account in the classical writings of the Brahmans. It is indeed confidently asserted that Sanscrit books on Chess exist in this country; and if they can be procured at Benares, they will assuredly be sent to us. At present, I can only exhibit a description of a very ancient Indian game of the same kind; but more complex, and, in my opinion, more modern than the simple chess of the Persians. This game is also called Chaturanga, but more frequently Chaturaji, or the Four Kings, since it is played by four persons, representing as many princes, two allied armies combating on each side. The description is taken from the Bhawishya Puran, in which Yudhist'hir is represented conversing with Vyasa, who explains, at the king's request, the form of the fictitious warfare, and the principal rules of it. 'Having marked eight squares on all sides,' says the sage, 'place the red army to the east, the green to the south, the yellow to the west, and the black the north.'" [25]—It is worthy of remark, that these colours form the ground of four of the suits of one of the divisions of an eight-suit pack of Hindostanee cards.

It appears that in this game the moves were determined by casts with dice, as in backgammon, so that it was one of chance as well as skill. On this point Sir William Jones observes: "The use of dice may, perhaps, be justified in a representation of war, in which fortune has unquestionably a great share, but it seems to exclude Chess from the rank which has been assigned to it among the sciences, and to give the game before us the appearance of Whist, except that pieces are used only instead of cards, which are held concealed."

Though Sir William Jones mentions Whist in particular, it is yet apparent, from his own description, that the similarity of Chaturaji to any other game of cards played by four persons is precisely the same. This evidence of the similarity, between a game of cards and an ancient Indian game of chess, is the more important, as the fact appears to have forced itself upon the notice of the writer, rather than to have been sought for.

It may here be observed, that in the wardrobe accounts of Edward I, there is an item, of money paid for the use of the king for playing at the Four Kings—Quatuor Reges—and that it has been conjectured that the game was cards. The Hon. Daines Barrington, who appears to have been of this opinion, says: "the earliest mention of cards that I have yet stumbled upon is in Mr. Anstis's History of the Garter, where he cites the following passage from the Wardrobe Rolls, in the sixth year of Edward the First, [1278]: 'Waltero Sturton, ad opus regis ad ludendum ad quatuor reges viiis. vd.' From which entry Mr. Anstis with some probability conjectures, that playing cards were not unknown at the latter end of the thirteenth century; and perhaps what I shall add may carry with it some small confirmation of what he supposes." [26] As this is not the place to discuss the question, if playing cards were known in England so early as the reign of Edward I, it may be sufficient to remark that the substance of what Mr. Barrington has adduced in confirmation of Anstis's conjecture consists in a statement of the fact of Edward having been in Syria, and that he might have learned the game of cards there [27] —taking it for granted that cards were of Eastern invention, and known in Syria at that period,—and in a second-hand reference to Breitkopf for a passage in the Güldin Spil, wherein it is stated that a certain game—cards being unquestionably meant—first came into Germany about the year 1300.

From Sir William Jones's account of the game of Chaturanga or, more specifically, chaturaji—the Four Rajas, or Kings—there can scarcely be a doubt that the game of the Four Kings played at by Edward I, was chess, and that this name was a literal translation of the Indian one. Assuming this, then, as an established fact, we have evidence of the number four being associated in Europe at that period with the game of chess, which, as has been previously shown, bore so great a resemblance to a game of cards.

Now, whatever may have been the origin of the name of cards, it is undeniable that the idea of the number four is very generally associated with them; there are four suits, and in each suit there are four honours, reckoning the ace;—to say nothing of the very old game of All Fours, which may have originally meant winning in each of the four Angas or divisions, now represented by High, Low, Jack, and the Game. It is also certain that, in this country, cards were called the Books of the Four Kings, long before the passage relating to the game of Quatuor Reges, which might have suggested the name, appeared in Anstis's History of the Garter. They are so called by Sir Thomas Urquhart, in his translation of Rabelais, in chapter 22, book i, which contains an account of the games that Gargantua played at: "After supper, were brought into the room the fair wooden gospels, and the books of the Four Kings, that is to say, the tables and cards." [28] Cards are not indeed called the Books of the Four Kings in the original text of Rabelais; though it is certain that they were known in France by that name, and that the Valets or Knaves were also called fous—a term which, as Peignot remarks, corroborates Breitkopf's theory of the analogy between chess and cards. [29] Mrs. Piozzi, speaking of cards, in her Retrospection, published in 1801, says, "It is a well-known vulgarity in England to say, 'Come, Sir, will you have a stroke at the history of the Four Kings?' meaning, Will you play a game at cards?" A writer in Fraser's Magazine, for August, 1844, also calls cards the books of the Four Kings, as if they were well known by that name.

Now as chahar, chatur, or, as the word is sometimes written in English, chartah, signifies four in the Hindostanee language, as it enters into the composition of chaturanga, and as chess probably suggested the game of cards, I am inclined to think that both games were invented in Hindostan, and that chahar or chatur in the language of that country formed a portion of the original name of cards. The common term for cards in Hindostan, is Taj or Tas; and its primary meaning, as I am informed, is a leaf, folium. But as it is also used in a figurative sense to signify a diadem or crown, and as the term signifying a crown is frequently used in most languages to signify regal authority, the compound term chahar-taj, or chahar-tas, would be suggestive of nearly the same idea as "the Four Kings," and be almost identical in sound with the Latin chartæ or chartas. The name, whatever it might be, would be liable to change in passing from Hindostan, through other countries, into Europe; in the same manner as we find Chaturanga, the Sanscrit name of chess, transformed into the Persian Chatrang, the Arabic Shatranj, the Greek Zatrikion, the Spanish Axedrez, the Italian Scacchi, the German Schach, the French Echecs, and the English Chess.

The name given to cards by the earliest French and German writers who mention them, is, respectively, Cartes and Karten—in Latin, Chartæ; but as Charta signifies paper, and as cards are made of paper, it has generally been supposed that they received their name from that circumstance. But if a part of their original name signified the number four, whether derived from an eastern root, or from the Latin quarta, it can scarcely be doubted that they acquired the name of chartæ, not in consequence of their being made of paper, but because the Latin word which signified paper had nearly the same sound as another word which signified four,—in the same manner as Pherz, the General, in chess, found a representative in Fierge, and subsequently became confounded with Vierge: the ideal change of Vierge into Dame, the wife of the king, followed of course, like "wooed,—an' married an' a'."

It is deserving of remark, that in several old French works, written within fifty years of the time when we have positive evidence of the game of cards being known in France, the word is sometimes spelled quartz or quartes, as if, in the mind of the writer, it was rather associated with the idea of four than with that of paper. The possible derivation of cards from quarta, was suggested by Mr. Gough, in his Observations on the Invention of Cards, in the eighth volume of the 'Archæologia,' though he was of opinion that they obtained their name from the paper of which they were made. "Perhaps," says he, "it may be too bold a conjecture that the 'quartes, ludus quartarum sive cartarum,' by which Junius [in his Etymologicon] explains cards, may be derived from quarta, which, Du Cange says, is used simply for the fourth part of any thing, and so may be referred to the quatuor reges; but as Du Cange expressly says, that quarta and carta are synonymous, I lay no stress on this, but leave it to the critics."

To carry still further this speculation on the Indian origin of Playing Cards,—both name and thing,—it is to be observed that cards are called Naibi, by the earliest Italian writers who mention them; and that they have always been called Naypes, or Naipes, in Spain, since the time of their first introduction into that country. Now in Hindostan, where we find the word Chahar, Chatur, or Chartah, they have also the word Na-eeb, or Naib, which, judging from the sound only, appears at least as likely to have been the original of naibi and naipe, as it is of the English Nabob. [30] This word Na-eeb signifies a viceroy, lieutenant, or deputy, who rules over a certain district, as a feudatory who owes allegiance to a sovereign. Now, as the game of chess was known in Hindostan by the name of the Four Kings, if cards were suggested by chess, and invented in the same country, the supposition that they might have been called Chatur-Nawaub—the Four Viceroys, as the cognate game of chess was called the Four Kings—and that this name subsequently became changed into Chartah-Naib, is, at least, as probable as the derivation of Naipes from N.P., the initials of Nicolas Pepin, their supposed inventor. Though this last etymology has very much the appearance of a conundrum, propounded in jest for the purpose of ridiculing a certain class of etymologists who always seek for roots at the surface, it is nevertheless that which received the sanction of the royal Spanish Academy, and which is given in their Dictionary. [31] Several Spanish writers, however, of high reputation for their knowledge of the formation of their native language, have decidedly asserted that the word Naipes, signifying cards, whatever it might have originally meant, was derived from the Arabic; and if the testimony of Covelluzzo, a writer quoted in Bussi's History of the City of Viterbo, could be relied on, the question respecting the word Naibi or Naipes, and cards themselves, having been brought into Europe through the Arabs, would appear to be determined. His words are: "Anno 1379, fu recato in Viterbo el Gioco delle Carte, che venne de Seracinia, e chiamisi tra loro Naib." [32] That is, "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." It may be observed, that the very word here given as the Arabic name for cards still signifies in Arabia a deputy of the Sultan. Even though it may not be a word of Hindostanee origin, it may have been introduced into that language when a great portion of Hindostan was subjected to the Mahometan yoke, and when many of the Rajahs of native race were superseded by the Naibs or deputies of a Mahometan sovereign. [33] There appears reason to believe that the word Naipe or Naipes, as applied to cards, did not primarily signify cards generally, but was rather a designation of the game played with cards; in the same manner as "the Four Kings" signified the game at cards, in consequence of a king being the chief of each of the four suits. In Vieyra's Portuguese Dictionary, 1773, one of the explanations of the word "Naipe" is, "a Suit of Cards;" and the phrase, "Náo tenho nenhuma daquelle naipe," is translated, "I have none of that suit."

It is not unlikely that the Greek word χαρτης,—Latin, Charta, paper,—was derived from the East, and that it was originally associated with the idea of "four," as expressive of a square—quarré—of paper, in contra-distinction to a long strip of paper or parchment, which, when rolled up, formed an ενειλεμα, or volume. In middle-age Greek, the word χαρταριον, or χαρτιον, [34]—which is unquestionably derived from the same root as χαρτης,—appears to have been used to convey the idea of a square, or four-sided piece of wood, and to have specifically signified a square wooden trencher: the top of the trencher-cap worn at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, and at some of our public schools, may be considered as a representative of the general form of the thing. It is curious to trace how a word primarily expressive of the number four has, in Greek, Latin, French, and English, been employed to signify either paper generally, or a portion of paper. From the French Cahier or cayer [35] —which may be traced through carré or quarré, to the Latin quartus, from quatuor—we have the old English quair, a little paper book consisting of a few sheets; and the modern quire, now signifying a definite number of sheets of paper.

In Hindostanee the word chit signifies, I believe, a note or letter, and is in this sense synonymous with the Latin Epistola, and the German Briefe. Should it also signify paper, [36] either in general, or of a particular kind, and be cognate with chahar, chatur, or chartah, [37]—"four,"—* the preceding speculations on the primary meaning of χαρτης, charta, and cards, will be materially corroborated. I leave, however, the investigation of this point to those who understand the Hindostanee language, as all the knowledge that I have of the word in question, is derived from one of Theodore Hook's tales, Passion and Principle, in the first series of 'Sayings and Doings.' Wherever he might have picked it up, the effect with which he uses it is peculiarly his own.

Breitkopf, who is decidedly of opinion that cards are of Eastern invention, and of great antiquity, considers that the name Naibe, or Naipes, by which they were first known to the Italians and the Spaniards, is derived from an Arabic word—Nabaa—signifying divination, foretelling future events, fortune-telling, and such like. In this opinion he says he is confirmed by the exposition of the Hebrew word Naibes, which he seems to think cognate with the Arabic Nabaa. [38] He, however, produces no evidence to show that cards were known either to the Arabians or the Jews by the name of Naibe, and from a subsequent passage in his work, it is evident that the conjecture was suggested merely from the circumstance of cards being occasionally employed for the purposes of fortune-telling.

Heineken, who contends that cards were invented in Germany, alleges the name—Briefe—given to them in that country in support of the presumed fact. "Playing Cards," he observes, "were called with us Briefe, that is letters, in Latin, Epistolæ, and they are called so still. The common people do not say, 'give me a pack of cards,' but 'a Spiel Briefe' (un jeu de lettres); and they do not say 'I want a card,' but 'I want a Brief' (a letter). We should, at least, have preserved the name cards, if they had come to us from France; for the common people always preserve the names of all games that come from other countries." [39] This argument is contradicted by the fact of cards having been called Karten in Germany, before they acquired there the name of Briefe; and this very word Briefe, which is merely a translation of the Latin Chartæ, is presumptive evidence of the Germans having obtained their knowledge of cards from either the French or the Italians, with whom the name cards, when "done" into Latin, had the same meaning as the German word Briefe.

With respect to the term Naibes, or Naipes, there are two etymologies which seem deserving of notice here; the one propounded by Bullet, in his 'Recherches Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer;' and the other by Eloi Johanneau, in his 'Mélanges d'Origines Etymologiques.' Mons. Bullet thinks that cards are of French origin, and that they were not invented before the introduction of linen paper,—his chief reason for fixing this epoch as a ne-plus-ultra being evidently founded on their Latinised name, chartæ. From France he supposes that they passed into Spain by way of Biscay, and acquired in their passage the name of Naipes. This word, according to Mons. Bullet, is derived from the Basque term napa, signifying "plat, plain, uni," which very properly designates cards, and corresponds with the Latin charta. This etymology is fanciful rather than felicitous; if charta were synonymous with mensa,—a table,—the Basque term napa would appear to correspond more nearly with it. But the Basque language, like the Celtic, is one peculiarly adapted for etymological speculation; a person who understands a little of it, may readily grub up in its wild fertility a root for any word which he may not be able to supply with a radical elsewhere. [40]

Mons. Eloi Johanneau is of opinion that cards are of much higher antiquity than they are generally supposed to be; and with respect to their Spanish name, Naipes, the origin of it, is, to him, too plain and simple to require the aid of any scarce or voluminous works to prove it; it is, in short, one of those truths which, to be perceived, requires only to be enounced. This incontestable truth is, that the word naipe, a card, comes from the Latin mappa, the m being merely changed into an n. Of this antithesis, or change of a letter, several examples are produced; as the French nappe, a table-cloth, also from mappa; nefle and neflier from mespilum and mespilus; and faire la Sainte Mitouche, for faire la Sainte Nitouche. Then naipe and mappa have an analogous meaning. Naipes, Playing Cards, scarcely differ from a map,—which is a geographic card,—or, except in point of size, from a nappe, which is spread like a chart on the table. In ancient times, too, mappa signified the tessara, or signal, which was displayed at the games of the circus. Tertullian, speaking of those games in his 'Diatribe De Spectaculis,' says: "Non vident missum quid sit. Mappam putant; sed est diaboli ab alto præcipitati gula,"—"They perceive not what is displayed. They think it the mappa, but it is the jaws of the devil." It is evident from this, that in Tertullian's estimation, there was something very wicked in the mappa; and the bad odour which, even at that early period, the word was in, appears to have been retained by its presumed derivative, naipes, ever since: Servavit odorem diu. But then for the grand discovery: Mons. Johanneau finds, in Ducange's Glossary, a passage cited from Papias, a lexicographer of the eleventh century, which proves that the word mappa then signified a Playing Card, and that the game of cards was known at least three centuries previous to the period assigned to its invention by the Abbé Rive. [41] "Mappa," according to Papias, "is a napkin; a picture, or representation of games, is also called mapa; whence we say mapa mundi,"—a map of the world. An ancient Latin and French glossary, also cited by Ducange, explains the passage from Papias to the following effect: "Mapamundi, a mapemunde (or geographic map); and it is derived from mapa, a nappe, a picture or representation of games." [42] Though it may be admitted that nappe, a table-cloth, or napkin, is derived from mappa, and that the latter word was sometimes used to signify a picture of some kind of game; it yet does not appear to be incontrovertibly true, either that mappa, as explained by Papias, signified a card, or a game of cards, or that the word naipes was derived from it. What Mons. Johanneau considers to be a self-evident truth, appears in reality to be no better than one of those confident assertions entitled, by courtesy, moral truths, in consequence of the sincerity of the author's belief. A great many truths of this kind pass current in the business of life, and maintain their nominal value, long after their real character is known, upon the credit of the indorsers.

Wherever cards may have been first invented, and whatever may be the etymology of the words chartæ and naipes, or naibi, it is certain that cards are now well known in Hindostan, where they form the amusement of the natives, both Hindoos and Moslems. That they were invented there, may be a matter of dispute; but that they have been known there from an early period, and were not introduced there from Europe, appears to be undeniable. The Hindoo cards are usually circular; the number of suits is eight, and in some packs ten; and the marks of the suits, though in some instances showing an agreement with those of European cards, are evidently such as are peculiar to the country, and identified with the customs, manners, and opinions of the people. They coincide with the earliest European cards in having no queen, the two coat cards—being a king and his principal minister or attendant—and in the suits being distinguished by the colour as well as by the form of the mark or emblem.

It appears necessary here to notice an objection, which readily suggests itself to the supposed derivation of chartæ, cards, from a word of eastern origin, signifying "four." It is this: if the ancient Hindoo pack consisted of eight or even ten suits, would it not be preposterous to derive the European name from a word which implies that there were only four. Facts most assuredly are stubborn things, and no speculation, whether lame of a leg, or going smoothly on "all fours," can stand against them. It is not, however, proved that the most ancient Hindoo cards consisted of eight or ten suits; and till this be done, the speculation must just pass for what it is worth. Whether there were eight, ten, or twenty suits, the derivation of χαρτης, charta, paper, from a word of Eastern origin, would still be unaffected. If the game of cards were suggested by that of chess, I am inclined to think that the earliest pack would consist of only two suits, and that more were subsequently added to satisfy the wants of "busy idleness," for a more complicated game. Be this as it may, cards did not arrive at Europe from Hindostan "per saltum;" it is probable that their progress through the intervening countries was comparatively slow; and even if they left home with a "suite" of eight, it is not impossible that they might lose half of them by the way. But, to meet the objection by a fact: from a description of a pack of Hindostanee cards to be subsequently noticed, and of the game played with them, it appears that the eight suits are not considered as a single series, but as two divisions of four suits each. [43] This partition corroborates both the theory of the game of cards being suggested by that of chess, and of the name being derived from a word primarily signifying the number four.

On the supposition, then, that cards were invented in the East, it seems advisable to first give some account of the cards now used in Hindustan, before entering into any investigation of the period when the game was first brought into Europe. A high antiquity, indeed, no less than a thousand years, is claimed for one of the packs subsequently described; but rejecting t as a pure fiction, which the apparent newness of the cards themselves contradicts, it may be fairly assumed, seeing that in the East customs are slowly changed, that the figures and symbols, or marks, on those cards are, in their forms and signification generally, of at least as early a date as those which are to be found on the oldest European cards.

There is no collection of Hindostanee cards in the Museum of the East India Company; the purveyors, it would seem, not considering them likely to be interesting even to the Lady Proprietors, who, though they have no voice, at least in Leadenhall Street, yet have considerable influence, by their votes, in the choice of Directors. The natives of Hindustan always speak of "the Company" as if, in the abstract, the great body of proprietors were a female,—"Mrs. Company;" [44] and it would appear that the "direction" of things at home, is rapidly approximating to a pure Gynecocracy. [45]

In the Museum of the Royal Asiatic Society, there are three packs of Hindostanee cards, one of them consisting of ten suits, and the other two of eight suits each. In each suit, when complete, the number of cards is twelve; that is two coat cards, or honours, and ten others, whose numerical value is expressed by the number of marks upon them, in a mode similar to that by which English cards, from the ace to the ten, are distinguished by the number of the "pips." The cards of all the packs are circular; the diameter of the largest is 2-3/4 inches, and of the smallest about 2-1/8 inches. The material of which they are formed would appear to be canvas, [46] but so stiffened with varnish, that each single card feels like a piece of wood. All the figures and marks appear to be executed by hand, not printed nor stencilled; each pack is contained in an oblong box, the cards being placed on their edges; and on the top and sides of the box, the marks or emblems of the several suits are depicted. From the style of their execution, I should conclude that card-painting in Hindostan, was a regular profession, though possibly combined with some other, to "make ends meet," just as card-painting was combined with wood-engraving generally, in Germany in the latter part of the fifteenth century; or just as shaving and hair-cutting might, in former times, afford a decent subsistence when eked out with a little surgery, such as blood-letting, tooth-drawing,—"Quæ prosunt omnibus artes."

In giving a separate description of each of those packs, it seems most proper to begin with that for which the highest antiquity is claimed. This pack is one of the two which consist of eight suits; and, from a memorandum which accompanies it, I have obtained the following particulars respecting a former possessor and the presumed antiquity of the cards. They formerly belonged to Captain D. Cromline Smith, to whom they were presented, about the year 1815, by a high-caste Bramin, who dwelt at Guntoor, or some other place in one of the northern Sircars of Southern India. The Bramin considered them to be a great curiosity, and informed Capt. Smith that they had been handed down in his family from time immemorial. He supposed that they were a thousand years old, or more; he did not know if they were perfect, but believed that originally there were two more colours or suits. He said they were not the same as the modern cards; that none knew how to play at them; and that no books give any account of them. Such is the sum of the Bramin's information. The writer of the memorandum,—looking at the costume of the figures and the harness of the animals, and considering that the Mahometans do not tolerate painted images, [47] —concludes that these cards are Hindostanee.

The pack consists of eight suits, each suit containing two honours and ten common cards—in all ninety-six cards. In all the suits the King is mounted on an elephant; and in six, the Vizier, or second honour, is on horseback; but in the blue suit,—the emblem or mark of which is a red spot with a yellow centre—he rides a tiger; and in the white suit,—the mark of which appears like a grotesque or fiendish head,—he is mounted on a bull. The backs of all the cards are green. The following are the colours of the ground on which the figures are painted in the several suits, together with the different marks by which the suits and the respective value of the common cards were also distinguished.

On every one of the common cards there is also depicted, in addition to the mark of their respective suits, something like a slender leaf, tapering upwards, but with the top curving down. Of this pack of cards I have nothing further to observe here than that if they are even a hundred years old, they must have been preserved with great care; and that I am inclined to think that the Bramin, who gave them to Capt. Smith, had over-rated their antiquity and rarity in order to enhance the value of his present.

In a second pack, consisting, like the preceding, of eight suits of twelve cards each, the King appears seated on a throne; while the Vizier, as in the former, is on horseback, except in three of the suits where he appears mounted on an elephant, a single-humped camel, and a bull. Though there be a difference between this pack and the former, in the marks of some of the suits, there can be no doubt that the same game might be played with each. In the pack now under consideration the backs of all the cards are red. The following are the colours of the ground and the marks of the several suits.

The third pack of Hindostanee cards in the possession of the Royal Asiatic Society, to whom it was presented by the late Sir John Malcolm, is much more curious and interesting than either of the other two previously noticed. It consists of ten suits, of twelve cards each; and the marks of the suits are the emblems of the ten Avatars, or incarnations of Vichnou, one of the three principal divinities in the religious system of the Hindoos. The King is represented by Vichnou, seated on a throne, and in one or two instances accompanied by a female; and the Vizier, as in most of the suits of the other two packs, is mounted on a white horse. In every suit two attendants appear waiting on the second as well as on the principal "honour." The backs of all the cards in this pack are red; and the colours of the ground and marks of the several suits are as follows:— [48]

The following description of the ten Avatars, or incarnations, of Vichnou, as represented in a series of drawings, [49] will explain the meaning of nearly every one of the marks of the ten suits of cards. The only suits which do not exactly correspond with the Avatars, as represented in the drawings, are those numbered 8 and 9, the emblems of which are a goat and an umbrella. It is, however, to be observed that Hindoo authors do not agree in their accounts of the different Avatars of Vichnou, though they generally concur in representing them as ten in number, that is, nine passed and one to come. It is also possible that the goat—which appears couchant as if giving suck—and the umbrella, which in the east is frequently the sign of regal dignity, may be symbolical of the eighth and ninth Avatars in the description of the drawings. Though the Bramin Dwarf, in the fifth Avatar of the drawings, carries an umbrella, there can scarcely be a doubt that the Man's head, in No. 5 of the cards, is the symbol of this Avatar.

THE TEN AVATARS OF VICHNOU.

1. Matsyavatara. The first Avatar of Vichnou, as a Fish; represented as the body of a man with the tail of a fish. The human part is coloured blue; the rest is white. In two of his four hands he holds the Chakra, or Soudarsana, which here appears something like a quoit with rays proceeding from it. [50] In the palm of another of his hands the diamond—carré mystique—is displayed. According to the Bhagavat Purana, the precious stone or diamond called Castrala, is a sort of talisman which illuminates all things, and in which all things are reflected. It is the perfect mirror of the world, and Vichnou generally wears it on his breast, or holds it in the palm of that hand which is raised in the act of benediction.

2. Kourmavatara. The second Avatar, as a Tortoise; the upper part of the figure, man, the lower, tortoise. The Chakra appears poised on the fingers of one of the hands.

3. Varahavatara. The third Avatar of Vichnou, as a Verrat, or wild boar, to destroy the giant Hiranyakcha. Vichnou appears with the head of a boar, but with the body and limbs of a man. In the cards, the head of the boar is blue.

4. Narasinhavatara. The fourth Avatar of Vichnou, as a Lion, to destroy the giant Hiranycasyapa. Vichnou appears with a lion's head, but with a human body, holding the Chakra in one of his hands.

5. Vamanavatara. The fifth Avatar of Vichnou, as a Bramin Dwarf, to avenge the gods on the giant Bali. In one hand he holds a kind of narrow-necked pot, with a spout to it, and in another a cattashal, or umbrella.

6. Parasou-Rama. The sixth Avatar of Vichnou, as a Bramin, armed with an axe, to chastise kings and warriors. The colour of the figure is green, and in one of his hands he holds either a flower, or a kind of leaf.

7. Sri-Rama, or Rama-Ichandra. The seventh Avatar of Vichnou, in the family of the Kings of the race of the Sun, to avenge the gods and men of the tyranny of Ravana, King of Lanka or Ceylon. The figure of Vichnou in this Avatar, is blue or green; and he is seated on a couch or throne with his wife Sita beside him, while monkeys appear offering him adoration. In the cards, the colour of Vichnou is blue, and a female shares his throne, which is very much like a font or shallow bath. Monkeys also appear before him.

8. Chrishna. The Eighth Avatar of Vichnou, as an Infant suckled by his mother Devaki. Rays of glory surround the heads of the mother and child.

9. Bouddha, the Son of Maya. The ninth Avatar of Vichnou, who appears richly dressed, seated in an attitude of meditation on a throne, the back of which is of a shell-like form—"espèce de conque"—and is adorned with Lotus flowers.

10. Calki-avatara. The tenth, and future Avatar of Vichnou, as a Horse, or Man-horse, armed with sword and buckler, to destroy the world at the end of the present age. The figure has a human body, and a horse's head.

As there are different accounts of the incarnations of Vichnou, as has been previously observed, the following is given with the view of throwing a little more light on the subject: "Vichnou, the second person in the Hindoo trinity, is said to have undergone nine successive incarnations to deliver mankind from so many perilous situations. The first, they say, was in the form of a lion; the second of a hog; the third a tortoise; the fourth a serpent; the fifth that of a Bramin (a dwarf, a foot and a half high); the sixth a monster, namely, half man half lion; the seventh a dragon; the eighth a man born of a virgin; and the ninth an ape. Bernier adds a tenth, which is to be that of a great cavalier. (Voyage, vol. ii, p. 142.) A very particular and a very different account of these transformations is given by Mr. Sonnerat (Voyages, vol. i, p. 158), with curious representation of each of them." [51] In this account we have both a lion, and a man-lion, which are probably symbols of the same Avatar; and a dragon and a serpent, also probably symbols of the same thing, though neither of them occur in the cards, nor in the description of the drawings.

I shall now present the reader with a description of another pack of Hindostanee cards, and of the game played with them: it forms an article entitled 'Hindostanee Cards,' in the second volume of the Calcutta Magazine, 1815; and is accompanied with two plates, fac-similes of which are here given.

"The words Gunjeefu and Tas are used in Hindostanee to denote either the game, or a pack of cards. I have in vain searched the 'Asiatic Researches,' 'Asiatic Annual Register,' Sir William Ouseley's 'Oriental Collections,' and the 'Oriental Repertory,' by Dalrymple, for some account or description of the mode of playing the cards in use among the natives of Hindostan; and further, from the total silence of the French and English Encyclopædias, conclude that they have never engaged the attention of any inquirer. A description of the gunjeefu, or cards, used by the Moslems, may therefore be acceptable to our readers.

"In the 'Dictionary, Hindostanee and English,' edited by the late Dr. Hunter, the names of the eight suits are to be found under the word Taj, the name of the first suit.

"The pack is composed of ninety-six cards, divided into eight suits. In each suit are two court cards, the King, and the Wuzeer. The common cards, like those of Europe, bear the spots from which the suits are named, and are ten in number.

"Four suits are named superior, [52] and four the inferior [53] suits.

SUPERIOR SUITS.

• Taj. [54]
• Soofed.
• Shumsher.
• Gholam.

INFERIOR SUITS.

• Chung.
• Soorkh.
• Burat.
• Quimash.

Plate I.

Plate II.

"Plate I represents the [honours of the] four superior suits, called Beshbur; and Plate II, the inferior, Kumbur. The kings are easily distinguished, and are here numbered from 1 to 8.

"In the superior suits, the ten follows next in value to the king and wuzeer; and the ace is the lowest card. In the inferior suits, the ace has precedence immediately after the wuzeer, then the deuce, and others in succession, the ten being of least value.

"The game is played by three or six persons: when six play, three take the superior, and three the inferior suits. The pack being divided into parcels after the cards are well mixed, the players cut for the deal; and he who cuts the highest card deals. [55] When three play, the cards are dealt by fours. In the first and last round the cards are exposed, and thus eight cards of each person's hand are known to the adversaries. The cards are dealt from right to left, the reverse of the European mode.

"The Lead. When the game is played by day, he who holds the red king, (Soorkh, the sun,) must lead that and any small card. Should he play the king alone, it is seized by the next player. The adversaries throw down each two common cards, and the trick is taken up. When the game is played by night, the white king, (Soofed, the moon,) is led in like manner. The cards are then played out at the option of him who leads, the adversaries throwing away their small cards, and no attention is paid to the following suit, unless when one of the adversaries, having a superior card of the suit led, chooses to play it to gain the trick.

"In order to guard a second-rate card which may enable you hereafter to recover the lead, it is customary to throw down a small one of that suit, and call the card you are desirous to have played. With this call the adversaries must comply. As in Whist, when the person who has the lead holds none but winning cards, they are thrown down. After the cards have been all played, the parties shuffle their tricks, and the last winner, drawing a card, challenges one of his adversaries to draw out any card from the heap before him, naming it the fourth or fifth, &c. from the top or bottom. The winner of this trick in like manner challenges his right-hand adversary. The number of cards in the possession of each party is then counted, and those who have fewest are obliged to purchase from an adversary to make up their deficiency of complement. The greatest winner at the end of four rounds has the game.

"The following terms used in the game may be acceptable to those who desire to understand it when played by natives: I think they unequivocally prove that Gunjeefu is of Persian or Arabian origin.

• "Zubur-dust, the right-hand player.
• Zer-dust, the left-hand player.
• Zurb, a trick.
• Ser, a challenge.
• Ser-k'hel, the challenging game.
• Ekloo, a sequence of three cards.
• Khurch, the card played to one led; not a winning card.
• K´hel java, to lay down the winning card at the end of a deal.
• Chor, the cards won at the end of a deal; the sweep.
• Ghulutee, a misdeal.
• Wuruq, a card.
• Durhum-kurna, to shuffle.
• Wuruq-turashna, to cut the cards.

"From my observation of the game when played, I do not think it sufficiently interesting to cause its being preferred by Europeans to the cards in vogue in Europe. The number of the suits are too great, and the inconvenient form of the cards (the size and shape of which are represented by the plates [56]) are great objections. The Hindoostanee cards are made of paper, well varnished; the figures appropriately painted, and the ground and backs of every suit of one colour. The Slave standing before the King in No. 3, is the figure used as the spot or crest on all the common cards of that suit.... The tradition regarding the origin of the Hindoostanee cards is, that they were invented by a favorite sultana, or queen, to wean her husband from a bad habit he had acquired of pulling or eradicating his beard."

With respect to the word Gunjeefu, which, according to the preceding account, appears to be a general name for cards, I am informed that it is of Persian origin, and that it signifies both a pack of cards and the game. In Bengal, cards are more generally known by the name of Tas, which is a Hindoo word, than that by Gunjeefu, or Gangēefah, as it is otherwise written. From the reference, in the preceding account, to the 'Dictionary, Hindoostanee and English,' edited by the late Dr. Hunter, [57] I am inclined to think that Taj and Tas have the same signification, with reference to cards; and that the only difference between them consists in the pronunciation and mode of spelling. Now, the word Taj is said to signify a crown; but if it be also used figuratively for a king, the wearer of a crown—just as "crown" is figuratively used to signify empire or regal power—the Hindoo name for cards would be synonymous with "Kings." That cards were known in England by the name of the "Four Kings" has been already shown; and if my speculations on the terms Chartæ and Naipes be correct, it was by a name originally signifying four kings, or four viceroys, that cards were first known in Europe.

With regard to the game described in the preceding account, it appears to bear some resemblance to that which the French call "l'Ombre à trois,"—three-handed Ombre. [58] In both games the suits appear to be considered as ranged in two divisions: in the Hindostanee game, as the Red and the White; and in the European, as the Red and the Black. In the Hindostanee game there are eight suits, and six or three players; and when three play, the cards are dealt by fours. In the European game of four suits and forty cards—the tens, nines, and eights being omitted—there are three players, and the cards are dealt by threes. A person who can play at Ombre will scarcely fail to perceive several other points of similarity between the two games. From the terms used in the game of Ombre—Spadillo, Basto, Matador, Punto, &c.—there can scarcely be a doubt that the other nations of Western Europe derived their knowledge of it from the Spaniards. The Hon. Daines Barrington, in his 'Observations on the Antiquity of Card Playing in England,' derives the names of the game from the Spanish, "hombre," a man; and there is reason to believe that it was one of the oldest games at cards played at in Europe. If the game of cards were introduced into Europe by the Arabs, it is in Spain that we might first expect to find them. Pietro della Valle, in his Travels in the East, between 1614 and 1626, speaks of the people playing at cards, though differing from ours in the figures and number of suits; and Niebuhr, in his Travels, also speaks of the Arabians playing at cards, and says that the game is called Lab-el-Kammer. [59] It is, however, to be observed, that the game of cards is not once mentioned in the Arabian Nights; and from this silence it may be concluded that at the time when those tales were compiled card-playing was not a popular pastime in Arabia. The compilation, it is believed, is not earlier than about the end of the fifteenth century, though many of the tales are of a much higher antiquity.

Leaving out of consideration the pack of ten suits, with the emblems of the ten incarnations of Vichnou, as being of a mythological character, and probably not in common use for the purposes of gaming, it is evident from the other three packs, of eight suits each, that the cards known in Hindostan are not uniform in the marks of the different suits, though it is obvious that any game,—depending on sequences and the conventional value of the several cards,—which can be played with one of the packs, may be also played with either of the other two. The difference in the marks is, indeed, much less than is to be observed in old French, Spanish, and German cards, which present so many differences as to render it impossible to derive them from one original type. The mere mark or emblem, whatever it might originally signify, appears to have had no specific meaning or value, beyond what might be assigned to it by the conventional rules of the game; whether it were a sword or a chalice, a club or a piece of money, a heart or a diamond, a green leaf or a hawk's bell, in playing and counting the game, it was a "pip," and nothing more.

Whether the two packs of eight suits each, in the possession of the Royal Asiatic Society, are considered by the natives of Hindostan as consisting of two divisions of four suits each, as in the pack described in the extract from the 'Calcutta Magazine,' I have not been able to ascertain. In all the three packs the sword is to be found as the mark of one of the suits; and the soofed and soorkh of the one pack—silver coin and gold coin, figuratively the moon and the sun—I consider to be represented by the circular marks in the other two; and the oval in these is not unlike the mark of the suit named Quimash—merchandise—in the former. The mark of the suit Burat, see Plate II, No. 7—which is said to mean a royal diploma or assignment, corresponds very nearly with a parallelogram containing dots, as if meant for writing, in the pack formerly belonging to Capt. D. Cromline Smith; but though a parallelogram—crossed by two lines, and with the longest side vertical—also occurs in the other pack, its agreement with the Burat is by no means so apparent. The marks of the suits Taj, a Crown, and Chung, a Harp. [60] (see Plate I, fig. 1, and Plate II, fig. 5,) I am unable to recognise, either by name or figure, in the other two packs; though I am inclined to think that, in one of them, the place of the Taj is supplied by a kind of fruit, and in the other by a flower. It will be observed that, in the plate, the mark of the suit called Chung, a harp, is a bird. In the other two packs, the suits which I consider to be the substitutes of the Chung have a mark which I have not been able to make out; but in one of them the Vizier, as in the Chung, is mounted on a single-humped camel. In the suit called Gholam, a slave—Plate I, fig. 4—I cannot make out what is intended for the mark,—whether the Mahut, who appears guiding the elephant, or the kind of mace carried by the Vizier; whatever may be the mark, I consider the suit to be represented by that with a white ground in Capt. D. C. Smith's cards, the mark of which is a grotesque head, as in both suits the Vizier is mounted on a bull. The corresponding suit in the other pack I conceive to be the one which has for its mark a man's head.

With respect to the marks of the several suits, in the different packs of Hindostanee cards, previously described,—what objects they graphically represent, what they might have been intended to signify by the person who devised them, and what allegorical meanings may have assigned to them by others,—much might be said; and a writer of quick imagination, and hieroglyphic wit, like Court de Gebelin, might readily find in them not only a summary of all the knowledge of the Hindoos—theological, moral, political, and scientific—but also a great deal more than they either knew or dreamt of. As I feel my inability to perform such a task, or rather to enjoy such pleasures of imagination; and as the present work does not afford space for so wide a discursus, I shall confine my observations to such marks as appear to have, both in their form and meaning, the greatest affinity with the marks to be found on early European cards. The marks in the pack consisting of ten suits, representing the incarnations of Vichnou, I shall only incidentally refer to, as I am of opinion that those cards are not such as either are or were generally used for the purposes of gaming, but are to be classed with those emblematic cards which have, at different periods, been devised in Europe for the purpose of insinuating knowledge into the minds of ingenious youth by way of pastime.

In referring to any of the marks to be found in the three eight-suit packs of Hindostanee cards, which appear to be intended for the purposes of play only, it seems unnecessary to specify the particular pack to which they belong, as my object is merely to call attention to the apparent agreement between some of the marks of Hindostanee cards, and those which are either known to have been the marks of the earliest European cards, or are to be found on such old cards as are still preserved in public libraries, or in the collections of individuals.

In the early European cards, which have cups, swords, pieces of money, and clubs or maces for the marks of the four suits, [61] the sword and piece of money of the Hindostanee cards are readily identified; and if we are to suppose that in these cards certain emblems of Vichnou were formerly represented—but which are not to be found either on the ordinary Playing Cards, or on those displaying the ten incarnations of Vichnou—it would not be difficult to account for the cups, and clubs or maces; for, according to Dr. Frederick Creutzer, [62] the mace or war club is frequently to be seen in one of the hands of Vichnou; and Count von Hammer-Purgstal remarks, that "the sword, the club, and the cup, are frequent emblems in the Eastern Ritual." [63] As the marks in European suits, cups, or chalices, swords, money, and clubs, have been supposed to represent the four principal classes of men in a European state, to wit, Churchmen; Swordmen, or feudal nobility; Monied men, merchants or traders; and Club-men, workmen, or labourers,—it is just as easy to run a parallel in the four superior suits of one of the packs of Hindostanee cards, given in Plate I; there may be found Taj, a crown, royalty; Soofed, silver money, merchants; Shumsher, a sword, fighting men, seapoys; and Gholam, a slave, the coolies both of hill and plain. It may not be unnecessary here to observe that the four great historical castes of the Hindoos are, 1, Bramins, priests; 2, Chetryas, soldiers; 3, Vaisyas, tradesmen and artificers; and 4, Sudras, slaves, and the lowest class of labourers. Of these four castes the Bramins alone remain unmixed; the other three, as distinct castes, exist only in name, for they have become so intermixed, that the subdivisions can neither be ascertained nor reckoned by the learned pundits themselves. [64]

In the oldest stencilled, or printed, European cards, which are probably of as early a date as the year 1440, the marks of the suits are bells, hearts, leaves, and acorns; and in the Hindostanee cards we find a leaf or a flower, as the mark of one of the suits; and I am inclined to think that, in the latter, the figures of the oval, and of that which appears something like a pineapple in a shallow cup, were the types of the bells and the acorns. When those marks are compared, without reference to their being representations of specific objects of which the mind has already a preconceived idea, the general agreement of their forms is, to the eye, more apparent. For the heart, I have not been able to discover any corresponding mark in the Hindostanee cards. Should I be told that the form of the heart might be suggested by that of the leaf, I have to observe that the form of the leaf in Hindostanee cards, is not the same as that which occurs in European, and that in the latter, the colour of the so-called heart appears always to have been red.

Between the marks of the suits on old French cards,—Cœur, Carreau, Trèfle, and Pique,—and those to be found on Hindostanee cards, I shall not venture to make any direct comparison. It, however, may be observed that the form of the Pique—the spade in English cards—is almost precisely the same as that of the leaf in other European packs; and that the Trèfle—the club, in English cards—in its outline bears a considerable likeness to the acorn. Those who please may derive the Carreau, or diamond, from the Castrala, or mystic diamond, worn on the breast, or held in the palm of the hand of Vichnou; it does not, however, occur as the mark of a suit in any of the Hindostanee cards that have come under my observation; and the mark to which it bears the greatest resemblance is that of the suit Burat, as shown in Plate II, No. 7. An examination of a greater variety of Hindostanee cards, and more extensive knowledge of the names and significations of the marks of the suits, and of the different games played, would probably lead to the discovery of more points of resemblance than I have been able to perceive.

The different things signified by marks, apparently agreeing in their general forms, on Hindostanee and European cards, may be partly accounted for on the following grounds, which will also in some degree serve to explain the difference, both in form and name, of the marks of the suits in different packs of old European cards.

Graphic forms of all kinds, whether symbolic, or positive representations of specific objects, which are readily understood, both in their figurative meaning and direct signification, by the people with whom they originated, are, when brought into a different country without their explanations, often interpreted by that people according to their knowledge and opinions; and forms for which they have no corresponding originals, or which they fail to identify, are referred to objects of similar shape with which they are familiar, and are called by their names. Similar changes in the meaning of symbolic figures also take place with the same people, in consequence of the original meaning becoming obsolete, through change of customs and opinions, in the course of time. In this manner a figure of the horned Isis, with the young Horus in her lap, appears to have been taken for a representation of the Virgin Mary, with the crescent moon on her head, nursing the infant Jesus; and thus the figures of Jupiter and Minerva have passed for those of Adam and Eve. In the sixteenth century it appears that in Italy the suit of Bastoni—clubs, or maces, proper—was also called Colonne, pillars; and the suit of Danari—money—Specchi, mirrors; [65] merely because the club or mace as depicted on the suits, bore some resemblance to a slender pillar, and that the form of Danari, like that of an ancient mirror, was circular. Among the pitmen in the neighbourhood of Newcastle-on-Tyne, the diamonds on the cards are frequently called Picks, from their similarity to the head of a pick, the tool with which they dig the coals; a writer like Court de Gebelin, might discover in this connexion between picks and "black diamonds" "a type with a pair of handles." It may be here observed, that the suit which the French term piques, is that which we, improperly, call spades.

But, even admitting the agreement, both in figure and signification, of several of the marks of the suits in early European cards, and those which occur in the cards now used in Hindostan, it may be said that this fact by no means proves either that cards were invented in the East, or that the marks of suits on the Hindostanee cards were actually the models of those resembling them which are to be found on early European cards; for cards might find their way into the East from Europe as well as into Europe from the East. When St. Francis Xavier was in the East Indies,—from 1541 to 1552,—card-playing was a common amusement with the European residents and traders; [66] and it is very likely that the first Portuguese ship that arrived there, about half a century before, had a pack of cards on board. That European cards were sent to the East, among other articles of merchandise, towards the end of the sixteenth century, appears evident from a passage in a narrative of the first voyage of the English, on a private account, begun by Captain George Raymond, and finished by Captain James Lancaster; [67] and we learn from Sir Alexander Burnes, that commerce has imported cards into the Holy City of Bokhara, that the pack consists of thirty-six cards, and that the games are strictly Russian. [68]

Looking, however, at all the circumstances,—the probability of Cards having been suggested by Chess, the names Chartæ and Naipes, the marks to be found on them, and the tradition of their having been known in Hindostan from a very early period,—the balance of evidence appears decidedly in favour of the conclusion that cards were invented in the East. The writer of an article on Cards, in No. xlviii of the 'Foreign Quarterly Review,' previously referred to, speaks confidently of the great antiquity of cards in Hindostan, but does not give any authorities for the fact. "We know," he says, "that the Tamuli have had cards from time immemorial; and they are said to be of equal antiquity with the Brahmins, who unquestionably possess them still, and claim to have invented them." The statement of the Bramin who gave the cards to Captain D. Cromline Smith, though certainly not true with respect to that individual pack, may yet be received as confirmatory of the traditional evidence in favour of cards generally having been known in Hindostan from a very early period. [69]

Playing Cards appear to have been known from an early period in China. In the Chinese dictionary, entitled Ching-tsze-tung, compiled by Eul-koung, and first published A.D. 1678, it is said that the cards now known in China as Teen-tsze-pae, or dotted cards, were invented in the reign of Seun-ho, 1120; and that they began to be common in the reign of Kaou-tsung, who ascended the throne in 1131. [70] —According to tradition, they were devised for the amusement of Seun-ho's numerous concubines. M. Abel Remusat, probably on the authority of the Ching-tsze-tung, has also observed that cards were invented by the Chinese in 1120. [71] Mons. Leber, however, considers it to be more likely that they got their first cards from Hindostan; and that, like the Europeans, they merely changed or modified the types, and invented new games.

The general name for cards in China is Che-pae, which literally signifies "paper tickets." At first they are said to have been called Ya-pae, bone or ivory tickets, from the material of which they were made. A pack of dotted cards consists of thirty-two pieces, and the marks—small circular dots of red and black—are placed, alternately, at two of the corners; for instance, in a card containing eight dots, four are placed in one corner and four in the other diagonally opposite to it. Ten of those cards are classed in pairs; the first pair are called Che-tsun,—"the most honorable,"—and are superior to all the others; these may be considered as coat cards, as the one contains the figure of a woman, and the other that of a man; both these cards are also marked with black and red dots,—that of the woman with six, and that of the man with twelve. The second pair are called Tien-pae,—"celestial cards;" each contains twenty-four dots of black and red, corresponding with the twenty-four terms in the Chinese year. The third pair are called Te-pae,—"terrestrial cards;" each contains four red dots corresponding with the four cardinal points of the compass. The fourth pair are called Jin-pae,—"human cards;" each contains sixteen red dots, relating to benevolence, justice, order, and wisdom in a four-fold degree. The fifth pair are called Ho-pae; each card contains eight black dots, relating to a supposed principle of harmony in nature extending itself towards all points of the compass. The remaining twenty-two cards have distinct names, which it is needless here to give: the aggregate of the dots upon them is said to have reference to the number of the stars.

The cards most commonly used in China, are those called Tseen-wan-che-pae,—"a thousand times ten thousand cards." There are thirty cards in a pack; namely, three suits of nine cards each, and three single cards which are superior to all the others. The name of one of the suits is Kew-ko-wan; that is, the nine ten-thousands, or myriads of Kwan—strings of beads, shells, or money. The name of the other suit is Kew-ko-ping,—"nine units of cakes;" and that of the third is Kew-ko-so,—"nine units of chains." The names of the three single cards are, Tseen-wan, a thousand times ten thousand; Hung-hwa, the red flower; and Pih-hwa, the white flower.

No. 1.

No. 2.

No. 3.

No. 4.

No. 5.

No. 6.

In the annexed specimens of Chinese cards, Nos. 1 and 2 are the first and third of the suit of nine myriads of Kwan; Nos. 3 and 4 are the one and the three of the suit of cakes; No. 5 is the one of the suit of chains; and No. 6 is that of the three superior cards, which is called the white flower.

Besides those above described, the Chinese have several other varieties of cards: one pack or set is called Pih-tsze-pae, the hundred boys' cards; another, Tseen-wan-jin-pae,—"a thousand times ten-thousand mens' names cards," containing the names of persons famous in Chinese history; and a third has the same name as Chinese Chess, Keu-ma-paou, chariots, horses, and guns. This latter name corroborates what has been previously said about the probability of the game of cards having been suggested by that of chess.

The marks to be found on Chinese cards scarcely afford a gleam of light by which we might judge of their relation to the cards of other countries: in a pack of such as are chiefly used in Cochin China, I have observed the form of the diamond nearly the same as it appears on English cards; and in a pack of the Chinese cards called Tseen-wan-che-pae, the mark of the suit of Nine Cakes is nearly the same as that of the old Italian Danari, which Galeottus Martius—in his treatise 'De Doctrina promiscua,' written about 1488—considers to have been meant for a loaf.

The cards commonly used in China, are much narrower than ours; an idea of their size may be formed from the specimens given, making allowance for a small margin of white paper all round, but rather wider at the top and bottom than at the sides. The Chinese name for a card, considered singly, or as one of the pieces of a pack or set, appears to be Shen, a fan.

At what period Playing Cards first became known in Europe,—whether as an original invention, or introduced from some other quarter of the world,—has not yet been ascertained. From the silence, however, of all authorities by whom we might expect to find them distinctly named if they had been in common use, it may be fairly concluded, that, though they possibly might be known to a few persons before the year 1350, they did not begin to attract notice nor come into frequent use till towards the latter end of the fourteenth century. Packs of cards are distinctly mentioned by the name which they still retain in France—Jeux de Cartes—in an entry made in his book of accounts, about 1393, by Charles Poupart, treasurer of the household to Charles VI of France. Considering, then, this entry as an established fact in the history of cards, I shall now proceed to lay before the reader some of the grounds and evidences on which it has been asserted that cards were well known in Europe before that period.

Several writers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, in discussing the lawfulness of card-playing, gratuitously assuming that the game was included under the general term Alea, [72] have spoken of cards as if they had been known from time immemorial. The easy mode of deriving aliquid de aliquo by means of a comprehensive genus, is of frequent use with those decisive characters who delight in settling cases of conscience with a strong hand; and who, enveloped in the dust of the Schools, lay vigorously about them, both right and left, with weapons borrowed from "the old Horse Armoury of the Fathers," and re-ground, for present use, on the Decretals. He who can discover cards, implicitè, as Olearius has it, [73] in St. Cyprian's tract, De Aleatoribus, or in the injunctions against gaming in the canons of any Council or Synod previous to 1390, will have no difficulty in finding "Roulette" and "E or O," implied under the general term Tabulæ. Having thus indicated the value of the hypothetic evidence in favour of cards being known in early times,—because the game was subsequently comprehended under a schoolman's definition of the term Alea,—it may be left to pass for what it is worth.

Mons. Eloi Johanneau's proof that cards were known in the eleventh century, from the testimony of Papias, previously noticed, neither requires, nor indeed admits of serious refutation. If it could be shown that the word Naipe or Naibe was ever used in Spain or Italy to signify a painted cloth or a picture, before it was used to signify a Playing Card, its affinity with Nappe and Mappa might be admitted to be clearly established. John of Salisbury, who was born in the early part of the twelfth century, says not a word in his work 'De Nugis Curialium'—on the Trifling of Courtiers—which might indicate a knowledge of cards, although one of the chapters is especially devoted to an examination of the use and abuse of gaming. [74] Had cards formed one of the common pastimes of the courtiers of his age, it is highly probable that he would have mentioned them, by some name or other, so as to distinguish them from the other games which he enumerates.

The 38th canon of the Council of Worcester, held in 1240, contains the following prohibition: "Prohibemus etiam clericis, ne intersint ludis inhonestis, vel choreis, vel ludant ad aleas vel taxillos; nec sustineant ludos fieri de Rege et Regina, nec arietes levari, nec palæstras publicas fieri:" that is, "We also forbid clergymen to join in disreputable games or dancings, or to play at dice; neither shall they allow games of King and Queen to be acted [fieri], nor permit ram-raisings, nor public wrestlings. " [75] Ducange, who quotes the passage in his Latin Glossary, under the word Ludi, is inclined to think that the game de Rege et Regina—King and Queen—might have been the game of cards. There are not, however, any just grounds for entertaining such an opinion. The conjecture seems to have been suggested merely from the circumstance of there being a King and Queen in the cards with which the writer was most familiar; but had he known that no Queen is to be found in the earliest European cards, he probably would not have made so bad a guess. Besides, looking at the context, there can scarcely be a doubt that the games—not game—of King and Queen were a kind of mumming exhibitions which the clergy enjoyed as spectators, not as performers. Payments to minstrels and mummers for their exhibitions for the amusement of the monks, and eke of the lord Abbot himself, are not of unfrequent occurrence in the account books of old monasteries. In the same clause, the clergy are enjoined not to allow of ram-raisings nor public wrestlings—sports in which they were as unlikely to appear as actors as in the games of the King and Queen. What may have been meant by ram-raising—arietes levari—the curious reader is left to find, if he can, in the pages of Strutt and Fosbroke.

The next passage, supposed to relate to Playing Cards, which demands attention, is that which occurs in the Wardrobe accounts of Edward I, anno 1278, and which has been already quoted in the first chapter. It appears necessary to give it here again, together with the Hon. Daines Barrington's remarks on it, in the chronological order of evidences adduced in favour of the antiquity of Card Playing in Europe. "The earliest mention of cards that I have yet stumbled upon, is in Mr. Anstis's 'History of the Garter' (vol. ii, p. 307), where he cites the following passage from the Wardrobe rolls, in the sixth year of Edward the First: 'Waltero Sturton ad opus regis ad ludendum ad quatuor Reges, viii.s. v.d.'; from which entry Mr. Anstis, with some probability conjectures, that Playing Cards were not unknown at the latter end of the thirteenth century; and perhaps what I shall add, may carry with it some small confirmation of what he supposes."

The simple fact that the game of cards was known, both in France and England, by the name of the Four Kings, long before we had any special dissertations respecting its origin, is of more weight, in corroboration of Anstis's supposition, than Mr. Barrington's supplemental conjectures. The first question to be determined, is the identity of the game of cards, and that of the Quatuor Reges; but, without adducing the slightest evidence, he assumes the fact, and then proceeds to speculate where Edward might have learnt the game. But even admitting that cards were meant by the term Quatuor Reges, it is just as likely that Edward learned the game from his Queen, Eleanor of Castile, as that he learned it from the Saracens in the Holy Land; for, admitting it to be of Eastern origin, and that Europeans first obtained a knowledge of it from the Saracens, or a people of Arab race, it may be fairly supposed that Spain would be one of the countries in which cards would be earliest introduced. In the cards now in use in England, there are certain peculiarities in the names of two of the suits, as compared with the marks, which seem to intimate that we obtained our first knowledge of the game from Spain, although subsequently we might import our cards from France.

Seeing that chess was known in the East by a term signifying the Four Kings, and that it was a favorite amusement with the higher classes in Europe in the reign of Edward I, there can scarcely be a doubt that this was the game to which Walter Sturton's entry relates. If cards were indeed known in Europe in the early part of the reign of Edward the First, the silence respecting them, of all contemporary writers, for about a century afterwards, must be admitted as conclusive, though negative, evidence of their not being in common use. Petrarch, though he treats of gaming in one of his dialogues, never mentions them; and though Boccacio and Chaucer notice various games at which both the higher and lower classes of the period were accustomed to play, yet there is not a single passage in the works of either, which can be fairly construed to mean cards.

From the following passage, which occurs in a work on the 'Government of a Family,' in manuscript, composed by Sandro di Pipozzi, [76] in 1299, it has been concluded by Breitkopf that cards were at that period well known in Italy: "Se giucherà di denaro, o cosi, o alle carte, gli apparecchieria la via, &c." Zani, however, opposes to the authority of the manuscript, the negative evidence of Petrarch, who flourished at a subsequent period, and who, he thinks, would not have failed to have mentioned cards if they had then been known among the various games which he enumerates in the first dialogue of his treatise 'De Remediis utriusque Fortunæ.' [77] Mons. Duchesne also remarks, in his 'Observations sur les Cartes a jouer,' that, as the copy of Sandro di Pipozzi's work, cited by Taraboschi, and examined by Zani, is not of an earlier date than 1400, there is reason to believe that the express mention of cards in it, was the interpolation of a transcriber. That such interpolations were frequently made both by printers and transcribers, will appear evident from the following observations on several works, both printed and manuscript, which have been cited in proof of the antiquity of card-playing in Europe. [78]

The Abbé Rive, who ascribes the invention of cards to Spain, endeavours to show that they were known there in the early part of the fourteenth century. The evidence of this is, according to his statement, to be found in the Statutes of the military order of the Band, promulgated by Alphonso, King of Castile, where there is a passage expressly forbidding the members to play at cards. Whether cards are expressly mentioned in any old Spanish manuscripts of the Statutes in question, has not been ascertained; but of all the different editions, original and translated, of Guevara's 'Golden Epistles,' the work from which the Abbé Rive obtained his information, the first in which cards are expressly named, is that of the French translation by Gutery, published at Lyons in 1558. [79] As the word is not to be found in the original Spanish editions, nor in the Italian translations made from them, there cannot be a reasonable doubt of its being an interpolation of Gutery, who probably thought that a general prohibition of gaming necessarily included cards; and thus, "par conséquent," the Abbé Rive is furnished with positive evidence that the game of cards was common in Spain in 1332. Another authority, referred to by the Abbé Rive in favour of the antiquity of Spanish cards, is of the same kind. In a collection of the 'Laws of Spain,' printed in 1640, he finds the following passage in an Ordonnance issued by John I, King of Castile, in 1387: "We command and ordain that none of our subjects shall dare to play at dice or at cards (Naypes) either in public or in private, and that whoever shall so play, &c." [80] There can, however, be no doubt that the word cards (Naypes) is an interpolation; for it is not to be found in the same Ordonnance as given in the collection entitled 'Ordenanças Reales de Castilla,' printed at Medina del Campo, 1541. In this earlier edition, playing at dice and tables for money is indeed forbidden—"de jugar juego de dados ni de tables, a dinero"—but cards are not mentioned.

Jansen, in his 'Essai sur l'Origine de la Gravure en Bois et en Taille-douce,' cites the four following verses from the romance of Renard le Contrefait, pointed out to him by the late Mons. Van Praet, in evidence of cards being known in France at least as early as 1341, the year in which the romance was finished:

The manuscript containing the verses as they are here given is in the Bibliothèque du Roi; but certainly it is not of earlier date than 1450; while in another manuscript, of the same romance, apparently about a hundred years older, also preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi, the word "Cartes" is not to be found in the corresponding verse, which is as follows:

Meerman [81] imagined that he had discovered a positive date for the early use of cards in France, in the work known as the Chronicle of Petit-Jehan de Saintré, but which was, in fact, written by Antoine de Lassale, in 1459. [82] Saintré had been one of the pages of Charles V, and on his being appointed carver to the King on account of his good conduct, the governor of the pages is represented as giving them a lecture on their bad courses: "Observe your companion here, who, through his good conduct, has acquired the favour of the King and Queen, and of all; while you are dicers and card-players, keeping bad company, and haunting taverns and cabarets." [83] The fact of the work having been composed in 1459, however, renders it of no authority on the question; and even if it had been written by Jehan Saintré himself, there cannot be a doubt that the term "Cartes" is an interpolation.

The term "joueux de cartes," card-players, is indeed to be found in the earliest printed editions of the work, and also in a manuscript preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi; but then this manuscript does not appear to be of an earlier date than the latter end of the fifteenth century, and there is also reason to believe that it is the identical manuscript from which the work was first printed. The word Cartes, however, is not to be found in a manuscript copy of the work in the library of the Sorbonne, nor in another in the library of St. Germains. The latter is much older than either of the others. Mons. Duchesne says that, in 1583, it belonged to Claude d'Expilly, and that these two verses, which show that it was even then considered an old manuscript, are written in the first folio:

"From this examination," says Mons. Duchesne, "we may conclude that the word Cartes is an interpolation made by a transcriber a century later: consequently it cannot be admitted as a proof that cards were known in 1367." [84]

In an edition of William de Guilleville's allegorical poem, entitled 'Le Pelerinaige de l'Homme,' [85] printed at Paris by Verard in 1511, the following verses, in which cards are named, were pointed out to me by my friend Mr. N. Hill, of the Royal Society of Literature, to whom I am greatly indebted for much curious and interesting information relating to the Origin and History of Playing Cards.

At folio xlv, a, Oysivete tempts the pilgrim to quit the right way by recounting to him the pleasures enjoyed by those who place themselves under her guidance:

At folio lxxii, a, Quartes—for so the word is there spelled—is noticed as a prohibited game:

As there was reason to suspect that the word Cartes or Quartes, in the printed copies of De Guilleville's poem, was an interpolation, the same as it was found to be in other works examined by M. Duchesne, M. Paulin Paris, assistant-keeper of the manuscripts in the Bibliothèque du Roi, was requested by a friend of Mr. Hill, to compare the printed text with that of the earliest manuscript copies of the poem preserved in the collection under his care. The result of the collation was that the suspected words had been interpolated. The following is a translation of a portion of M. Paulin Paris's letter on the subject.

"I have compared the verses of our MSS. of the Pilgrimage of Human Life with the printed editions, and have found the latter very inexact. Cards are neither named nor alluded to in the MSS.; and in them the first passage, pointed out by your friend Mr. N. Hill, stands thus:

MS. 6988, fol. 44, verso.
(No. 2), fol. 47, verso.

"The other passage referred to is, in both MSS. as follows:

As all the different interpolations referred to appear to have been made in good faith,—not for the purpose of showing the antiquity of card-playing, nor with any view of deceiving the reader, but merely to supply what the transcriber, looking at the manners of his own age, felt to be an omission,—they afford good grounds for concluding that, at the time when the several works were first written, cards were not a common game in either France or Spain; for, had they then been well known in those countries, it is just as likely that they would have been mentioned by the original writers as that they should have been interpolated by later transcribers.

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.

Though in 1393 cards might have been but little known and seldom played at, except by the higher classes, the game in a short time appears to have become common; for in an edict of the provost of Paris, dated 22d of January, 1397, working people are forbid to play at tennis, bowls, dice, cards, or nine-pins, on working days. From the omission of cards in an ordonnance of Charles V, dated 1369, forbidding certain games and addressed to all the seneschals, baillies, provosts, and other officers of the kingdom, it may be safely concluded that if cards were known in France in 1369, the game was by no means so common as in 1397. Duchesne indeed says that it is between 1369 and 1397, a period of twenty-eight years, that the invention of Playing Cards, or at least their introduction into France, ought to be placed.

Cards having been presented at the court of France for the amusement of the king, and prohibited in the city of Paris, either as too good or too bad for the amusement of working people, appear forthwith to have become fashionable; but, besides the recommendations alluded to, the game possesses charms of its own which could scarcely fail to render it a favorite with gamesters of all classes, as soon as its principles should be known. [94] To ladies and gentlemen who might play, merely as a relaxation from the more serious business of hunting and hawking, dressing and dining, no game could be more fascinating; while to those who might play for gain, what other game could be more tempting? The great infirmity of human nature, with the noble as well as the ignoble, as old stories plainly show, is the too eager desire to obtain money, or money's worth, in a short time and at little cost; and, hence, to risk a certain sum on the chance of obtaining a greater, whether at dice, cards, state lotteries, or art-union little-goes: in the latter, indeed, under the prudent direction of what may be called "handicap" legislators,—from their always coming out strong towards the end of the session, like the beaten horses for a handicap at the end of a race week,—the spirit of gaming is refined, and made subservient to the purposes of pure charity and the promotion of the fine arts. He who devised the game of cards, as now usually played, appears to have had a thorough perception of at least two of the weak points of human nature; for next to man's trust in his "luck," in all games of chance, is his confidence in himself in all games of skill. The shuffling, cutting, and dealing at cards, together with the chance afforded by the turn-up of the trump, place the novice, in his own conceit, on a par with the experienced gamester; who, on the other hand, is apt to underrate his opponent's chance, from his over-confidence in his own skill.

During the middle ages, the clergy, notwithstanding their vows and their pretensions to superior sanctity, appear to have been not a whit more exempt from the weaknesses of human nature than the unsanctified laity; nay, from the history of the times, it would seem that their vows rendered them not only more susceptible of temptation, but more likely to fall. Their preaching pointed one way, and their lives another; and hence the old proverb, "Mind what the friar says, not what he does." The vices of the times are indeed written in the canons of synods and councils, and in the penitentials of bishops directed against the immoralities of the clergy; and from the experience of the past, thus recorded, we have ample proof that clerical vows are not always a certain charm against secular vices. After cards were once fairly introduced, it would appear that the clergy were not long in "cutting in;" for, according to Dr. J. B. Thiers, they were expressly forbid to play at cards, by the synod of Langres, 1404. [95]

Menestrier refers to the statutes of Amadeus VIII, Duke of Savoy, 1430, forbidding all kinds of gaming for money within his territories, though his subjects are allowed to amuse themselves at certain games, provided they play only for meat and drink. [96] "With respect to cards, they are forbidden; nevertheless, they are allowed to women, with whom men may also play, provided that they play only for pins,"—"dum ludus fiat tantum cum spinulis." In this passage a jurist would not construe the word "spinulis"—pins—literally, but would take it to mean any small articles of pins' worth. In France, about 1580, the douceur given by a guest to a waiter at an inn was called "his pins"—"épingles; " [97] and the proverbial phrase, "Tirer son épingle du jeu," seems to allude rather to "pin-stakes," than to the game of "push-pin."

Early in the fifteenth century, card-making appears to have become a regular trade in Germany, and there is reason to believe that it was not of much later date in Italy. In 1418 the name of a card-maker—"Kartenmacher,"—occurs in the burgess-books of Augsburg. In an old rate-book of the city of Nuremberg, the name "Ell. Kartenmacherin" occurs under the year 1433; and in the same book under the year 1435, the name "Elis. Kartenmacherin," probably the same person. In the year 1438 the name "Margret Kartenmalerin" occurs. [98] From those records it would appear that the earliest card-makers and card-painters of Nuremberg were women; and that cards were known in Germany by the name of "Karten" before they acquired the name of "Briefe." Heineken, however, maintains that they were first known in Germany by the latter name; for as he claimed the invention for his countrymen, the fact of the name being derived either from the French or Italian was adverse to his theory.

Nuremberg, Augsburg, and Ulm appear to have been the chief towns in Germany for the manufacture of cards about the middle of the fifteenth century; and, from the following passage, cited by Heineken from a manuscript chronicle of the city of Ulm, ending at 1474, it would appear that the German manufacturers, besides supplying the home market did also a large export business: "Playing cards were sent in small casks [leglenweiss] into Italy, Sicily, and also over sea, and bartered for spices and other wares." [99] It was probably against the German card-makers and painter-stainers that the magistracy of Venice issued an order in 1441, forbidding the introduction of foreign manufactured and printed coloured figures into the city under the penalty of forfeiting such articles, and being fined xxx liv. xii soldi. This order appears to have been made in consequence of a petition from the fellowship of painters at Venice, wherein they had set forth that "the art and mystery of card-making and of printing figures, which were practised in Venice, had fallen into total decay through the great quantity of foreign playing cards, and coloured printed figures which were brought into the city. " [100] The magistrates' order, in which this passage occurs as the preamble, was discovered by an Italian architect, of the name of Temanza, in an old book of rules and orders belonging to the company or fellowship of Venetian painters. Temanza sent an account of his discovery to Count Algarotti, who published it in the fifth volume of his 'Lettere Pittoriche.'

As it has been assumed that the earliest professional card-makers were wood-engravers, and that the engraving of cards on wood led to the execution of other figures, it appears necessary to trace the Briefmaler's progress, and to show how he came to be identified with the "wood-engraver in general." That the early card-makers or card-painters of Ulm, Nuremberg, and Augsburg, from about 1418 to 1450, were also wood-engravers, is founded entirely on the assumption that the cards of that period were engraved on wood, and that those who manufactured them, both engraved and coloured the figures. It is not, however, certain that the figures of the earliest cards, not drawn by hand, were engraved on wood; in the oldest cards, indeed, which I have had an opportunity of examining, and which appear to be of as early a date as the year 1440, it is evident that the figures were executed by means of a stencil. [101] From the circumstance of so many women occurring as card-painters in the town books of Nuremberg between 1433 and 1477, there appears reason to conclude that they, at least, were not wood-engravers.

The name of a wood-engraver proper—Formschneider—first occurs in the town-books of Nuremberg, under the year 1449; and as for twenty years subsequently, it frequently occurs on the same page with that of a card-painter— Kartenmaler—there cannot be a doubt that there was a distinction between the professions, although, like the barbers and surgeons of former times, they both belonged to the same fellowship or company.

A few years subsequent to the Formschneider, the Briefmaler occurs; but though his designation has the same literal meaning as that of the Kartenmaler, yet his business seems to have been more general, including both that of the card-painter and wood-engraver. About 1470 we find the Briefmalers not only employed in executing figures, but also in engraving the text of block-books; and about the end of the fifteenth century the term seems to have been generally synonymous with that of Formschneider. Subsequently the latter term prevailed as the proper designation of a wood-engraver, while that of Briefmaler was more especially applied, like that of the original Kartenmaler, to designate a person who coloured cards and other figures. [102]

Though we have positive evidence that, about the year 1470, the Briefmaler was a wood-engraver as well as a colourer of cards; and though it be highly probable that the outlines of the figures on cards were then engraved on wood, and that, from this circumstance, the Briefmaler became also a wood-engraver, yet we have no proof that the earliest wood-engravers in Europe were the card-makers. Von Murr indeed confidently affirms "that card-makers and card-painters were known in Germany eighty years before the invention of typography, and that the card-makers were at first properly wood-engravers, but that, after the art of wood-engraving was applied to the execution of sacred subjects, a distinction was made." [103] He who can thus persuade himself that the germ of wood-engraving in Europe is to be found in cards, will doubtless feel great pleasure in tracing its interesting development; the first term, cards engraved on wood, being assumed, we then have figures of saints with their names, or short explanations, engraved on wood; next block-books consisting of sacred subjects with copious explanatory text; and lastly typography and the press: "ce n'est que le premier pas qui coute." [104]

At what period the art of wood-engraving was first introduced in Europe, or in what country it was first practised, has not been precisely ascertained. Not the slightest allusion is made to its productions by any writers of the fourteenth century; and the earliest authentic date that has hitherto been observed on any wood-engraving, is 1423. A wood-engraving said to contain the date 1418 was indeed discovered at Malines in 1844, pasted in the inside of an old chest; but as the numerals have evidently been repaired by means of a black-lead pencil, both the genuineness and the authenticity of the date have been very justly questioned. The person by whom it was found, the keeper of a little public-house, almost immediately sold it to an architect named De Noter, of whom it was purchased by the Baron de Reiffenberg, for the Royal Library of Brussels, of which he is the conservator, and where it is now preserved. [105]

Before this discovery, the earliest wood-engraving with a date, was the St. Christopher, in Earl Spencer's collection, in which the date 1423, partly in words and partly in numerals—"Millesimo cccc^o xx^o tercio"—is seen engraved in the same manner as the other parts of the subject. The first person who published an account of the St. Christopher, was Heineken. When he first saw it, it was pasted on the inside of the cover of a manuscript volume in the library of Buxheim, near Memmingen in Suabia, within fifty miles of Augsburg, a city which appears to have been the abode of wood-engravers almost from the very commencement of the art in Europe, and in which we find a card-maker so early as 1418. On the inside of the cover, Heineken also observed another cut, of the annunciation, of the same size as the St. Christopher, and apparently executed about the same time. The volume within whose covers those cuts were pasted, was bequeathed to the convent by Anna, canoness of Buchaw, who was living in 1427, but who probably died previous to 1435. The Annunciation, as well as the St. Christopher, is now in the possession of Earl Spencer.

From the time of their first introduction, woodcuts of sacred subjects appear to have been known in Suabia and the adjacent districts by the name of Helgen or Helglein, a corruption of Heiligen, saints; and in course of time this word also came to signify prints or woodcuts generally. It would seem that originally the productions of the wood-engraver were considered as imperfect till they were coloured; and as the St. Christopher, the Annunciation, and others of an early date, appear to have been coloured by means of a stencil, there is reason to conclude that most of the "Helgen" of the same period were coloured in the same manner. In France the same kind of cuts, probably coloured in the same manner, were called "Dominos,"—a name which of itself indicates the affinity of the subjects with those of the Helgen. Subsequently, the word "Domino" was used to signify coloured or marbled paper generally; and the makers of such paper, as well as the engravers and colourers of woodcuts, were called Dominotiers.

Though we cannot reasonably suppose that the cut of St. Christopher, with the date 1423, was the very first of its kind, there is yet reason to believe that the art of wood-engraving was then but little known. As the earliest woodcuts are observed to be coloured by means of a stencil, it would seem that at the time when wood-engraving was first introduced, the art of depicting and colouring figures by means of a stencil was already well known; but as there are no cards engraved on wood to which so early a date as 1423 can be fairly assigned, and as at that period there were professional card-makers established at Augsburg, it would appear that wood-engraving was employed on the execution of "Helgen" before it was applied to cards, and that there were stencilled cards before there were wood-engravings of saints. Though this conclusion be not exactly in accordance with an opinion which I have expressed in another work, [106] it is yet that which, on a further investigation of the subject, appears to be best supported by facts, and most strongly corroborated by the incidental notices which we have of the progress of the Briefmaler or card-painter from his original profession to that of a wood-engraver in general.

Old Stencilled Cards in the British Museum. No. 1 (p. 88.)

Old Stencilled Cards in the British Museum. No. 2 (p. 88.)

The annexed cuts are fac-similes of some of the old cards to which I have alluded at page 83. The originals are preserved in the print-room of the British Museum; and from a repeated examination of them, I am convinced that they have been depicted by means of a stencil, and not printed nor "rubbed off" from wood blocks. They are not coloured, nor cut into single cards; but appear just as they are shown in the fac-similes. They formed part of the covers or "boards" of an old book, and were sold to the British Museum by Mr. D. Colnaghi. Looking at the marks of the suits in those cards, the character of the figures, and the manner in which they are executed, I should say that they are not of a later date than 1440. Though cards of only three suits occur, namely, Hearts, Bells, and Acorns, there can be little doubt that the fourth suit was Leaves, as in the pack described by Mr. Gough, in the eighth volume of the 'Archæologia.' As in Mr. Gough's cards, so in these, there is no Queen; though, like them, there appears to have been three "coat" cards in each suit, namely, a King, a Knight, or Superior Officer, and a Knave, or Servant; in other words, King, Jack, and Jack's Man. The lower cards, as in Mr. Gough's pack, appear to have been numbered by their "pips" from two to ten, without any ace.

That those cards were depicted by means of a stencil is evident from the feebleness and irregularity of the lines, as well as from the numerous breaks in them, which, in many instances, show where a white isolated space was connected with other blank parts of the stencil. The separation seen in the heads of the figures in No. 1 of the fac-similes here given, would appear to have been occasioned by the stencil either breaking or slipping while the operator was passing the brush over it. From the costume of the figures in these cards, I am inclined to think that they are the production of a Venetian card-maker. A lion, the emblem of St. Mark, the patron saint of Venice, and a distinctive badge of the city, appears, as in the annexed cut, in the suit of Bells; and a similar figure, with part of a mutilated inscription, also occurs in the suit of Acorns.

Card-playing appears to have been a common amusement with the citizens of Bologna, about 1423. In that year St. Bernardin of Sienna, who died in 1444, and was canonized in 1450, preaching on the steps in front of the church of St. Petronius, described so forcibly the evils of gaming in general, and of Card-playing in particular, to which the Bolognese were much addicted, that his hearers made a fire in the public place and threw their cards into it. A card-maker who was present, and who had heard the denunciations of the preacher, not only against gamesters, but against all who either supplied them with cards or dice, or in any manner countenanced them, is said to have thus addressed him, in great affliction of mind. [107] "I have not learned, father, any other business than that of painting cards; and if you deprive me of that, you deprive me of life, and my destitute family of the means of earning a subsistence." To this appeal the Saint cheerfully replied: "If you do not know what to paint, paint this figure, and you will never have cause to regret having done so." Thus saying, he took a tablet and drew on it the figure of a radiant sun, with the name of Jesus indicated in the centre by the monogram I.H.S. The card-painter followed the saint's advice; and so numerous were the purchasers of the reformed productions of his art, that he soon became rich. In the Bibliothèque du Roi at Paris, there is an old woodcut of St. Bernardin, with the date 1454, which has been supposed to have been engraved with reference to this anecdote, as the saint is seen holding in his right hand the symbol which he recommended the card-maker to paint. A fac-simile of this figure of St. Bernardin is given in the 'Illustrated London News,' of the 20th of April, 1844, and reprinted in a work recently published, entitled 'The History and Art of Wood Engraving.'

John Capistran, a disciple of St. Bernardin, and also a Franciscan friar, followed the example of his master in preaching against gaming; and his exhortations appear to have been attended with no less success. In 1452, when on a mission to Germany, he preached for three hours at Nuremberg, in Latin, against luxury and gaming; and his discourse, which was interpreted by one of his followers, produced so great an effect on the audience, that there were brought into the market-place and burnt, 76 jaunting sledges, 3640 backgammon boards, 40,000 dice, and cards innumerable. Under an old portrait of Capistran, engraved on wood by Hans Schaufflein, there is an inscription commemorating the effects of his preaching as above related. [108]

Having now shown at what period cards were certainly well known in Europe, and at what period card-making was a regular business in Italy and Germany, I shall proceed to lay before the reader a series of facts showing the prevalence of the game in various countries, both among great and little people.

From the repeated municipal regulations forbidding card-playing, to be found in the Burgher-books of several cities of Germany, between 1400 and 1450, it would seem that the game was extremely popular in that country in the earlier part of the fifteenth century; and that it continued to gain ground, notwithstanding the prohibitions of men in office. There are orders forbidding it in the council-books of Augsburg, dated 1400, 1403, and 1406; though in the latter year there is an exception which permits card-playing at the meeting-houses of the trades. It was forbidden at Nordlingen in 1426, 1436, and 1439; but in 1440 the magistrates, in their great wisdom, thought proper to relax in some degree the stringency of their orders by allowing the game to be played in public-houses. In the town-books of the same city there are entries, in the years 1456 and 1461, of money paid for cards at the magistrates' annual goose-feast or corporation dinner. In the books of the company of "Schuflikker"—cobblers—of Bamberg, there is a bye-law agreed to in 1491, which imposes a fine of half a pound of wax—not shoemakers', but bees' wax for the company's holy candle, to burn at the altar of the patron saint,—upon any brother who should throw the backgammon pieces, cards, or dice out of the window. [109] From this it may be concluded that the "Schuflikker" of Bamberg in 1491 were accustomed, like gamesters of a more recent period, to vent their rage, when losers, on the cards and dice.

Baptista Platina, in his treatise 'De Honesta Voluptate'—which is neither more nor less than an antique "School of Good Living," teaching how creature comforts may be best enjoyed—mentions cards as a game at which gentlemen may play, after dinner or supper, to divert their minds, as deep thinking after a hearty meal impedes digestion. There was, however, to be no cheating nor desire of gain—which is as much as to say that the stakes were to be merely nominal—lest bad passions should be excited, and the process of healthy concoction disturbed. [110]

Galeottus Martius, a contemporary of Platina, is perhaps the earliest writer who "speculated," or at least published his speculations, on the allegorical meaning of the marks of the four suits of cards. I shall give a translation of the passage, which occurs in chapter xxxvi of his treatise 'De Doctrina promiscua,' written, according to Tiraboschi, between 1488 and 1490. I leave others to divine the author's precise meaning, referring them to the original text which is given below. The topics of this chapter are: "The greater and lesser Dog Star, Orion, the Evening Star, the Pleiades, the Hyades, Bootes, the Kids, the planet Venus, and the game of Cards." Towards the conclusion, after having exhausted his astronomical topics, he thus proceeds, apropos of the benign influence of Venus.

"From the excellency of this planet it is not surprising that the ancients called a happy throw at dice Venus,—not Jove, though considered of greater fortune. Thus Propertius:

"An unlucky cast was called the Dog—"Canis"—and also the Little Dog—"Canicula"—with reference to the Stars. Thus Persius:

"What kind of stars the Great and Little Dog were, has been already shown. Some persons, indeed, might laugh at the invention of such kind of games being ascribed to the learned, were it not plain from reason that the game of cards was also devised by wise men. To say nothing about the Kings, Queens, Knights, and Footmen,—for every one knows the distinction between dignity and military service,—is it not evident, when we consider the significance of swords, spears, cups, and country loaves, that the inventor of the game was a man of shrewd wit? When there is need of strength, as indicated by the Swords and Spears, many are better than few; in matters of meat and drink, however, as indicated by the Loaves and Cups, a little is better than a great deal, for it is certain that abstemious persons are of more lively wit than gluttons and drunkards, and much superior in the management of business. What I call country loaves, from their form and colour,—Pliny speaks of bread of a yellow colour—are the marks which are ignorantly supposed to signify pieces of money. The Cups are goblets, for wine." [111]

The remainder of the passage cannot be literally translated into English, as it relates chiefly to the pronunciation of the word "Hastas"—Spears. The substance of it, however, is as follows: "The common people say 'Hastas,' as the aspiration H, and the letter V are interchangeable, and so are B and V, both in Greek and Latin. As Bastoni [clubs] are vulgarly called Hastoni, so have they sometimes the form of spears [Hastarum], but mostly that of bills, for both are military weapons." The original passage is extremely perplexing; and the only thing in it that appears plain to me is the writer's desire to convert Bastoni—Clubs—into "Hastas," Spears. The Bastoni, which he says are called Hastoni, or the Hastoni which are called Bastoni,—for there is here an ambiguity, as in the celebrated oracular response, "Aio te, Æacida, Romanos vincere posse"—can only relate to the figures of the things as seen on cards, and not to the things themselves; for the author says that they have sometimes the shape of spears, but more frequently that of bills. The real meaning of this I take to be, that the Bastoni—Clubs—on cards were more like bills than spears, notwithstanding that H and V, and V and B, were interchangeable letters. From the account of Galeottus, it is evident that the usual marks of the suits of Italian cards were in his time, Coppe, Spadi, Danari, and Bastoni,—Cups, Swords, Money, and Clubs.

In 1463 it would appear that cards were well known in England; for, by an act of parliament passed in that year, which was the third of Edward IV, the importation of playing cards was expressly prohibited. This act, according to Anderson, was passed in consequence of the manufacturers and tradesmen of London, and other parts of England, having made heavy complaints against the importation of foreign manufactured wares which greatly obstructed their own employment. [112] If we suppose that cards were included in the prohibition for the above reason, it would follow that card-making was then a regular business in England.

Whether cards were home-manufactured or obtained from abroad, they appear about 1484 to have been, as they are at present, a common Christmas game. Margery Paston thus writes to her husband, John Paston, in a letter dated Friday, 24th Dec., 1484: "Right worshipful husband, I recommend me unto you. Please it you to weet that I sent your eldest son John to my Lady Morley, to have knowledge of what sports were used in her house in the Christmas next following after the decease of my lord her husband; and she said that there were none disguisings, nor harpings, nor luting, nor singing, nor none loud disports; but playing at the tables, and chess, and cards; such disports she gave her folks leave to play, and none other. Your son did his errand right well, as ye shall hear after this. I sent your younger son to the Lady Stapleton; and she said according to my Lady Morley's saying in that, and as she had seen used in places of worship thereas [where] she hath been." [113] It may not be improper here to caution the reader against confounding "places of worship," with "houses of prayer," and hence inferring that cards were then a common game in churches, with gentlemen's servants, at Christmas time. By "places of worship" are meant the dwelling-places of worshipful persons, such as lords, knights, and justices of the peace: in those days there were no stipendiary police-magistrates, and every Shallow on the bench was "a gentleman born."

Whether Richard III, in whose reign the letter above quoted was written, added dicing and card-playing to his other vices, we have no account either in public history which deals, or ought to deal, wholesale, in "great facts," or in private memoirs, which are more especially devoted to the retailing of little facts. His successor, however, Henry VII, was a card player; for Barrington observes that in his privy-purse expenses there are three several entries of money issued for his majesty's losses at cards. Of his winnings there is no entry; though his money-grubbing majesty kept his accounts so exactly as to enter even a six-and-eightpenny bribe, given to propitiate his mercy in favour of a poor criminal,—thus turning a penny by trafficking with his prerogative of pardoning:

It would appear that cards was a common game at the court of Henry the VII, even with the royal children; for, in 1503, his daughter Margaret, aged 14, was found playing at cards by James IV of Scotland, on his first interview with her, after her arrival in Scotland for the purpose of being married to him. [114] James himself is said to have been greatly addicted to card-playing; and in the accounts of his treasurer there are several entries of money disbursed on account of the game. On Christmas night, 1496, there are delivered to the king at Melrose, to spend at cards, "thirty-five unicornis, eleven French crowns, a ducat, a ridare, and a leu"—in all forty-two pounds. On the 23d August, 1504, when the king was at Lochmaben, he appears to have lost several sums at cards to Lord Dacre, the warden of the English marches; and on the 26th of the same month, there is an entry of four French crowns given "to Cuddy, the Inglis luter, to louse his cheyne of grotis, quhilk he tint at the cartis,"—to redeem his chain of groats which he lost at cards. [115]

M. Duchesne, in his 'Observations sur les Cartes à jouer,' says, somewhat inconsistently, that cards are of Italian origin, and that it was either at Venice or at Florence, that the Greek refugees from Constantinople, first made them known. M. Duchesne is as incorrect in his chronology, as he is singular in his notions with respect to the Italian origin of playing cards,—first brought to Venice or Florence, by Greeks. [116] The refugees to whom he apparently alludes were the Greeks who sought an asylum in Italy, when Constantinople was taken by the Turks, in 1453, which is sixty years after the time that we have positive evidence of cards being known in France. But though no evidence has been produced to show that cards were first brought into Europe from Constantinople, it is yet certain that they were known to the Greeks, before the end of the fifteenth century; for Ducange, in his Glossary of Middle-Age Greek, under the word "XAPTIA, Ludus chartarum, [117] quotes the following verse from a manuscript of Emanual Georgillas on the Plague at Rhodes:

"Burn the tables, cards, and dice."

"It appears from this," says Ducange, "that the game of cards, the origin of which is uncertain, was at least known in 1498, the year in which this mortality happened." In the 'Journal des Dames,' for the 10th April, 1828—a publication, which I have not had the fortune to see, but which is referred to by Brunet the younger, in his 'Notice Bibliographique sur les Cartes à jouer,'—there is a detailed account of the modern Greek cards manufactured at Frankfort. [118]

Towards the close of the fifteenth, and in the early part of the sixteenth century, before Luther had sounded the tocsin of religious reform, and given a new impulse to both the busy and the idle, the Germans appear to have been greatly addicted to gaming. Woodcuts of this period showing men and women playing at cards and dice are common. John Geiler of Kaisersberg, a famous preacher in his day, who, like Latimer, was accustomed to season his sermons with a little humour—not to say fun—rings a peal against gaming in his 'Speculum Fatuorum,' first printed at Strasburg about 1508. He says that there are some games at cards which are purely of chance, such as "der offen Rusch und Schantzen," [119] while others, such as "des Karnefflins" depend on both chance and skill. In treating of the lawfulness of playing at cards, dice, and similar games "for the sake of recreation"—a saving clause which appears to have been introduced in favour of the laboriously studious and devout,—he cites authorities both pro and con. A certain gloss says that to play at such games, whether for money, or "gratis," is a deadly sin; and Hostiensis says that to play for recreation, for money,—"to kill themselves for love, with wine"—is a deadly sin in the laity as well as the clergy. Angelus, however, says that it is lawful for both clergy and laity to play for recreation, for small stakes: "pro modico non notabili." Geiler's own conclusion is that, as doctors differ, there is danger. Gaming in his time, as in our own, appears to have levelled all distinctions: lords and ladies, and even clergymen, dignified or otherwise, eager to win money, and confiding in their luck, or their skill, cared but little for the rank or character of those with whom they played, provided they could but post the stakes; and felt no more compunction in winning a ruffling burgher's money, than a peer would in receiving the amount of a bet from a cab-man, or a wealthy citizen, a few years ago, in rendering bankrupt the wooden-legged manager of a thimble-rig table at Epsom or Ascot.—The "thimble-rig," however, is now numbered with the things that have been—"fuit." Lord Stanley brought it into political disrepute; and Sir James Graham put it down, just about the time that the railway speculation began to be the "rage" under the auspices of a knowing Yorkshireman.

Thomas Murner, a Franciscan friar, availing himself apparently of the popularity of card-playing, introduced the term "Chartiludium" as a "caption" in the title of his 'Logica Memorativa,' printed at Strasburg, in 1509. [120] The work is evidently that of a scholastic pedant, who might possibly be expert enough in ringing the changes on verbal distinctions, but who had not the least knowledge of things, nor any idea of the right use of reason. The book is adorned with numerous cuts, which represent cards, inasmuch at the top of each there is an emblem, just as there is the mark of the suit in each of our coat cards. The cuts and the text taken together, for they mutually render each other more intelligible, form such a mass of complicated nonsense as would puzzle even a fortune-teller to interpret. In his prologue, Murner asks pardon for the title of his book; and assures the studious youths, for whose instruction it was devised, that he had not been led to adopt it from any partiality to card-playing; that, in fact, he had never touched cards, and that, from his very childhood he had abhorred the perverse passion for play. In 1518 Murner, apparently stimulated by the success of his logical card-play, published an introduction to the civil law, written and pictorially illustrated in the same manner as the former. [121]

As I have not been able to make anything of Murner's logical card-play, either as regards the instruments or the matter professed to be taught, I willingly avail myself of what Mons. Leber has said on the subject in his 'Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer.'—"These cards," says Mons. Leber, "made much noise in their time; and this might well be, for they were a novelty which it was easier to admire than to comprehend. At first people fancied that they saw in them the work of the devil; and it was even a question whether the author should not be burnt, seeing that he could be nothing more than a conjurer with the logicians of that age. But the conjurer's pupils made such extraordinary progress, that people cried out "wonderful!" and Murner's book was pronounced divine. Although those cards are fifty-two in number, they have nothing in common with our pack. They differ from all other cards, whether for gaming, or of fanciful device, in the multiplicity and the division of the suits, which the inventor has applied to the divisions of logic, after a method of his own. Of these suits there are no less than sixteen, corresponding with the same number of sections of the text, and having the following names and colours:

"Such is the whimsicality of those signs, and such the oddity of their relation to the things signified, that the learned Singer has been deterred from the attempt to make them known; at any rate, he declares that he will not undertake to explain that which even the most profound logicians of the day might not be able to comprehend. This is easily said, but we see no impossibility in explaining how the author understood himself. One example will be sufficient to give an idea of Murner's figured language, and of the the parts which might be played by serpents, cats, acorns, and crayfish in the chair of Aristotle when its occupant was a friar of the sixteenth century.

"The figure of a man with a crown on his head, a patch over one of his eyes, a book in one hand, and a trowel in the other, relates to section, or "Tractatus," X, APPELLATIO. It displays three symbols, the object of which is intelligence or definition: 1, the logical appellation; 2, relative terms or ideas which have become connected in the mind; 3, privative terms, expressive of privation or exclusion. The open book, [which appears shut] is the symbol of the definition; the trowel indicates connexion; and the patch over the eye signifies privation. The star, which occupies the place of the mark of the suit, and casts its light on all the other three symbols, signifies that clearness is the first merit in every definition." The cut here given is a fac-simile of that referred to.

Rogers, availing himself of the poetic license, though but to a small extent, has represented the followers of Columbus as playing at cards in his first voyage of discovery, to the West Indies, in 1492.

Garcilasso de la Vega, to whom Mr. Rogers refers, says nothing about Primero or the followers of Columbus playing at the game; he only mentions, in his 'History of the Conquest of Florida,' that the soldiers who were engaged in that expedition, having burnt all their cards after the battle of Mauvila, [about 1542], made themselves new ones of parchment, which they painted admirably, as if they had followed the business all their lives; but as they either could not, or would not, make so many as were wanted, players had the cards in their turn for a limited time. [123] Although we have no positive evidence of the fact, it is yet not unlikely that there were cards in the ships of Columbus; unless indeed they had been especially prohibited to the crews on this occasion, as they were to the soldiers and sailors of the Spanish Armada in 1588. [124] Herrera has recorded in his 'History of the Spanish Discoveries in America,' that Montezuma, emperor of Mexico, who was made prisoner by Cortes in 1519, took great pleasure in seeing the Spanish soldiers play at cards.

Barrington, in his 'Observations on the Antiquity of Card-playing in England,' says, "During the reigns of Henry VIII and Edward VI, this amusement seems not to have been common in England, as scarcely any mention of it occurs either in Rymer's Fœdera, or the statute book." Had Mr. Barrington been as well read in old poems and plays as he was in the more ancient statutes, it is likely that he would have been of a different opinion. He says, "It is not improbable, however, that Philip the Second, with his suite, coming from the court of Charles V, made the use of cards much more general than it had been, of which some presumptive proofs are not wanting." The supposition is plausible; but as the presumptive proofs which he alleges, were as likely to be found in the reign of Edward IV, as in the reign of Mary, they are of no weight in the determination of the question. As Catherine, the wife of Henry VIII, was a Spanish princess, and as it is recorded that, amongst her other accomplishments, she could "play at tables, tick-tack, or gleek, with cardes or dyce," [125] the persons forming her suite were just as likely as those of the suite of Philip II, to have brought into England Spanish cards with the marks of swords and clubs proper—Espadas and Bastos: but there can scarcely be a doubt that such cards were known in England long before. Mr. Barrington's partiality to his theory about Spanish cards, and of the game becoming much more general in England after the marriage of Philip and Mary, has probably caused him either to entirely overlook, or attach too little importance to a presumptive proof, to be found in the statute-book, of cards being a common amusement in England in the reign of Henry VIII. In a statute relating to plays and games, passed in the thirty-third year of that king's reign, 1541, we find the following restrictions. "No Artificer, or his Journeyman, no Husbandman, Apprentice, Labourer, Servant at Husbandry, Mariner, Fisherman, Waterman, or Serving-man, shall play at Tables, Tennis, Dice, Cards, Bowls, Closh, Coyting, Logating, or any other unlawful game out of Christmas; or then, out of their master's house or presence, in pain of 20s.; and none shall play at Bowls in open places, out of his garden or orchard, in pain of 6s. 8d." [126] In the morality of Hycke-Scorner, reprinted in Hawkins's 'Origin of the English Drama,' from a black letter copy in Garrick's collection, of at least as early a date as the commencement of the reign of Henry VIII, the following are enumerated as forming part of the company of the ships that came over with Hycke-Scorner:

In the morality of Lusty Juventus, written by R. Wever, in the reign of Edward VI, Hypocryse says to Juventus, whom he invites to breakfast:

From a subsequent passage it appears that this "furny carde" [127] is the naughty woman, "litle Besse," the personification of "Abhominable Livyng."

In the comedy of 'Gammer Gurton's Needle,' said to have been first printed in 1551, old dame Chat thus invites two of her acquaintance to a game at cards:

In a Satire on Cardinal Wolsey and the Romish Clergy by William Roy, without date, but most likely printed in 1527, [128] some of the bishops are charged with gaming in addition to their other vices:

In the privy purse expenses, from 1536 to 1544, of the Princess Mary, daughter of Henry VIII, afterwards Queen Mary, there are numerous entries of money delivered to the princess to play at cards. In a prefatory memoir, Sir Frederick Madden remarks: "Cards she seems to have indulged in freely; and there is a sum generally allotted as pocket-money for the recreation every month." [129] As Mary is said to have been extremely devout, we may presume that, adopting the decisions of the more indulgent casuists, she availed herself of their permission to play at cards as a recreation when her mind was fatigued with the exercise of her strenuous piety. The records of the burning of men and women in her reign for the sake of religion, form a singular contrast with the entries in her privy purse expenses of money delivered to her to play at cards.

From the preceding incidental notices of cards in poems and plays, as well as from the direct evidence of the statute book and the privy purse expenses of the Princess Mary, it would appear that card-playing was common in England during the reigns of Henry VIII and Edward VI, both in the cottage and the palace; and there is reason to believe that about the same period the game was equally common in Scotland. William Dunbar, who wrote in the reigns of James IV and James V, in his 'General Satire,' exposing the depravity of all classes of people in the kingdom, thus alludes to the prevalence of dicing and card-playing:

In the poems of Sir David Lyndsay, there are several allusions to card-playing; and in his 'Satire of the Three Estaites,' which Chalmers says was first acted at Cupar, Fifeshire, in 1535, the Parson declares himself to be an adept at the game:

In Sir David's poem, entitled 'The Cardinal,' exposing the personal vices and tyrannical conduct of Cardinal Beaton, who was assassinated at St. Andrews in 1546, that prelate is represented as a great gamester: [130]

In the examination of Thomas Forret, a dean of the Kirk, and vicar of Dollar, on a charge of heresy brought against him by John Lauder, a tool of Cardinal Beaton's, at Edinburgh, 1st March, 1539, Forret's answer to one of the charges of his accuser, affords some idea of the manner in which many bachelor priests of the period were accustomed to spend their tithes:

"Accuser. False Heretic, thou sayest it is not lawful to Kirkmen to take their teinds (tythes) and offerings and corps-presents, though we have been in use of them, constitute by the Kirk and King, and also our holy father the Pope hath confirmed the same?

"Dean Forret. Brother, I said not so; but I said it was not lawful to Kirkmen to spend the patrimony of the Kirk, as they do, on riotous feasting, and on fair women, and at playing at cards and dice." [131]

Pinkerton, in his 'History of Scotland,' says: "Stewart the poet, in an address to James V, advises him to amuse himself with hunting, hawking, and archery, justing, and chess; and not to play at cards or dice, except with his mother or the chief lords, as it was a disgrace for a prince to win from men of inferior station, and his gains at any time ought to be given to his attendants."

At a period somewhat later, it would appear that card-playing was a common amusement on the borders of Scotland, and that the sturdy rievers, whose grand game was cattle lifting, were accustomed to while away their idle hours at cards for placks and hardheads. The following curious passage occurs in a letter dated Newcastle, 12th January (1570), printed in the second volume of Sir Ralph Sadler's 'State Papers.' The writer was a gentleman named Robert Constable, who appears to have been sent into Scotland to endeavour to persuade his kinsman, the Earl of Westmoreland, to return to England and submit himself to Elizabeth's mercy. [132]

"I left Ferniherst, and went to my ostes house, [133] where I found many guests of dyvers factions, some outlaws of England, some of Scotland, some neighbours thereabout, at cards; some for ale, some for placks and hardhedds [a small coin]; and after I had diligently learned and enquired that there was none of any surname that had me in deadly fude, nor none that knew me, I sat down and plaid for hardhedds among them, where I heard vox populi that the Lord Regent would not, for his owne honour, nor for the honour of his country, deliver the Earls, if he had them bothe, unless it were to have their Quene delivered to him; and if he wold agree to make that change, the borderers would start up in his contrary, and reave both the Quene and the Lords from him, for the like shame was never don in Scotland; and that he durst better eate his own lugs than come agen to seke Farneherst; if he did, he should be fought with ere he came over Sowtray edge. Hector of Tharlows [134] hedd was wished to have been eaten amongs us at supper."

In the old ballad entitled 'The Battle of the Reed Swire,' giving an account of a fray at a Warden meeting, which ended in a general fight, we find cards mentioned. This meeting was held in 1576 near the head of the river Reed, on the English side of the Carter fell; and appears to have been attended, like a fair, by people from both sides of the Border.

About the same period the game of cards was a common amusement in the south of Ireland. Spenser, in his 'View of the State of Ireland,' written about 1590, speaks of an idle and dissolute class of people called "Carrows," who, he says, "wander up and down to gentlemen's houses, living only upon cards and dice; the which, though they have but little or nothing of their own, yet will they play for much money; which, if they win, they waste most lightly; and if they lose, they pay as slenderly, but make recompense with one stealth or another; whose only hurt is not that they themselves are idle lossels, but that through gaming they draw others to lewdness and idleness." [136]

The counterpart to this picture was to be found in Spain about the same period; and as the intercourse between the two countries was frequent, and the favorite game in both was "One-and-Thirty," it is not unlikely that the Irish obtained their knowledge of cards from the Spaniards. In Cervantes' 'Comical History of Rinconete and Cortadillo,' a young Spanish vagabond gives the following account of his skill at cards: "I took along with me what I thought most necessary, and amongst the rest this pack of cards, (and now I called to mind the old saying, 'He carries his All on his back,') for with these I have gained my living at all the publick houses and inns between Madrid and this place, playing at One-and-Thirty; and though they are dirty and torn, they are of wonderful service to those who understand them, for they shall never cut without leaving an ace at bottom, which is one good point towards eleven, with which advantage, thirty-one being the game, he sweeps all the money into his pocket: besides this, I know some slight tricks at Cards and Hazard; so that though you are very dexterous and a thorough master of the art of cutting buskins, I am every bit as expert in the science of cheating people, and therefore I am in no fear of starving; for though I come but to a small cottage, there are always some who have a mind to pass away time by playing a little; [137] and of this we may now try the experiment ourselves: Let us spread the nets, and see if none of these birds, the carriers, will fall into them; which is as much as to say that you and I will play together at One-and-Thirty, as if it was in earnest; perhaps somebody may make the third, and he shall be sure to be the first to leave his money behind him."

At what period cards were first used in Europe for the purposes of divination or fortune-telling has not been ascertained. In the 'Magasin Pittoresque' for 1842, page 324, there is a cut entitled "Philippe-le-Bon consultant une tireuse de cartes," copied from a painting ascribed to John Van Eyck. Though it has been denied that this picture is really by Van Eyck, it is yet admitted that the costume is that of the reign of Charles VIII, between 1483 and 1498. [138] Supposing then that the picture belongs to the latter period, we have thus evidence of cards being used for the purposes of fortune-telling before the close of the fifteenth century. The gypsies, who are unquestionably of Asiatic origin, appear to have long used them for this purpose; and if they brought cards with them in their earliest immigration into Europe, as Breitkopf supposes, they are just as likely to have brought with them their occult science of cards as to have acquired it subsequently from Europeans. The earliest work, expressly treating of the subject appears to be 'Le Sorti,' written or compiled by Francesco Marcolini, printed at Venice in 1540. In the prologue, the author professes to explain the mode of applying what he calls his pleasant invention—"piacevole inventione;" but beyond the fact that certain cards are to be used, I have not been able to make out his meaning. The only cards to be employed were the King, Knight, Knave, ten, [139] nine, eight, seven, deuce, and ace of the suit Danari or Money. Besides the small cuts of cards, of which the following are specimens, the work contains a number of wood-engravings, some of which are designed in a spirited manner. A work similar to Marcolini's, entitled 'Triompho di Fortuna,' by Sigismond Fanti, professing to teach the art of solving questions relating to future events, but without using cards, was printed at Venice in 1527.

Juggling and fortune-telling by means of cards, whenever introduced, appear to have had many professors in the latter half of the sixteenth century. A trick performed with cards by a juggler, appears to have excited the inquisitive genius of Lord Bacon when a boy; and his biographer, Basil Montagu, thinks that from this circumstance his attention was first directed to an inquiry into the nature of the imagination. [140] Reginald Scott, in his Discovery of Witchcraft, first published in 1584, has a chapter "Of Cards, with good cautions how to avoid cousenage therein; special rules to convey and handle the cards; and the manner and order how to accomplish all difficult and strange things wrought with cards."

"Having now," says he, "bestowed some waste money among you, I will set you to cards; by which kind of witchcraft a great number of people have juggled away not only their money, but also their lands, their health, their time, and their honesty. I dare not (as I could) show the lewd juggling that cheaters practice, lest it minister some offence to the well-disposed, to the simple hurt and losses, and to the wicked occasion of evil doing. But I would wish all gamesters to beware, not only with what cards and dice they play, but especially with whom, and where they exercise gaming. And to let dice pass, (as whereby a man may be inevitably cousened,) one that is skilful to make and use Bumcards may undo a hundred wealthy men, that are not given to gaming; but if he have a confederate present, either of the players or standers-by, the mischief cannot be avoided. If you play among strangers, beware of him that seems simple or drunken; for under their habit the most special couseners are presented; and while you think by their simplicity and imperfections to beguile them, (and thereof, perchance, are persuaded by their confederates, your very friends as you think,) you yourself will be most of all over-taken. Beware also of the betters by and lookers on, and namely of them that bet on your side; for whilst they look on your game without suspicion, they discover it by signs to your adversaries, with whom they bet and yet are their confederates."

Among the tricks with cards which he notices, are the following: "How to deliver out four Aces and to convert them into four Knaves. How to tell one what card he seeth in the bottom, when the same card is shuffled into the stock. To tell one, without confederacy, what card he thinketh. How to tell what card any man thinketh, how to convey the same into a nut-shell, cherry-stone, &c., and the same again into one's pocket. How to make one draw the same, or any card you list, and all under one devise." The two verses which he quotes in the margin should be inscribed as a motto on the dial-plate of every gamester's watch. "Of dice play, and the like unthrifty games, mark these two old verses, and remember them:

Rowland, in his 'Judicial Astrology Condemned,' relates the following anecdote of Cuffe, the Secretary of the Earl of Essex, "a man of exquisite wit and learning, but of a turbulent disposition," who was hung at Tyburn, on the 13th of March, 1602, for having counselled and abetted the Earl in his treason. "Cuffe, an excellent Grecian, [141] and Secretary to the Earl of Essex, was told twenty years before his death that he should come to an untimely end, at which Cuffe laughed, and in a scornful manner, intreated the astrologer to show him in what manner he should come to his end; who condescended to him, and calling for cards, intreated Cuffe to draw out of the pack three which pleased him. He did so, and drew three Knaves and laid them on the table with their faces downwards, by the wizard's direction, who then told him, if he desired to see the sum of his bad fortunes, to take up those cards. Cuffe, as he was prescribed, took up the first card, and looking on it, he saw the portraiture of himself, cap-a-pie, having men compassing him about with bills and halberds; then he took up the second, and there he saw the judge that sat upon him; and taking up the last card, he saw Tyburn, the place of his execution, and the hangman, at which he laughed heartily; but many years after, being condemned for treason, he remembered and declared this prediction."

Queen Elizabeth, as well as her sister, Mary, was a card player; and even her grave Lord Treasurer, Lord Burleigh, appears to have occasionally taken a hand at Primero. [142] That she sometimes lost her temper, when the cards ran against her, may be fairly inferred from the following passage, which occurs in a letter, written in the latter part of her reign, by Sir Robert Carey to his father, Lord Hunsdon: her violent language must have been the result of her holding a bad hand at the moment that the presence of young Carey reminded her of his father's procrastination. "May it please your L. t'understande that yesterday yn the afternune I stood by hyr Ma^tie as she was att Cards in the presens chamber. She cawlde me to hyr, and askte me when you mente too go too Barwyke. I towlde hyr that you determinde to begyn your jorney presently after Whytsontyd. She grew yntoo a grete rage, begynnynge with Gods wonds, that she wolde sett you by the feete, and send another in your place yf you dalyed with hyr thus, for she wolde not be thus dalyed withall. [143]

Though the laity of all ranks and conditions—except apprentices [144] —appear to have played at cards and dice without let or hinderance, notwithstanding any statute to the contrary, yet the clergy seem to have been rather more sharply looked after. In the 'Injunctions geven by the Quenes Majestie, as well to the Clergye as the Laity,' printed by Richard Jugge and John Cawood, 1559, the clergy are thus admonished: "Also the sayde ecclesiastical persons shall in no wyse, nor for any other cause then for theyr honeste necessities, haunt or resort to anye Tavernes or Alehouses. And after theyr meates, they shall not geve themselves to any drynkyng or ryot, spendyng theyr tyme idelly by day or by nyght, at dyse, cardes, or tables playing, or anye other unlawfull game." [145] In the 'Injunctions exhibited by John, Bishop of Norwich, at his first visitation, in the third year of our Soveraign Ladie Elizabeth,' printed at London by John Daye, 1561, officials are enjoined to inquire, "Whether any parson, vicare, or curate geve any evell example of lyfe; whether they be incontinent parsones, dronkardes, haunters of tavernes, alehouses, or suspect places; dycers, tablers, carders, swearers, or vehementlie suspected thereof."

A notice of a dramatic representation of the game of cards occurs in the accounts of Queen Elizabeth's 'Master of the Revels,' 1582. [146] In that year he and his officers were commanded "to show on St. Stephen's day at night, before her Majesty at Wyndesore, a Comodie or Morral devised on a game of the cardes," to be performed by the children of her Majesty's Chapel. From the following observations of Sir John Harrington on this "Comodie or Morral," it would seem to have been a severe satire on those Knaves who enrich themselves at the nation's expense: "Then for comedies, to speake of a London comedie, how much good matter, yea and matter of state, is there in that comedie cald the play of the cards? in which it is showed how foure Parasiticalle knaves robbe the foure principall vocations of the Realme, videlicet, the vocations of Souldiers, Scollers, Marchants, and Husbandmen. Of which comedie I cannot forget the saying of a notable wise counseller who is now dead (Sir Frauncis Walsinghame), who, when some (to sing Placebo) advised that it should be forbidden, because it was somewhat too plaine, and indeed, as the old saying is, Sooth boord is no boord, yet he would have it allowed, adding that it was fit that 'They which doe that they should not, should heare that they would not.'" [147]

The mention of a comedy shown before the Queen at Windsor by the children of her Majesty's Chapel, naturally suggests the recollection of John Lyly's Court Comedies, which were wont to be shown by the same children, as well as by the "children of Poules;" and as in one of those comedies,—Alexander and Campaspe,—Lyly has committed an anachronism with respect to cards, [148] an opportunity is thus afforded of here introducing the pleasantly conceited song that contains the error,—a song, which Elia would have encored, and which even Mrs. Battle herself would have allowed to be sung at the card table during the intermission of the game at the end of a rubber, when cutting in for new partners. [149]

Before taking leave of the reign of Elizabeth, it seems proper to insert here what Philip Stubbes says about Cards, Dice, Tables, Tennis, and other games, in his 'Anatomie of Abuses.' [150] "As for Cardes, Dice, Tables, Boules, Tennisse, and such like," says the moral dissector, speaking in the person of Philoponus, "thei are Furta officiosa, a certaine kind of smothe, deceiptfull, and sleightie thefte, whereby many a one is spoiled of all that ever he hath, sometimes of his life withall, yea, of bodie and soule for ever: and yet (more is the pitie) these be the only exercises used in every mans house, al the yere through. But especially in Christmas time there is nothyng els used but Cardes, Dice, Tables, Maskyng, Mummyng, Bowling, and such like fooleries. And the reason is, thei think thei have a commission and prerogative that tyme to doe what thei list, and to followe what vanitie they will. But (alas) doe thei thinke that thei are privileged at that time to doe evill? the holier the time is (if one time were holier then another, as it is not) the holier ought their exercises to bee."

He, however, thinks that at some games, under certain circumstances, Christian men may play for the sake of recreation; for, in answer to the question of Spudeus, "Is it not lawfull for one Christian man to plaie with an other at any kinde of game, or to winne his money, if he can?" Philoponus thus replies: "To plaie at Tables, Cardes, Dice, Bowles, or the like, (though a good Christian man will not so idely and vainely spende his golden daies), one Christian with an other, for their private recreations, after some oppression of studie, to drive awaie fantasies, and suche like, I doubt not but thei may, using it moderately, with intermission, and in the feare of God. But for to plaie for lucre of gaine, and for desire onely of his brothers substance, rather then for any other cause, it is at no hande lawfull, or to be suffered. For as it is not lawfull to robbe, steale, and purloine by deceite or sleight, so is it not lawfull to get thy brothers goodes from hym by Cardyng, Dicyng, Tablyng, Boulyng, or any other kind of theft, for these games are no better, nay worser than open theft, for open theft every man can beware of; but this beying a craftie polliticke theft, and commonly doen under pretence of freendship, fewe, or none at all, can beware of it. The commaundement saieth, Thou shall not covet nor desire any thing that belongeth to thy neighbour. Now, it is manifest, that those that plaie for money, not onely covet their brothers money, but also use craft, falshood, and deceite to winne the same."—There are doubtless many card-players, who, conscious of their want of craft, can safely deny the truth of Stubbes's sweeping conclusion; but it is to be feared that most crafty players will not lose if they can avoid it, either by hook or by crook.

In the reign of James I, the game "went bonnily on." His son, Henry, Prince of Wales, who died in 1612, aged nineteen, used occasionally to amuse himself at cards, but so nobly and like himself, as showed that he played only for recreation, and not for the sake of gain. [151] James himself was a card-player; and his favorite game was Maw, which appears to have been the fashionable game in his reign, as Primero was in the reign of Elizabeth. His Majesty appears to have played at cards just as he played with affairs of State—in an indolent manner, requiring in both cases some one to hold his cards, if not to prompt him what to play. Weldon, speaking of the poisoning of Sir Thomas Overbury, in his 'Court and Character of King James,' says: "The next that came on the stage, was Sir Thomas Monson; but the night before he was to come to his tryal, the King being at the game of Maw, said, 'to-morrow comes Thomas Monson to his tryal.' 'Yea;' said the King's card-holder, 'where if he do not play his master's prize, your Majesty shall never trust me.' This so ran in the King's mind, that at the next game he said he was sleepy, and would play out that set next night." From the following passage in a pamphlet, entitled 'Tom Tell-troath,' supposed to have been printed about 1622, [152] it would seem that the writer was well acquainted both with his majesty's mode of playing at cards, and with the manner in which he was tricked in his dawdling with state affairs: "In your Majestie's owne tavernes, for one healthe that is begun to your-selfe, there are ten drunke to the Princes your forraygn children. And, when the wine is in their heads, Lord have mercie on their tonges! Ever, in the very gaming ordinaries, where men have scarce leisure to say grace, yet they take a time to censure your Majestie's actions, and that in their oulde schoole terms. They say, you have lost the fairest game at Maw that ever King had, for want of making the best advantage of the five finger, and playing the other helpes in time. That your owne card-holders play bootie, and give the signe out of your owne hand. That hee you played withall hath ever been knowne for the greatest cheater in Christendome. [153] In fine, there is noe way to recover your losses, and vindicate your honour, but with fighting with him that hath cozened you. At which honest downe righte play, you will be hard enough for him with all his trickes."

The following verses, which might have been written by Tom Tell-troath himself, form part of an inscription beneath a caricature engraving of the same period, representing the Kings of England, Denmark, and Sweden, with Bethlem Gabor, engaged in playing at cards, dice, and tables with the Pope and his Monks. [154]

From the allusions to the five fingers and the ace of hearts, in the preceding extracts, it would appear that the game of Maw was the same as that which was subsequently called Five-Cards, for, in both games, the five of trumps—called the five fingers—was the best card, and next to that was the ace of hearts. [155]

From the frequent mention of cards by writers of the time of James I, it would appear that the game was as common a diversion with his Majesty's peaceable subjects, as it was with the fighting men who followed the banner of Wallenstein or Tilly in the Thirty-Years' War. Inordinate gaming in one country, according to certain authorities, was the result of long-continued peace and too much ease; according to others, it was the natural consequence of war; in England, the devil, finding men idle, gave them employment at cards and dice; and in Germany, where they were busy in the work of destruction, he encouraged them to play as a relaxation from their regular labours. Prodigals, in each country, lighted their candle at both ends: English gallants used to divert themselves with cards at the playhouse before the performance began; [156] and desperate hazarders in the imperial camp staked, on a cast at dice, their plunder, ere it had well come into their possession.

In the reign of James I, a controversy arose respecting the nature of lots, in which the lawfulness—"in foro theologorum"—of deciding matters by lot, and of playing at games of chance, such as cards and dice, was amply discussed. It was maintained by one party, that as lots were of divine ordinance, for the purpose of determining important matters, [157] and of so ascertaining, as it were, the divine will, their employment for the purpose of amusement, was a sinful perversion of their institution, and a disparaging of Divine Providence, which was thus made the arbiter of idle and immoral games. [158] In opposition to this opinion, the learned Thomas Gataker published his treatise, historical and theological, 'Of the Nature and Use of Lots,' in 1619. In this work he treats of casual events in general, and of the different kinds of lots, which he thus classes under three heads: 1, Lots which are commonly employed in serious affairs; 2, Lots which enter into games of chance; 3, Lots extraordinary or divinatory. The first are generally admitted to be innocent; but the third are absolutely condemned by Gataker, except when they are expressly required to be used by a revelation or a divine command. [159] With regard to lots of the second kind, he contends that they are neither prohibited in the Scriptures nor evil of themselves; though, like those of the first, they are liable to great abuse. The abuse he earnestly condemns; but at the same time shows that it is not a necessary consequence of the employment of lots in games of amusement. He also refutes the arguments of James Balmford, who, in a small tract which appears to have been first published about 1593, had maintained that all games of chance were absolutely unlawful. An account of the controversy on this subject, between Gataker on one side, and William Ames and Gisbert Voet on the other, will be found in the preface to the second edition of Barbeyrac's 'Traité du Jeu.' [160]

In the reign of James I, and in the early part of that of his successor, ere the discussion of political grievances had produced a decided effect on the public mind, the fashionable vices of excess in apparel, gaming, drinking, and smoking tobacco, were fertile themes of declamation with a certain class of reformers, both lay and clerical. Their denunciations of the vanity and wickedness of wearing fine clothes are merely variations to Stubbes's 'Anatomy of Abuses;' while their fulminations against tobacco are generally pitched in the somewhat loud key of King James's Counterblast. Their common-places against drunkenness and gaming, are, in general, "very common indeed,"—as Sir Francis Burdett said of a certain common lawyer, who, since his elevation to the peerage, has been convicted of a petty larceny on the literary property of Miss Agnes Strickland, and who seems to be an adept at Cribbage, though no card-player.

In a woodcut on the title-page of 'Woe to Drunkards,' a sermon preached by Samuel Ward, of Ipswich, 1627, the vices of that age are typically contrasted with the virtues of a former one. In the upper compartment we are shown what men were of old by the open Bible, the foot in the stirrup, and the hand grasping the lance; while in the lower, the degeneracy of their descendants is typified by the leg and foot, decorated with a broad silk garter and a large rosette; by cards and dice, and a hand holding at the same time a lighted pipe and a drinking cup with a cockatrice in it. Twenty years afterwards, these types would have been more strictly applicable, with the inscriptions merely transposed.

At what time the manufacture of cards was established in this country, has not been ascertained; though from their being included in an Act of Parliament of 1463, prohibiting the importation of sundry articles, as being injurious to native manufacturers and tradesmen, it would seem that there were card-makers in England even at that early period. [161] Barrington, referring to a proclamation of Elizabeth, and another of James I, says, "It appears that we did not then make many cards in England." In his paper in the 'Archæologia,' he gives a fac-simile of the cover of an old pack of cards, as a decisive proof that cards were originally made in Spain. On this cover was printed a wood engraving of the arms of Castile and Leon, together with a Club, a Sword, a Cup, and a piece of Money, the marks of the four suits of Spanish cards. To an inscription purporting that they were fine cards, made by Jehan Volay—"Cartas finnas faictes par Jehan Volay"—there was also added, in letters of a different character, either by a stencil, or by means of inserting a new piece of wood in the original block, the name "Edward Warman," probably that of the English vendor of the cards. The maker's name, Barrington reads, "Je (for Jean or John) Hauvola," and the final Y he mistakes for the Spanish conjunction "and." The whole of the inscription, he says, being rendered into English, runs thus: "Superfine cards made by John Hauvola, and (Edward Warman)," the last name being substituted for that of a former partner of John Hauvola. [162] Mr. Barrington's reading of the maker's name, Je. Hauvola, instead of Jehan Volay, and his then introducing Edward Warman into the firm, by means of the final Y, construed as a copulative conjunction, are fair specimens of the proofs and illustrations which he adduces in favour of his theory about Spanish cards.

Jean Volay, as I learn from Leber, [163] was one of the most celebrated French card-makers of the sixteenth century; at what time "Edward Warman" lived, whose name also appears on the cover, is not known; but Mr. Barrington says that a person of that name kept a stationer's shop somewhere about Norton Folgate, about fifty years before the date of his paper, that is about 1737. Any vogue that Spanish cards might have had in the more northerly countries of Europe, during the times of Elizabeth and James I, was probably owing rather to the circumstance of so many Spaniards being then resident in the Low Countries than to any superiority of the cards manufactured in Spain. Until a comparatively recent period, large quantities of cards used to be sent from Antwerp to Spain. [164]

From the following verses, in "The Knave of Harts his Supplication to the Card Makers," in Samuel Rowlands' satire entitled 'The Knave of Harts,' [165] 1612, it would appear that cards were then commonly manufactured in England, for it cannot be fairly supposed that the Knave's supplication was addressed to foreign card-makers. The foregoing cut, which is a fac-simile of that prefixed to the edition of 1613, shows the Knaves of Hearts and Clubs in the costume complained of.

In Rowlands' 'More Knaves Yet? The Knaves of Spades and Diamonds,' published after his 'Knave of Harts,' the Knaves of Spades and Diamonds are represented in a modernised costume, bestowed on them by the printer, and the favour is thus acknowledged.

By a proclamation of Charles I, June, 1638, it was ordered that after the Michaelmas next all foreign cards should be sealed at London, and packed in new bindings, or covers. A few years later, it would appear that the importation of foreign cards was absolutely prohibited; for, in July, 1643, upon the complaint of several poor card-makers, setting forth that they were likely to perish by reason of divers merchants bringing playing-cards into the kingdom, contrary to the laws and statutes, order was given, by a committee appointed by parliament for the navy and customs, that the officers of the customs should seize all such cards, and proceed against the parties offending. [167]

When the civil war commenced, and the people became interested in a sterner game, card-playing appears to have declined. The card-playing gallant whose favorite haunts had been the playhouse and the tavern, now became transformed into a cavalier, and displayed his bravery in the field at the head of a troop of horse; whilst his old opponent, the puritanical minister, incited by a higher spirit of indignation, instead of holding forth on sports and pastimes and household vices, now thundered on the "drum ecclesiastic" against national oppressors; urged his congregation to stand up for their rights as men against the pretensions of absolute monarchy and rampant prelacy, and to try the crab-tree staff against the courtier's dancing rapier.

Among the numerous pamphlets which appeared during the contest there are a few whose titles show that the game of cards, though not so much in vogue as formerly, was still not forgotten. [168] The following are the titles of three of such pamphlets, all quartos, the usual form of the literary light infantry of the period. "Chartæ Scriptæ, or a New Game at Cards, called Play by the Booke, 1645."—"Bloody Game of Cards, played between the King of Hearts and his Suite against the rest of the pack, shuffled at London, cut at Westminster, dealt at York, and played in the open field."—"Shuffling, cutting, and dealing, in a game at pickquet, being acted from the year 1653 to 1655, by O. P. and others, 1659." [169] In a 'Lenten Litany,' a backward prayer for the Rump, written in the time of the Long Parliament, the appointment of three keepers to the great seal is thus commemorated:

It was probably as much owing to the circumstance of regular playing-cards being in small request, as to any desire to promote learning, that we have the "Scientiall Cards" mentioned in the following title of a work, in which cards are made subservient to the purposes of instruction, and which appears to have been one of the earliest of the kind published in England. [171] "The Scientiall cards; or a new and ingenious knowledge grammatically epitomised, both for the pleasure and profit of schollers, and such as delight to recollect (without any labour) the rudiments of so necessary an art as grammer is, without hindering them from their more necessary and graver studies, offering them as a second course unto you. Which, in all points and suits, do represent your vulgar or common cards; so that the perfection of the grammer principles may hereby be easily attained unto, both with much delight and profit. Together with a key showing the ready use of them. Written by a lover of ingenuity and learning. And are to be sold by Baptist Pendleton at his house, near St. Dunstan's Church in the east, or by John Holden, at the Anchor in the New Exchange. 1651." Of those cards, or of the key, showing how they are to be used, I know nothing beyond what is contained in the title above given, which is preserved amongst Bagford's collections, Harleian MSS. No. 5947, in the British Museum. I, however, greatly suspect that the "lover of learning and ingenuity" who devised them, was specially employed for the purpose by the maker, Mr. Baptist Pendleton, who, sensible of the decline of his regular business, and noting the signs of the times, might think it both for his interest and credit to manufacture cards, which might serve indifferently for the purposes of instruction, but equally as well for play as "your vulgar or common cards," which were then in very bad repute. The Scientiall cards would appear to have been well adapted for the use of persons who wished to save appearances with the Puritans, and yet had no objection to play a quiet game with the profane.

In 1656 was published a little book intitled 'The Schollers Practicall Cards,' by F. Jackson, M.A., containing instructions by means of cards how to spell, write, cypher, and cast accounts; together with many other excellent and necessary rules of calculation, without either almanack or ephemeris. "I am persuaded," says the author in his preface, "that the cards, now in common use, may be reduced to such a way of use as may not only contribute to knowledge and good learning, but may also remove the scandall and abuse, which every tinker that can but tell his peeps [pips] exposeth them unto. To that end I have framed, for the recreation of sober and understanding people, that which (although in form they represent common cards) in the inside, as to the use that be made of them, affords profitable learning and honest recreation: and herein there is much difference; the common cards being meer fiction, like the foolish romances, not applicable to any morall, or anything to be learned by them that is laudable." His method, like all others of the same kind, may be interesting, from its complicated absurdity, to those who already understand what he proposes to teach; but must have formed an almost unsurmountable obstacle to the unlettered, unless they were previously well grounded in Gleek, Ruff, Post and Pair, Saunt, [172] Lodam, and Noddy,—the games to which he chiefly refers in his instructions.

William Sheppard, sergeant-at-law, a great stickler, during the ascendency of the Rump, for the reformation of the law and the correction of manners, thus sets forth certain grievances, and, like a good Samaritan, propounds a remedy for them in his work, entitled 'Englands Balme.' [173]

"It is objected,

"That there is no certain and clear law to punish prophane jesting, fidling, ryming, piping, juggling, fortune-telling, tumbling, dancing upon the rope, vaulting, ballad-singing, sword-playing, or playing of prizes, ape-carrying, puppet-playing, bear-baiting, bull-baiting, horse-racing, cock-fighting, carding, dicing, or other gaming; especially the spending of much time, and the adventuring of great sums of money herein.

"It is offered to consideration,

"That to the laws already made: 1. That it be in the power of any two justices of the peace to binde to the goode behaivour such as are offensive herein. 2. That they be, so long as they use it, uncapable of bearing any office in the commonwealth. 3. That all payments to the commonwealth be doubled on such persons."

His saintly delicacy, if not his Christian charity, is displayed in the following "grievance" and "remedy:"

"There are some other cases wherein the law also is said to be somewhat defective: as

"That there is no law against lascivious gestures, wanton and filthy dalliance and familiarity, whorish attire, strange fashions; such as are naked breasts, bare shoulders, powdering, spotting, painting the face, curling and shearing the hair; excess of apparel in servants and mean people.

"It is offered to consideration,

"1. That the justices of the peace at their Quarter Sessions >may binde any such to the good behaivour.

"2. That for a whorish attire, something of note be written upon the door of her house to her disgrace, there to continue till she wear sober attire."

The character of this puritanical reformer's liberality may be estimated by his proposed remedies for the abuses of the press. As his party were in power, there was no longer any occasion for free discussion. Milton was opposed to such canting reformers as Sheppard, and maintained the liberty of unlicensed printing.

"It is objected,

"That there are disorders in printing of books, for which there is no remedy.

"It is offered for this to consider of these things:

"1. That printing-houses be reduced to a number.

"2. That no books be printed but be first perused.

"3. That no dangerous books be printed here, carried beyond sea, and brought in hither.

"4. That the right of every mans copy be preserved.

"5. That every man shall licence his own book and be answerable for it."

On the accession of Charles II, a reaction took place; and people who had felt themselves coerced in their amusements by the puritanical party, seem now to have gloried in their excesses, not so much from any positive pleasure that they might feel in their vicious courses, but as evincing their triumph over those who formerly kept them in restraint. From the example of the king himself, a sensual, selfish profligate, vice became fashionable at court, where gross depravity of manners seems to have been admitted as prima facie evidence of loyal principles. His majesty's personal favorites, from the wealthy noble who had a seat at the council-table, to the poor gentlemen who served as a private in the horse-guards, seem all to have been eager to divert the "merry monarch" by their shameless profligacy. The man of ton of the period, was professionally a rake and a gamester, and often a liar and cheat; boasting of an intrigue with "my lady," while in truth he was kept by "my lord's" mistress; and pretending that he had won a hundred pieces of "the duke," at the groom-porter's at St. James's, when he had merely "rooked" a gay city 'prentice of five pounds at a shilling ordinary in Shire Lane. The morals and manners of the country, generally, at that period, are not, however, to be estimated by those of the court and the so-called "fashionable world." A numerous and influential class remained uncontaminated by their example; and laboured zealously to stem the torrent of vice which, issuing from the court, threatened to deluge the whole country. Though "the saints" no longer enjoyed the fatness of the land, they still exercised great influence over the minds of the middle classes, and fostered in them a deep religious feeling, and a strict observance of decency, which were in direct opposition to the principles and practice of the sovereign and his court. At no period of our history, do the profligacy of one class and the piety of another appear in more striking contrast. On looking closer, however, it would seem that this effect is, in a great degree, produced by the approximation of the extremes of each,—of sinners who painted themselves blacker than they really were, and of saints who heightened their lights and exalted their purity, while they were in truth but as "a whitened wall." A slight glance at the literature of the time of Charles II, will show that mankind do not become worse as the world grows older: the depravity which existed in his reign, is generally dwelt on by historians and moralists, though but few take the trouble of informing their readers that correctives for it, in the shape of good books, were at no period more abundant. For a picture of the manners of the time, we are referred to licentious plays and obscene poems, as if they formed the staple literature of the day,—as if all men frequented the playhouse and read Rochester, but never went to church or conventicle, nor read the numerous moral and religious works which then issued from the press. In the time of Charles II, the representation of plays was almost exclusively confined to London; and it may be questioned if even one of the licentious comedies of the period was represented on a provincial stage. The obscene books which were written in his reign for the entertainment of the fashionable world have sunk into disrepute, and are only to be found in the libraries of collectors of what are termed "Facetiæ;" while those of higher purpose are in constant demand, and are known to millions. More copies of Bunyan's 'Pilgrim's Progress' have been sold than of all the bad books that ever were written through the encouragement of Charles II and his courtiers.

But to come from this digression to the game we have in hand. Barrington, who is singularly unfortunate in his speculations about cards, and who seems to have been prone to draw general conclusions from special premises, says, that "Ombre was probably introduced by Catherine of Portugal, the queen of Charles II, as Waller hath a poem 'On a card torn at Ombre by the Queen.'" The game, however, was introduced before the arrival of the queen; for a work entitled the 'Royal game of Ombre' was published at London in 1660, [174] and Catherine did not arrive at Portsmouth till 14th May, 1662. Charles, on hearing of the queen's arrival, seems to have intrusted a right reverend prelate with a delicate commission: his majesty, according to Aurelian Cook, Gent., "having sent the Bishop of London thither before him to consummate the sacred rights of marriage, which was to be done in private." [175]

From the following passage in Pepys's Diary, under the date 17th Feb. 1667, it would appear that her majesty was accustomed to play at cards on a Sunday,—a crime of the greatest magnitude in the eyes of certain persons, who insist that the Christian Sunday should be observed like a Jewish Sabbath, and who yet have no objection to roast pig. [176] "This evening," says Mr. Pepys, "going to the Queene's side to see the ladies, I did finde the Queene, the Duchesse of York, and another or two, at cards, with the room full of ladies and great men; which I was amazed at to see on a Sunday, having not believed it, but, contrarily, flatly denied the same a little while since to my cosen Roger Pepys." The Duchess of York here mentioned, was Anne Hyde, first wife of James, Duke of York, afterwards James II. Her daughter, Mary, afterwards Queen of England, used also to play at cards on a Sunday, as we learn from the following passage in the diary of her spiritual director, Dr. Edward Lake, printed in the Camden Miscellany, vol. i, 1847: "Jan. 9. 1677-8. I was very sorry to understand that the Princess of Orange, since her being in Holland, did sometimes play at cards upon the Sundays, which would doubtless give offence to that people. I remember that about two years since being with her highness in her closett, shee required my opinion of it. I told her I could not say 'twas a sin to do so, but 'twas not expedient; and, for fear of giving offence, I advised her highness not to do it, nor did shee play upon Sundays while shee continued here in England." Card-playing on Sundays would appear to have been equally common with the select circle who had the honour of partaking of his majesty's amusements. Evelyn, in his Memoirs, writing on 6th Feb. 1685, the day when James II was proclaimed, says, "I never can forget the inexpressible luxury and profaneness, gaming and all dissoluteness, and as it were total forgetfulness of God (it being Sunday evening), which this day se'nnight I was witness of, the king sitting and toying with his concubines, Portsmouth, Cleaveland, and Mazarine, &c., a French boy singing love songs in that glorious gallery, whilst about twenty of the great courtiers and other dissolute persons were at Basset [177] round a large table; a bank of at least £2000 in gold before them, upon which two gentlemen who were with me made reflexions with astonishment. Six days after, all was in the dust!"

In the sixteenth year of the reign of Charles II an act was passed which might justly be entitled "An Act to legalise Gaming; to prevent wealthy Pigeons being plucked by artful Rooks, and to discourage Betting or Playing for large Sums upon Tick." An act of the same kind, passed in the reign of Queen Anne, was repealed in 1844, in consequence of its penalties being likely to fall heavy on some eminent sporting characters who had been so indiscreet as to receive sundry large sums in payment of bets lost to them upon credit. Its enactment and its repeal are significant indications of the state of the sporting world at the two respective periods. It seems to have been framed on a presumption that, in gaming, noble and wealthy sportsmen would be most likely to lose; and to have been repealed because certain noble and wealthy sportsmen had won, and received their bets. The parties in whose favour the act was repealed, were said to have been liable to penalties to the amount of £500,000: the law did not anticipate that lords and squires would be winners, nor intend that needy prosecutors should be enriched at their expense. The preamble and some of the provisions of the act of Charles II are here given as "Curiosities of Gambling Legislation."

"Whereas all lawful Games and Exercises should not be otherwise used than as innocent and moderate recreations, and not as constant trades or callings, to gain a living, or make unlawful advantage thereby; and whereas by the immoderate use of them many mischiefs and inconveniences do arise, and are dayly found to the maintaining and encouraging of sundry idle, loose, and disorderly persons in their dishonest, lewd, and dissolute course of life, and to the circumventing, deceiving, cousening, and debauching of many of the younger sort, both of the nobility and gentry, and others, to the loss of their precious time, and the utter ruin of their estates and fortunes, and withdrawing them from noble and laudable employments and exercises.

"Be it therefore enacted, that if any person or persons, of any degree or quality whatsoever, shall by any fraud, cousenage, circumvention, deceit, &c. in playing at Cards, Dice, Tables, Tennis, Bowls, Kittles, Shovel-board, or in or by Cock-fightings, Horse-races, Dog-matches, or Foot-races &c. or by betting on the sides or hands of such as play, win, obtain, or acquire any sum or sums of money or any other valuable thing; that then every person so offending shall ipso facto forfeit treble the sum or value of money, or other thing, so won, gained, or acquired.

"And for the better avoiding and preventing of all excessive and immoderate playing and gaming for the time to come, be it further enacted, that if any person shall play at any of the said games, or any other pastime whatsoever (otherwise than with and for ready money), or shall bet on the sides of such as play, and shall lose any sum of money or other thing played for, exceeding the sum of one hundred pounds, at one time or meeting, upon ticket or credit, or otherwise, and shall not pay down the same at the time when he shall so lose the same, the party who loseth the said moneys, or other things so played for, above the said sum of one hundred pounds, shall not, in that case, be bound or compelled to pay or make good the same; and that all Contracts, Judgments, Statutes, Recognizances, Mortgages, &c. made, given, acknowledged, or entered for security and payment of the same shall be utterly void and of none effect. And, lastly, it is enacted, that the person, or persons, so winning the said moneys, or other things, shall forfeit and lose treble the value of all such sum and sums of money, or other thing which he shall so win (above the said sum of one hundred pounds), the one moiety to the King, and the other to the Prosecutor." The passion for gaming at that period, and its consequences to wealthy flats, are thus described by Dryden:

During the reign of Charles II, the business of card-making greatly increased in England: and the game appears to have been so generally understood as to induce many ingenious persons to employ cards not only as a means of diffusing useful and entertaining knowledge, but also of advertising their wares. The same mode of instruction was adopted about the same period in France; but in England it appears to have embraced a wider range of subjects; in France, scientific cards appear to have been devised for the exclusive use of the nobility and gentry, and to have been confined to their instruction in the conundrums of heraldry and the elements of history and geography; [178] while in England they were "adapted to the meanest capacity;" and in addition to the uses for which they were employed in France, were made subservient to the purposes of communicating knowledge in grammar, history, politics, morality, mathematics, and the art of carving.

A Mons. De Brainville invented at Lyons, about 1660, a pack of Heraldic cards, in which the Aces and Knaves, "les As et Valets," were represented by the arms of certain princes and nobles. Now as this was evidently a breach of etiquette and a derogation of heraldic nobility—Mons. De Brainville, like Mr. Anstis, does not seem to have rightly understood his own "foolish business" [179]—the plates were seized by the magistrates. As it appeared, however, that he had given offence through pure inadvertence, and not with any satirical intention, the plates were restored to him on condition of his altering the odious names of "As" and "Valets" into Princes and Chevaliers. In 1678 Antoine Bulifon carried the same kind of cards to Naples, where Don Annibal Aquaviva established a society to play at Blazon, under the name of "Armeristi," with the map of Europe for a device, and the motto, "Pulchra sub imagine Ludi." [180]

About the same time that Heraldic cards were introduced into Naples, a pack of the same kind as these of Mons. De Brainville were engraved in England. In these cards, specimens of which are given in the annexed plate, the honours of the several suits are thus represented. Each of the cards representing a Knave, is marked P, for Prince; and a stamp appears on the Ace of Spades.

In the annexed specimens, which are of the same size as the originals, the honours represented are the King of Clubs, the Queen of Hearts, the King of Diamonds, and the Ace of Spades. The arms of the Pope, representing the King of Clubs, are those of Clement IX, who was elected 20th June, 1667, and died 9th December, 1669.

In another pack of Heraldic cards, relating entirely to England, probably engraved about the same period, the armorial ensigns of the King and the nobility were thus distributed amongst the Têtes and Pips. [181] The King and Queen of Hearts were respectively represented by the arms of England and of the Duke of York; of Diamonds, by the arms of Ireland, and of Prince Rupert; of Spades, by the arms of France, and of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York; and of Clubs, by the arms of Scotland, and of the Dukes of Norfolk, Somerset, and Buckingham. In this pack there were no Knaves. The arms of the Earls were distributed amongst the sevens, eights, nines, and tens; the Viscounts furnished the sixes; the Bishops were quartered on the fives; and the Barons' coats armorial clothed the nakedness of the lower orders, from the fours to the aces,—the aces in the Heraldic game being low. From a kind of title-page, or perhaps wrapper, preserved in Bagford's collection, in the British Museum, it would appear that the publication of those cards was licensed by the Duke of Norfolk, as Earl Marshal of England, and as such entitled to take cognizance of all matters relating to heraldry.

The Pope, The Emperour
Castille & Leon, Eclesiasticks Dukes and Peirs (Reims, Longres, Laon)

In playing the game armorial with Heraldic cards, the players were required to properly describe the various colours and charges of the different shields; but as this could not be done without some previous knowledge of the science of heraldry, a Mons. Gauthier was led to devise, about 1686, a new pack of Heraldic cards, simply explaining the terms of blazon, and thus serving as an introduction to the grand game. [182] The Heraldic game, however, never was popular; and does not even appear to have been in much esteem with the higher orders, for whose instruction and entertainment it was specially devised. It would seem to have declined in France with the glory of Louis XIV, and not to have survived the Revolution in England.

About 1679, there was published a pack of cards, containing, according to the advertisement, "An History of all the Popish Plots that have been in England, beginning with those in Queen Elizabeth's time, and ending with the last damnable plot against his Majesty Charles II, with the manner of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey's murder, &c. All excellently engraved on copper-plates, with very large descriptions under each card. The like not extant. Sold by Randal Taylor, near Stationers Hall, and by most booksellers, price One Shilling each pack." In a "puff collusive," [183] forming a kind of postscript to this announcement, approbation of these cards is thus indirectly made a test of staunch Protestantism. "Some persons who care not what they say, and to whom lying is as necessary as eating, have endeavoured to asperse this pack by a malitious libel, intimating that it did not answer what is proposed. The contrary is evident. Aspersers of this pack plainly show themselves popishly affected." [184]

Such a pack of cards as that announced in the advertisement referred to—"containing an history of all the popish plots that have been in England, beginning with those in Queen Elizabeth's time"—I have never seen; and from the objection which was made to it at the time, namely, that "it did not answer what was proposed," I am inclined to think that it was the same pack as that which relates entirely to the pretended Popish plot of 1678, and the murder of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey. A pack of the latter now before me appears to have been published about 1680, and certainly subsequent to the 18th of July, 1679; as on the Four of Clubs is represented the trial of Sir George Wakeman and three Benedictine monks, who on that day were arraigned at the Old Bailey on an indictment of high treason for conspiring to poison the king. The complete pack consists of fifty-two cards; and each contains a subject, neatly engraved, either relating to the plot or the trial and punishment of the conspirators, with a brief explanation at the foot. At the top are the marks of the suit; and the value of the low cards, from one to ten, is expressed in Roman numerals. The suits of Hearts, Diamonds, and Clubs consist chiefly of illustrations of the pretended plot, as detailed in the evidence of Titus Oates and Captain Bedloe; while the suit of Clubs relates entirely to the murder of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey. An idea of the whole pack may be formed from the following description of a few of the cards of each suit. Hearts: King: the King and privy councillors seated at the council-table; Titus Oates standing before them: inscription at the foot, "Dr. Oates discovereth y^e Plot to y^e King and Councell." The Eight: "Coleman writeing a declaration and letters to la Chess,"—Père la Chaise. The Ace: the Pope with three cardinals and a bishop at a table, and the devil underneath: "The Plot first hatcht at Rome by the Pope and Cardinalls, &c." Diamonds: Knave: "Pickerin attempts to kill y^e K. in S^t James Park." The Four: "Whitebread made Provintiall." The Ace: "The consult at the white horse Taverne." Clubs: King: "Cap^t Bedlow examind by y^e secret Comitee of the House of Commons." The Nine: "Father Connyers preaching against y^e oathes of alegiance & supremacy." The Six: "Cap^t Berry and Alderman Brooks are offer'd 500£ to cast the plot on the Protestants." Spades: Queen: "The Club at y^e Plow Ale house for the murther of S. E. B. Godfree." The Nine: "S^r E. B. Godfree strangled, Girald going to stab him." The Five: "The body of S^r E. B. G. carry'd to Primrose hill on a horse."

Another pack of historical cards, apparently published in the same reign, but of inferior execution to the former, appears to have related to the Rye-house plot. As these cards are of even greater rarity than those relating to the Popish plot, the following description of four of them—all that I have ever seen—is here given as a stimulus to collectors. Queen of Hearts: "Thompson one of y^e conspirators taken at Hammersmith." Knave of Diamonds: "Rumbold the malster;" on a label proceeding from his mouth is the inscription, "They shall dye." Ace of Clubs: "Keeling troubled in mind:" on a label proceeding from his mouth, "King killing is damnable." Ace of Spades: "Hone taken prisoner at Cambridge." Shortly after the Revolution of 1688, one or two packs of cards appeared with subjects relating to the misgovernment of James II, and the birth of his son the Prince of Wales. In the reign of either Charles II or James II was published a pack of mathematical cards, by Thomas Tuttell, "mathematical instrument-maker to the King's most excellent Majesty." Those cards were designed by Boitard, and engraved by J. Savage; they represent various kinds of mathematical instruments, together with the trades and professions in which they are used. They were evidently "got up" as an advertisement. A few years afterwards, Moxon, also a mathematical instrument-maker, followed suit.

"It would be difficult," says Mons. Leber, "to name an elementary book of science or art, which had not a pack of cards as an auxiliary. Grammar, Rhetoric, Fable, Geography, History, Heraldry, the principles of Morals and Politics,—all these things, and many others besides, were to be learnt through the medium of play. The game of cards had served for the amusement of a royal lunatic; and similar games were comprehended in the plan for the education of one of our greatest kings. [185] —Though France had a large share in the dissemination of such treasures of knowledge, England showed herself not less diligent in working the same mine; if to us she owes the game of Piquet, it is from her own proper resources that she has endowed the culinary art with a game of a different kind, yet highly interesting considered in its relation to the play of the jaws, the most ancient and highly esteemed of all play. It was in December, 1692, that the London papers first announced to the world the invention of the game of Carving at Table. This precious announcement is conceived in the following terms: 'The Genteel Housekeeper's Pastime; or the mode of Carving at the table, represented in a pack of Playing Cards, with a book by which any ordinary capacity may learn how to cut up, or carve in mode, all the most usual dishes of flesh, fish, fowl, and baked meats, with the several sawces and garnishes proper to each dish of meat. Price 1s. 6d. Sold by J. Moxon, Warwick Lane.'" [186] In those cards the suit of Hearts is occupied by flesh; Diamonds by fowl; Clubs by fish; and Spades by baked meats. The King of Hearts presides over a sirloin of beef; of Diamonds over a turkey; of Clubs over a pickled herring; and of Spades over a venison pasty. A red stamp on the Ace of Spades belonging to a pack which I have had an opportunity of examining, contains the words "Six pence." If this was the duty on each pack, it was certainly great for the period.

In the reign of Queen Anne and that of George I, several packs of satirical and fanciful cards were published. A pack of the latter description, now in the possession of Thomas Heywood, Esq., of Pendleton, near Manchester, relates entirely to the subject of love. Each card is neatly engraved on copper; and, from the stamp on the Ace of Spades, it appears evident that they were manufactured and sold for the purposes of play. The subject of this card is a Cupid plucking a rose, with the inscription "In love no pleasure without pain," and the following verses at the foot:

All the other cards have, in the same manner, explanatory verses at the foot. The mark of the suit is placed at the top, to the left, and above it is engraved the value of the card, in Roman numerals. In the coat cards, the name of each,—King, Queen, or Knave—is engraved above the mark of the suit. This pack has been in the possession of Mr. Heywood's family for upwards of a century.

A pack of satirical cards, belonging to W. H. Diamond, Esq., Frith street, Soho square, appear to have been executed about the same time. Each subject has an explanatory couplet at the bottom, and the value of each in the game is indicated by a small card engraved at the top, to the left. As in the other pack, there is a red stamp on the Ace of Spades. All the subjects are coarsely engraved, though some of them display points of character very much in the style of Hogarth. In the Three of Spades there is a billiard-table, at which a gentleman is playing with a curved cue. The inscription is:

In the Ten of Spades, a Moorfields quack is seen pointing to his sign, with the inscription:

In the Ace of Diamonds, a lady is seen showing her palm to a fortune-teller, with the inscription:

In the Four of Diamonds, a lady is seen exchanging some of her clothes for china ware, with an itinerant dealer. The inscription is:

In the Ten of Diamonds, the interior of a shop is shown, with articles of plate on the shelves. A woman is standing behind the counter, on which are a box and dice, and in front are a lady and gentleman who seem to have just thrown. The inscription is:

In England, books containing instructions for playing at cards appear to have been first published in the reign of Charles II, to the great benefit, most assuredly, of all adepts who had acquired their knowledge by practice; for in card-playing, as well as in chemistry, the experienced manipulators have a great advantage over the merely book-learned when matters are brought to the test. The real science of play is not to be acquired by the study of books, but by frequent encounters across the table, with men, whose keenness ensures attention to the rules of the game. But, even with the knowledge thus acquired, the proficient will gain but little, unless he also be skilled in the discrimination of flats and sharps.

In 1670, an edition of a book entitled 'Wits Interpreter,' was enlarged with directions for playing the "Courtly Games of L'Hombre, Piquit, Gleek, and Cribbage;" and in 1674 appeared Cotton's "Compleat Gamester; or, Instructions how to play at all manner of usual and most Gentile games, either on Cards, Dice, Billiards, Trucks, Bowls, or Chess." This book was several times reprinted; and in an edition published in 1709, the following are enumerated as the principal games at cards: Piquet; Gleek; l'Ombre, a Spanish game; Cribbage; All-Fours; English Ruff and Honours, alias Slam; Whist; French Ruff; Five Cards; a game called Costly Colours; Bone-Ace; Put, and the High Game; Wit and Reason, a game so called; a Pastime called the Art of Memory; a game called Plain-Dealing; a game called Queen Nazareen; Lanterloo; a game called Penneech; Bankafalet; Beast; [187] and Basset. [188]

The game of Whist, or Whisk, as it seems to have been usually called, is unquestionably of English origin, and appears to have been popular long before it became fashionable.

Barrington's observations on the introduction of the game into respectable company, are as follows: "Quadrille (a species of Ombre) obtained a vogue upon the disuse of the latter, which it maintained till Whisk was introduced, which now [1787] prevails not only in England, but in most of the civilized parts of Europe. [191] If it may not possibly be supposed that the game of Trumps (which I have before taken notice of, as alluded to in one of the old plays contained in Dodsley's Collection) is Whisk, I rather conceive that the first mention of that game is to be found in Farquhar's 'Beaux Stratagem,' which was written in the very beginning of the present century. [192] It was then played with what were called Swabbers, [193] which were possibly so termed, because they who had certain cards in their hand were entitled to take up a share of the stake, independent of the general event of the game. The fortunate, therefore, clearing the board of this extraordinary stake, might be compared by seamen to the Swabbers (or cleaners of the deck), in which sense the term is still used. Be this as it may, Whisk seems never to have been played on principles till about fifty years ago, when it was much studied by a set of gentlemen who frequented the Crown coffee-house in Bedford row: before that time it was confined chiefly to the servants' hall with All-Fours and Put."

From Mr. Barrington's own references it would appear to have been a favorite game with country squires about 1707, the date of the Beaux Stratagem; and occasionally indulged in by clergymen about 1728, the date of Swift's Essay on the Fates of Clergymen. Their example, however, seems to have been unable to retrieve it from the character of vulgarity, until it was seriously taken up by "a set of gentlemen," who appear to have commenced their studies at the Crown coffee-house, in Bedford row, just about the time that the Treatise on Whist, by "Edmond Hoyle, Gent.," was first published by Thomas Osborne, at Gray's Inn. The studies of such gentlemen, and the celebrity of their scientific instructor, are thus commemorated in the prologue to the 'Humours of Whist,' a dramatic satire quoted in the preceding page.

Though Mr. Barrington has not assigned any grounds for supposing that Whist was the same game as that which was formerly called Trumps, or Trump, it is not unlikely that he was induced to suggest the possibility of their being the same from his having read, in 'The Compleat Gamester,' that Whist differed but little from the game called English Ruff and Honours, and in consequence of his having learnt, from Cotgrave's Dictionary, that Ruff and Trump were the same. [194] He says, in a note, that "In 1664, a book was published, entitled 'The Compleat Gamester,' which takes no notice of Whisk." Though it be true that "Whisk" is not named in the first edition of the book—printed in 1674, not 1664—yet the following passage, distinctly asserting that Whist was then a common game in all parts of England, appears in the second edition published in 1680.

"Ruff and Honours (by some called Slam), and Whist, are games so common in England, in all parts thereof, that every child almost, of eight years, hath a competent knowledge in that recreation; and therefore I am more unwilling to speak anything more of them than this, that there may be a great deal of art used in dealing and playing at these games, which differ very little one from the other." In the 'Memoirs of the most Famous Gamesters, from the reign of Charles II, to that of Queen Anne,' 1714, a sharper named Johnson, who was hanged in 1690, is mentioned as having excelled in the art of securing honours for himself and partner when dealing at Whist; and in the works of Taylor the Water-poet, printed in 1630, Whisk is mentioned among the games at which the prodigal squanders his money:

In an edition of 'The Compleat Gamester' of 1709, it is said that the game of Whist is so called from the silence that is to be observed in the play; and Dr. Johnson, from the manner in which he explains the term, seems to have favoured this opinion: "Whist, a game at cards, requiring close attention and silence." [196] The name, however, appears more likely to have been a corruption of the older one of Whisk. As the game of Whisk and Swabbers was nearly the same as that of the still older one of Ruff and Honours, it would seem that the two former terms were merely the ludicrous synonyms of the latter,—introduced perhaps about the time that Ruffs were going out of fashion, and when the Honours represented by the coat cards were at a discount. The fact that a game, so interesting in itself, should be so slighted, as it was, by the higher orders, from the reign of Charles II to that of George II, would seem to intimate that they were well aware of the ridicule intended to be conveyed by its popular name of Whisk and Swabbers. Looking at the conjunction of these terms, and considering their primary meaning, [197] there can scarcely be a doubt that the former was the original of Whist, the name under which the game subsequently obtained an introduction to fashionable society, the Swabbers having been deposed and the Honours restored.

In playing the game, Swabbers seem to have signified either the Honours, or the points gained through holding them. At the older game of Ruff and Honours, Ruff signified the Trump. It would appear that when the Ruff was called a Whisk, in ridicule of the Ruff proper, the Honours, or points gained through them were, "in concatenation accordingly, designated Swabbers." In the present day, a Parisian tailor calls, facetiously, the shirt-ruffle of a shopmate a damping clout; and Philip Stubbes, in his 'Anatomie of Abuses,' 1583, thus speaks of the ruffs of the gallants of his time: "Thei have great and monsterous ruffes, made either of cambricke, holland, lawne, or els of some other the finest cloth that can be got for money, whereof some be a quarter of a yarde deepe, yea some more, very few lesse: so that thei stande a full quarter of a yarde (and more) from their necks, hanging over their shoulder points instead of a vaile. But if Æolus with his blasts, or Neptune with his stormes, chaunce to hit upon the crasie barke of their bruised ruffes, then they goeth flip-flap in the winde, like ragges that flew abroode, lying upon their shoulders like the dishcloute of a slut."

In the reign of Queen Anne, card-playing seems to have attained its full tide in every part of civilized Europe. In England, in particular, it was at once fashionable and popular; Ombre was the favorite game of the ladies; and Piquet of the gentlemen, par excellence; clergymen and country squires rubbed on at Whist; and the lower orders shuffled away at All-Fours, Put, Cribbage, and Lanterloo. Subsequently some of the games may have been more diligently studied, and the chances more nicely calculated "on principles," but at no other time, either before or since, was card-playing more prevalent amongst people of all classes. The more pious indeed did their best to discourage the general passion for play; but their dissuasions appear to have produced but little effect; as indeed might be expected at a period when one of the first statesmen of the time piqued himself rather on his skill in gaming than on his political reputation, and when kind landlords, of the Sir Roger de Coverley school, used to send a string of hog's puddings and a pack of cards as a Christmas gift to every poor family in the parish. [198] The character of the statesman alluded to—Lord Godolphin, who died 1712, [199]—is thus sketched by Pope in his first Moral Epistle:

The following particulars relating to the manufacture of cards in the reign of Queen Anne, are derived from a broadside entitled "Considerations in relation to the Imposition on Cards, humbly submitted to the Hon. House of Commons." It is without date, but was certainly printed in the reign of Queen Anne, for the purpose of being circulated among the members of the House of Commons on the occasion of a proposal to lay a tax of sixpence per pack on cards. "Nine parts in ten of the cards now made," it is stated, "are sold from 6s. to 24s. per gross; and even these at 6s. will by this duty be subjected to £3 12s. tax. This, with submission, will destroy nine parts in ten of the manufacture; for those cards which are now bought for 3d. [per pack] can't then be afforded under 10d. or 1s. If any of your honours hope by this tax to suppress expensive card-playing, it is answered that the common sort who play for innocent diversion will only be hindered; the sharp gamesters who play for money will not be discouraged; for those who play for many pounds a game will not be hindered by 12d. a pack." There were then 40,000 reams of Genoa white paper annually imported, chiefly for the purpose of making cards. The business was in the hands of small masters, mostly poor, of whom there were no less than a hundred, in and about London. Their price to retailers, one sort of cards with another, was three halfpence a pack, and their profit not above a halfpenny. Though cards were at that period much smaller than they are at present, it is difficult to conceive how they could be manufactured at so low a price.

As Pope's description of the game of Ombre in the Rape of the Lock has been so frequently referred to by writers of all kinds,—whether treating, like Richard Seymour, Esq., on Court Games, or, like Miss Mitford, on Country Contentments, [200]—the omission of a reference to it here might be considered a gross oversight; but as it is impossible to go a pitch beyond the encomiums which have been bestowed on it, the following remarks by an old author may be introduced as a variation: "Mr. Pope, too, most certainly has his merit; yet the generality of polite men heed him little more than a pack-horse upon the road; they hear the jingle of his bells and pass on, without thinking of the treasure he carries. I have frequently thought it odd, that in all the good company I have kept, I never heard a line quoted from any part of him, unless, now and then, an accidental one, from his beautiful and accurate description of the game of Ombre." [201]

During the greater portion of the "Georgian Era" it would seem that cards were as much played at by all classes as in the reign of Queen Anne. In the early part of George I, Seymour published his 'Court Gamester,' written, as the title-page states, for the use of the young Princesses. [202] The only games of which Mr. Seymour treats are Ombre, Piquet, and the Royal Game of Chess. His instructions for playing at Ombre and Piquet are minute and precise, and have all the appearance of having been adapted for royal capacities. At cards with princesses, he may have been a master, in both senses of the word, and have played, in any company, a "decent hand;" but at Chess, it is evident, he was a mere novice,—"aut caprimulgus, aut fossor." Though, in the title-page, the work is said to have been written for the use of the young princesses, yet, in the preface, the author candidly acknowledges that he had been induced to compile it for the fashionable world at large, seeing that "gaming had become so much the fashion among the beau-monde, that he who in company should appear ignorant of the games in vogue would be reckoned low-bred and hardly fit for conversation." In his explanation of the Spanish terms employed in the game of Ombre, he is laudably precise; though when he renders the words, "No se deve, por Dios," by "It is not lost, by G—d," he seems wishful rather to give the spirit of the exclamation than the simple meaning of the phrase, and to be emphatic even at the risk of appearing profane. It is to be hoped that the princesses confined themselves to the original Spanish, and that they were ignorant that it contained an oath, supposing the objectionable English words to be merely added, elegantiæ causa, by their polite teacher.

About the time that Seymour's 'Court Gamester' was first published, a spirit of gambling seems to have pervaded all classes. Skill in the games at cards most in vogue was a test of gentility; stock-jobbing, or speculating for a rise or a fall in the public funds, had become a regular trade; and even pious ministers, of high dissenting principles, who looked on card-playing as sinful, scrambled as eagerly as the most profane for shares of South Sea stock, and were blinded to the sense of Christian duty by the dazzling hope of becoming suddenly rich. The South Sea bubble, however, at length burst, and its promoters and their dupes were appropriately caricatured in a pack of cards. [203] The South Sea directors, instead of having thousands of pounds presented to them by the shareholders, as a tribute to their speculative genius, were summoned before a parliamentary committee to give an account of their estates. Parliamentary committees have of late been employed for a purpose widely different:

About 1737, Hoyle's 'Treatise on Whist' was first published. The work, which seems to have been admirably adapted to the wants of society at the time, was most favorably received; and in the course of the succeeding ten or twelve years it ran through as many editions as Lindley Murray's Grammar, in the same period, in modern times. It proved a "lucky hit," both for the author and the publisher, who took every precaution to secure their copyright: injunctions were held up in terrorem against pirates; and purchasers were informed that no copies of the work were genuine unless they bore the signatures of

The race of "Wits," who had previously exercised no small influence on the world of fashion, was then on the decline; the beau-monde had acquired the ascendency over Grub street; and gentlemen of rank and fashion formed themselves into clubs, for the purposes of gaming and social intercourse, from which thread-bare poets and hack pamphleteers were excluded by the very terms of subscription, to say nothing of the preliminary ordeal of the ballot. Those were the golden days of Beau Nash; when George the Second was king; and his son, the Duke of Cumberland, the patron of Broughton and Figg; when Cibber was Poet-Laureate, and when Quin's brutality passed for wit; when the Guards, the pride of the army, were such heroes as we see them in Hogarth's March to Finchley; and when such statesmen as Bubb Doddington had the entrée, by the back stairs, both at Leicester House and St. James's. Even those who professed to correct the vices of the age seem in some degree to have been infected with its spirit; Richardson, the novelist, writing with the ostensible design of reforming "Rakes" and retaining innocent young women in the paths of virtue, seems often to indulge, more especially in Pamela and Clarissa Harlowe, in describing scenes and suggesting circumstances which only could have been conceived by a prurient imagination; and even John Wesley appears to have encouraged his poor converted sinners to exaggerate their petty vices, when speaking their experience at a love-feast, and to dwell, with a peculiar kind of complacency, on their former state of carnal wickedness as compared with their present state of spiritual grace,—just as William Huntington, S.S., when in the fulness of sanctity, dwelt on the memory of his former backslidings, and told all the world, with ill-dissembled pride, that his first-born love-begotten son was an exact copy of his father, both in humour and in person.

The reign of Beau Nash at Bath forms a "brilliant" era in the annals of ostentatious frivolity. Under his auspices the City of the Sick [204] became the favorite place of resort for the fashionable and the gay; and in the pools where formerly lepers alone washed to cleanse them of their sores, smooth-skinned ladies dabbled for pleasure, to the sound of soft music, while gentlemen, enraptured, looked on. [205] The Beau was admirably fitted, from his mercurial talents, to discharge the peculiar duties of purveyor of pleasure to the fashionable society of his age: he could administer flattery to a duchess while he pretended to reprove her; and could persuade the little madams, of the Would-be family, that they were honoured by his patronising condescension, at the very time that he was endeavouring to make them appear ridiculous, for the amusement of real ladies. He displayed great tact in bringing parties together who wished to be better acquainted, and denounced scandal as the bane of fashionable society. He promoted play as a recreation for the polite of both sexes; and encouraged dancing, not only as a healthy exercise per se, but for the benefit of the rooms, and for the sake of aiding the salutary operation of the waters. In his dress he was "conspicuously queer," as was requisite in a Master of the Ceremonies: he wore a large white hat,—cocked, be it observed,—the buckle of his stock before instead of behind, and, even in the coldest weather, his waistcoat unbuttoned, displaying the bosom of his shirt. He drove six greys in his carriage, and when he went in state to the rooms he was always attended by a numerous escort and a band of music, the principal instruments of which were French horns,—"Sonorous metal, blowing martial sounds." On his decease, which took place in 1761, the corporation of Bath, grateful for the benefits conferred on their city through his means, erected a marble statue of the Grand Master of the Ceremonies in the Pump-room, between the busts of Newton and Pope; and his good-natured friend, the Earl of Chesterfield, in an epigram, thus did justice to his memory and the taste of the corporation:

The Earl of Chesterfield was a frequent visitor at Bath, where he found many admirers of his wit, and many opportunities of exercising it. Bath, indeed, was the very place for such a genius to shine in, for in no other city in the kingdom were manners and morals, such as his lordship's, more highly appreciated. His lordship was fond of play too; and was partial to the company of Mr. Lookup, one of the most noted professional gamesters of the day. Lookup, as well as Colonel Charteris,—of notorious memory in the annals of gaming and debauchery,—was from the north of the Tweed. He was born in the neighbourhood of Jedburgh, and was bred an apothecary. On the expiration of his apprenticeship, he proceeded southward, and obtained a situation in the shop of an apothecary at Bath. On the death of his master, he wooed and won the widow; and having thus obtained possession of about five hundred pounds in ready money, he gave up the shop, and devoted himself entirely to play, an itch for which he is said to have brought with him from his native country. In Lookup's youth, and, indeed, for many years afterwards, a fondness for card-playing was more prevalent in Jedburgh than in any other town on the Scottish border.

Lookup, having determined to make gaming his business, devoted, like a sensible man, his whole attention to it: he calculated the odds coolly, played steadily, and, consequently, won considerably from those fashionable amateurs whose confidence was not according to knowledge. He was not only a proficient in all the usual games at cards, but also played well at billiards. Lord Chesterfield used sometimes to amuse himself at billiards with Lookup; and on one occasion had the laugh turned against him by a ruse of his antagonist, who, after winning a game or two, asked his lordship how many he would give if he were to put a patch over one eye. His lordship agreed to give him five; [206] and Lookup having won several games in succession, his lordship threw down his mace, declaring that he thought Lookup played as well with one eye as with two. "I don't wonder at it, my lord," replied Lookup, "for I have only seen out of one these ten years." The eye of which Lookup had lost the use appeared as perfect as the other, even to a near observer. With the money which he had at various times won of Lord Chesterfield, chiefly at Piquet, he built some houses at Bath, which he jocularly called "Chesterfield Row."

Lookup's gambling career, though successful, was not uniformly smooth; and on one occasion he got himself very awkwardly entangled in the meshes of the law. A gentleman, who had lost between three and four hundred pounds to Lookup at Cribbage, being persuaded that there had been "a pull" upon him, brought an action against Lookup for double damages, according to the statute made and provided for the special protection of the Tom-Noddy class of gamesters,—pitiful, whimpering, greedy fools, who call upon the world to commiserate their losses, though occasioned solely by their attempts on the purses of people more knowing, though not a whit more knavish, than themselves. In the course of some proceedings arising out of this action, Lookup, through the blunder of his attorney, it is said, swore to the truth of a circumstance which was subsequently proved to be false. Lookup was hereupon prosecuted for perjury, and imprisoned; and only escaped the pillory in consequence of a flaw in the indictment: the blunder of his own attorney brings him into peril, and the blunder of his opponent's sets him free; John a-Nokes's broken arm is a set-off against Tom a-Styles's broken leg; each party is left to pay his own costs, and thus the Law at least is satisfied. The oyster is swallowed, and the scales of justice are evenly balanced with a shell in each.

Lookup, like his contemporary, Elwes the miser, who was also a great card-player, frequently lost large sums by projects which he was allured to engage in by the tempting bait of a large return for his capital; a corrective occasionally administered by fortune to her spoiled children when they leave their old successful course of retail trickery, to embark as merchant adventurers on the sea of speculation. But though fortune frowned on him when he gave up gaming as a regular profession, to become the principal partner in a saltpetre manufactory at Chelsea, she yet looked favorably on some of his other speculations which were more in accordance with his old vocation: the shares which he held in several privateers, in the French war from 1758 to 1763, paid well; and he was highly successful as an adventurer in the slave trade. He is said to have died "in harness, "—that is, with cards in his hand,—when engaged in playing at his favorite game of Humbug, or two-handed Whist. Foote—who is supposed to have represented him in the character of Loader, in the farce of the Minor—is said to have observed, on learning the circumstances of his death, that "Lookup was humbugged out of the world at last." He died in November, 1770, aged about seventy. His biographer thus sums up his character: "Upon the whole, Mr. Lookup was as extraordinary a person as we have met with for several years in the metropolis. He possessed a great share of good sense, cultivated by a long acquaintance with the world; had a smattering of learning, and a pretty retentive memory; was fluent in words, and of a ready imagination. We cannot add, he was either generous, grateful, or courageous. In his sentiments, his cunning, and his fate, he nearly resembles the famous Colonel Charteris; a Scotchman by birth, and a gamester by profession, he narrowly escaped condign punishment for a crime that was not amongst the foremost of those of which he probably might be accused." [207] Had he lived in the railway era, he would, most assuredly, have been either a king or a stag royal:

The reign of George II is a historical picture of "great breadth," abounding in strongly marked characters, strikingly contrasted; but chiefly undignified, and generally low. The Carnal man is a ruffian rioting in Gin Lane; whilst the Spiritual is typified by a sinister-looking personage, with lank hair, cadaverous visage, and a cock-eye, preaching Free Grace from a tub to a miscellaneous company at Mile-end Green,—the indifference of the unregenerate being indicated by a prize fight in the background. Here a poor rogue is going, drunk, to Tyburn, for having robbed a thief-taker's journeyman of a silver watch, a steel chain, and a tobacco-stopper,—worth altogether forty shillings and threepence, the value required by law to entitle the thief-taker to his price of blood; and there a wealthy soap-boiler, who has made a fortune by cheating the excise, is going in state to Guildhall as Lord Mayor of London. Here a young rake is making violent love to his mother's maid, who has been induced to encourage his attentions from her reading Pamela; and there his aunt, a maiden lady of fifty-two, but having in her own right three thousand a year, is complacently listening to the matrimonial proposals of a young New-light preacher. Here is Colley Cibber sipping his wine at the table of "my lord;" and there sits Samuel Johnson, behind the screen in Cave's back shop, eagerly devouring the plate of meat which the considerate bookseller has sent him from his own table. Here are Johnny Cope and the dragoons riding a race from Preston Pans; and there sits the young Chevalier, unkempt and bare-legged, smoking a short pipe in a Highland hut. Here hangs the sign of the Duke of Cumberland's head; and there, grinning down on it from the elevation of Temple Bar, are the heads of the decapitated rebels. Here Ranelagh is seen shut up on account of the earthquake at Lisbon; [208] and there a batch of gambling senators are hurrying down to the House from the club at White's, to give their votes in favour of a bill to repress gaming.

The several acts passed against gaming, in the reign of George II, appear to have had but little effect in restraining the practice, either at the time, or in any subsequent reign; for though occasionally a solitary loose fish might become entangled in their meshes, they never interrupted the onward course of the great shoal.

The shameless inconsistency of many of the noble lords and honorable gentlemen who were parties to the enactment of those laws, is cleverly shown up in an ironical pamphlet entitled, "A Letter to the Club at White's. In which are set forth the great Expediency of repealing the Laws now in force against Excessive Gaming, and the many Advantages that would arise to this Nation from it. By Erasmus Mumford, Esq.," 1750. The following passages appear most worthy of transcription, both as showing the composition of a celebrated club about a hundred years ago, and as containing the pith of the writer's argument.

"The pertinency of my address to you, my Lords and Gentlemen, on this occasion, must be evident to every one that knows anything of your history; as that you are a Club of about Five Hundred, much the greatest part of you Peers and Members of Parliament, who meet every day at a celebrated Chocolate House, near St. James's, with much greater assiduity than you meet in the Court of Requests; and there, all party quarrels being laid aside, all State questions dropped, Whigs and Tories, Placemen and Patriots, Courtiers and Country Gentlemen, you all agree for the good of the Public, in the salutary measures of excessive gaming. But then as this is against laws of your own making, though now become old-fashioned, musty things, it would save appearances a little to the world methinks, that they should be repealed in the same solemn form in which they were enacted. And as you are, by yourselves and your relations, a great majority of the Legislature, and have no party bias whatsoever on this article, so it would certainly be as easy for you, as it is, in my opinion, incumbent on you, to accomplish such a repeal.... For, whatever we mean in our hearts, the forms of government should be carefully preserved; and though gaming is of the highest advantage to this nation, as I shall presently make appear, yet to practise it in defiance of all order, in the very sight, as it were, of the Government, and against the spirit and letter of the laws which you made yourselves, is entirely inconsistent with the character of Patriots, Nobles, Senators, Great Men, or whatever name of public honour you would chuse to call yourselves by.

"Besides, we have some odd queer maxims in our heads, that the Law is the same for the King and the Cobler, &c., nor is there in any Act of Parliament that has come to my knowledge, any exception of this same house called White's and the good company who frequent it. If you have any act against Gaming with any such exception in it, be so good as to produce it; for I believe verily that, besides yourselves, there is not a man in the kingdom who knows any thing of it. I have read the last Act over and over, and I protest that I can't see any such thing; and yet I don't know how to persuade myself that so many noble Lords and so many of the House of Commons, of all parties and denominations, should every day meet together in open contradiction to such an Act, without a saving clause to shelter themselves under.—

"But though it does no other harm at present, yet still it continues to be an act of the Lords and Commons of the kingdom, (of which you, to your eternal praise, are a great part,) and which has had the Royal assent. And whilst it does so continue, it not only hinders the rest of the kingdom, who are so silly as to mind Acts of Parliament, from Gaming, but it prevents a scheme, which I have had in my head for some time, from taking place; which is, that you should use your utmost endeavours with his Majesty, that he would be pleased, in consideration of the great good of his people, to give neither place nor pension to any Peer, howsoever deserving in all other respects, who is not of your body; and that a Bill should be brought in to render every one incapable of sitting as a member in either House of Parliament, how sound soever his political principles may be, who is not likewise a member of the Gaming Club at White's. This, I apprehend, would be an effectual way of introducing this wholesome innocent diversion into every house of Fashion and Politeness in the kingdom, and make your illustrious body more in vogue, if that can be, than it is at present.—

"But this scheme, which I apprehend to be of such great utility, can never be executed whilst these Acts of Parliament remain unrepealed.... There is one difficulty indeed which I am aware of, which, as I don't know how to get over very well myself, I must submit to your greater wisdom; and that is, getting the king and his chief ministers to consent. For as to the former, though he allows of the practice in his palace once a year, from mere antient custom, [209] yet it is well known that he discourages it very much; and the moment he heard of a table at his house at Kensington, sent immediate orders to forbid it. And as to the Secretaries of State, though they have this diversion once a year or so at their houses, for the entertainment of the Foreign Ministers, yet they never play themselves, nor show any other countenance to it, directly nor indirectly." [210]

In the political pamphlets which appeared in opposition to the ministry in the latter part of the reign of George II, the club at White's is frequently alluded to; and in 'A Political and Satirical History of the years 1756, 1757, 1758, 1759, and 1760, in a series of one hundred and four Humourous and Entertaining Prints,' [211] the gaming propensities of Lord Anson, the circumnavigator, who was at the same time a member of the club and of the government, are keenly satirised. In Plate 7 he is represented as a Sea Lion, with the body of a man and the tail of a fish; in one hand he holds a dice-box, and in the other a card; and on the wall are two pictures, the one showing an E.O. table, and the other a table covered with money, with the inscription "Blacks and Whites." In another print he figures as the Knave of Diamonds, with the inscription at the top, "Hic niger est;" and at the bottom, "Acapulca." In the Key prefixed to the work the person represented is thus denounced: "This caricatura's propensity to gaming tells us at once how valuable he must be to a shipwrecked state, and that he deserves (like a drunken pilot in a storm) to be thrown overboard, to make room for one of clearer brains and more integrity." The three other Knaves are: Spades, inscribed "Monsr. Dupe;" and in the Key it is said that, by the flower-de-luces, seen on the ground, is expressed, "how much this caricatura was connected with our enemies, and was even a Dupe to them against the interests of his country." Hearts, with a fox's head, and inscribed "Monsr. Surecard:" in the Key it is said that this character "infers, by the sharpness of the nose, that craft and subtilty which is natural to creatures of a similar kind, known by the name of Foxes, and is here pointed out as a Knave." Clubs, with a broken yoke in his hand, and inscribed "Null Marriage:" the Key says, "this caricatura was esteemed the most atrocious Knave in the pack, and the worst of the black sort."

Another plate in the same series of caricatures displays the gamester's coat of arms. The shield is charged with cards, dice, and dice-boxes, and is surrounded by a chain, from which hangs a label inscribed "Claret." Supporters, two Knaves. Crest, a hand holding a dice-box. Motto, "Cog it Amor nummi." In Plate 90, of which a copy is here given, the principal performers figuring on the political stage in 1759 are represented as coat cards. [212] In the suit of Hearts, the King, Optimus, is George II; Queen, Britannia; Knave, Pitt. Diamonds, King, the King of Prussia; Queen, the City of London; Knave, Prince Ferdinand. Spades, King, the King of Poland; Queen, the Queen of Hungary; Knave, Holland. Clubs, King, the King of France; Queen, Gallia; Knave, Marshal Broglie. In the Key it is said that "the labels and characters here represented are sufficient to explain the meaning of the print, with the least application."

The Court Cards of 1759 or Hearts is Trump & has won the Game.

In a work relating to the authorship of Junius's Letters, [213] the following account is given of the volume of caricatures in question. It is not, however, correct in every point; for though it may be true that the earlier plates were at first privately distributed, it is certain that subsequently they were publicly sold. The first collection of them, published in a volume, consisted only of the caricatures for 1756-7; and appears to have been enlarged from time to time, by the addition of such plates as had been published separately in the preceding year. The edition of the first volume which I have consulted, containing the plates from 1756 to 1760, is the fifth,—a proof that latterly those caricatures were not privately distributed, whatever they might have been at the commencement. Though Lord George Townshend might have supplied the publisher with sketches or hints, [214] for some of the subjects, and even have suggested the publication of the series, it would be absurd to conclude that he was the designer of the whole. There are only four subjects in the volume relating to Lord George Sackville; and they are among the most worthless of the series, both with respect to conception and design.

"Soon after the unfortunate misunderstanding at Minden, Lord George Townshend (who had formerly been on friendly terms with Lord George Sackville, particularly at the battle of Dettingen) joined with the court party in publicly censuring his conduct. He had an ingenious turn for drawing, and he even went so far as to caricature Lord George flying from Minden, which, with many others, he privately circulated among his friends. This book of caricatures, bearing date from 1756 to 1762, is extremely curious. As they were privately distributed, they are, of course, seldom to be met with. I never saw but one complete set, now in the possession of W. Little, Esq., of Richmond, who has obligingly allowed me to copy the one in question, which is submitted to the reader's inspection. We have Lord Orford's testimony to prove that this book was the production of Lord George Townshend. Lord Orford has described the first of the series, vol. ii, p. 68, 'A new species of this manufacture now first appeared, invented by Lord George Townshend; they were caricatures on cards. The original one, which had amazing vent, was of Newcastle and Fox, looking at each other, and crying with Peachum, in the Beggar's Opera, 'Brother, brother, we are both in the wrong.' On the Royal Exchange a paper was affixed, advertising 'Three kingdoms to be let: inquire of Andrew Stone, broker, in Lincoln's Inn Fields.'—The whole series forms a curious collection. Those on Lord George Sackville were very severe."

The example set by the club at White's appears to have been much more influential in promoting gaming than the denunciation of an Act of Parliament to have been effective in repressing it: the letter of the act was, indeed, killing, but the spirit of the legislators, as displayed at White's, kept the game alive. New clubs of the same kind,—on the principle of mutual insurance against informers,—were established in the metropolis; and even in the provinces, country gentlemen and tradesmen, becoming aware of the advantages of the social compact, formed themselves into little clubs for the purpose of indulging in a quiet game at cards or dice. Card-playing about the same time, or a little later, was greatly promoted by the establishment of assembly-rooms in country towns, where cock-fighting squires, after attending the pit in the morning, might enjoy in the evening the more refined amusements of dancing and cards. [215] The example set by the higher classes was followed by the lower; and at a "merry night" in a Cumberland village, some fifty years since, cards were as indispensable as at an assize ball in the county town: with the exception of the dress of the company and the arrangement of the rooms, the one assembly, at the commencement at least, seems to have displayed all the essentials of the other.

The passion for card-playing appears to have been extremely prevalent in the earlier part of the reign of George III. [217] In almost every town where there is an assembly-room, traditional anecdotes are handed down of certain keen players keeping up the game for twenty-four successive hours, till they were up to their knees in cards; and there is scarcely a county in England that has not a story to tell of two or three of its old landed gentry being ruined at cards by the Prince of Wales. Even villages have their annals of gaming; of once substantial farmers turning horse-coursers and riding headlong to ruin on a leather plater; of others going more quietly off at cards, staking their corn before it was housed; and of certain desperate cock-fighters losing their whole substance at a single match, and then straightway hanging themselves in their own barn. The love of card-playing, to the great horror of the inordinately pious, seems even to have infected ladies who were, in other respects, irreproachable:—good wives, affectionate mothers, teaching their children the Catechism, going regularly to church on Sundays, and taking the sacrament every month; yet, alas! dearly loving a snug private party of four or five tables, and immensely fond of Quadrille; and making but a poor atonement for their transgression by never touching a card in Passion week, nor the night before the Communion, nor even on the Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent,—whenever they could avoid playing, "consistently with good manners." [218]

A discourse against gaming, preached in 1793, by Dr. Thomas Rennell, Master of the Temple, seems to have made much noise about the time, but no converts. The most original passage in the work is the following, wherein he asserts that the habit of card-playing renders the mind insensible of Gospel evidence: in the present day, it may be observed in passing, that a similar effect has been ascribed to the study of Oriel-college logic. "The mind of one immersed in cards soon becomes vacant, frivolous, and captious. The habits form a strange mixture of mock gravity and pert flippancy. The understanding, by a perpetual attention to a variety of unmeaning combinations, acquires a kind of pride in this bastard employment of the faculty of thought, which is so far from having any analogy to the real exercise of reason, that we generally find a miserable eminence in it attainable by the dullest, the most ignorant, and most contemptible of mankind. The gamester, however, frequently mistakes this skill for general acuteness, and from that conceit either totally rejects the Gospel evidence, or if political or professional considerations render this indecent or inexpedient, he harbours all that contemptible chicane, all that petty sophistry, all that creeping evasion, with which a selfish heart, and a contracted understanding, meets and embraces the prevailing heresy of the times in which we live." [219]

The following appears to be levelled at an individual of no small reputation in his day, and whose memory is likely to outlast Dr. Rennell's. "What is it that converts those designed by Providence to be the GUARDIANS and PROTECTORS into the BANE and CURSE of their country? I will answer, the GAMING TABLE. The reverses here every moment occurring unite beggared fortunes, mortified pride, callous baseness, and inflamed appetites, directing their joint operations to the destruction of that common mother which gave them birth. And here I wish to be rightly understood—that with a frugal, active, dignified poverty, the discharge of public duty is perfectly compatible. Such a poverty was highly reverenced in the best ages of Pagan antiquity, as the nurse of every great and useful exertion; but as distant as light from darkness is such a poverty from that degraded, malevolent, abject MENDICITY, the offspring of vice, the organ of faction, and the parent of universal prostitution and venality."

Dr. Parr, in his copy of this discourse, wrote the following note, which may serve as a tail-piece to the present chapter: "Dr. Rennell is said, with his own hand, to have put a copy of this animated sermon under the knocker of Mr. Fox's door in South street. I could wish the story to be untrue. But the eloquent preacher did not employ his great talents in a sermon against Sabbath-breaking, though his illustrious patron, Mr. Pitt, had lately fought a duel with Mr. Tierney on Wimbledon Common."

Having in the preceding chapters endeavoured to trace the origin of Playing Cards, and to show their progress from the time of their first introduction into Europe, I shall now proceed to give collectively some account of the different kinds of cards, of the various marks that have been employed to distinguish the suits, and of the changes that they have undergone at different periods.

Most authors who have expressly written on the subject, agree in distinguishing two kinds of cards, namely, those which they call Tarocchi, or Tarots; and those, consisting of four suits, which are in common use throughout Europe. It is a subject of dispute, among the learned in these matters, which of those two kinds are of the greatest antiquity; Court de Gebelin considers that Tarocchi cards were known to the ancient Egyptians; [220] and Mons. Duchesne is pleased to assume that certain so-called Tarocchi Cards, preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi, belonged to one of the three packs painted for Charles VI, by Jacquemin Gringonneur, in 1393. Mons. Duchesne is also of opinion that these cards were the same as those which were formerly called Naibi in Italy; and in support of it, he alleges several authorities, which seem to him to be decisive of the fact, but which really prove nothing more than that Chartæ and Naibi were synonymous. [221] He produces no evidence to show that the series of painted and engraved figures, now usually called Tarocchi, were originally known either by that name, or by that of cards; while from a passage cited by Mons. Leber, from Raphael Volaterranus, it would appear that Tarocchi Cards, properly so called, were not invented till towards the close of the fifteenth century; and from the same author we learn that a pack of such cards consisted of the four suits of common cards, together with twenty-two symbolical figures, similar to those which are assumed by Mons. Duchesne to have been the original Tarocchi. Tarocchi cards—called Tarots by the French—are still used in several parts of France, Germany, and Italy; and an account of the manner of playing the game is to be found in the edition of the 'Académie des Jeux,' published by Corbet, Paris, 1814.

Mons. Duchesne calls this game Tarocchino, and distinguishes it from that played with the old series of figures, which he supposes to have been the original Tarocchi; but so far from there being any evidence to show that these figures were at their first introduction known either by the name of Tarocchi or of Cards, there seems greater reason to conclude that they have only obtained this name in comparatively recent times, in consequence of some of them being used in combination with common cards, at a game called Tarocchi, which was also the name given to the cards with which it was played. The earliest writers who mention Tarocchi as a kind of cards, always speak of them as consisting of four suits,—Swords, Cups, Batons, and Money,—together with a certain number of other cards, representing various characters and emblematical figures.

A pack of Tarots, [222] as at present used in France, corresponds in every particular with those called Tarocchi by writers of the sixteenth century. It consists of seventy-eight cards; that is, of four suits of numeral cards, and twenty-two emblematic cards, called Atous. [223] The marks of the suits are usually Swords, Cups, Batons, and Money; and each suit consists of fourteen cards, ten of which are "pips" or low cards, and the other four are coat cards,—namely, King, Queen, Chevalier, and Valet. Of the Atous, twenty-one are numbered consecutively from 1 to 21; that which is not numbered is called the Fou,—the Clown or Buffoon,—and in playing the game is usually designated "Mat." The Fou has of itself no positive value, but augments that of any of the other Atous to which it may be joined. The other Atous are numbered and named as follows:

1. The Bateleur, or Juggler; called also Pagad. 2. Juno. 3. The Empress. [224] 4. The Emperor. 5. Jupiter. 6. L'Amoureux. 7. The Chariot. 8. Justice. 9. The Capuchin, called also the Hermit. 10. The Wheel of Fortune. 11. Fortitude. 12. Le Pendu—a man suspended, head downwards, by one leg. 13. Death. 14. Temperance. 15. The Devil. 16. The Maison-Dieu, or Hospital—a tower struck by lightning. 17. The Stars. 18. The Moon. 19. The Sun. 20. The Last Judgment. 21. The End of the World.—Of these the first five are called petits atous, and the last five grands atous. Seven cards are also especially distinguished as Tarots, or Atous-tarots; these are the End of the World, the Buffoon, the Bateleur, and the four Kings. [225]

According to Cicognara, [226] the inventor of the game of Tarocchino,—or Tarots, as above described,—was an Italian, who resided at Bologna, prior to the year 1419; and the account which he gives is to the following effect: "There is preserved in the Fibbia family, one of the most ancient and illustrious of that city, a portrait of Francis Fibbia, Prince of Pisa,—who sought refuge at Bologna, about the commencement of the fifteenth century,—in which he is represented holding in his right hand a parcel of cards, while others appear lying on the ground; among the latter are seen the Queen of Batons, and the Queen of Money, the one being ornamented with the arms of the Bentivoglio family, and the other with the arms of the Fibbia. An inscription at the bottom of the picture informs us that Francis Fibbia, who died in 1419, had obtained, as the inventor of Tarocchino, from the Reformers of the city, the privilege of placing his own shield of arms on the Queen of Batons, and that of his wife, who was of the Bentivoglio family, on the Queen of Money; "a distinction," observes Mons. Duchesne, "which nevertheless does not exclude the supposition that Francis Fibbia, Commander-in-chief of the Bolognese forces, had rendered more important services to his countrymen than teaching them to play at Tarocchino."

Supposing Cicognara's account to be correct, it yet proves nothing with respect to the comparative antiquity of the two kinds of cards which compose the pack for the game of Tarocchino, or Tarots. Mons. Duchesne, however, having assumed that the old series of emblematic figures called Tarocchi cards were the oldest, sees no difficulty in the matter, but unhesitatingly concurs with Cicognara in ascribing the invention of Tarocchino to Francis Fibbia, without inquiring whether Fibbia had merely combined into one pack two kinds of cards already well known, or whether he was the first deviser of the four suits which constitute the most important portion of the pack, and which give to the game all its spirit. Seeing that Fibbia was honoured for his invention by the Reforming magistracy of Bologna,—where both card-playing and the manufacture of cards appear to have been pretty extensively carried on about 1423,—the most probable conclusion would be, that he had deserved well in their opinion, not from having converted by new combinations a previously innocent and amusing game into a hazardous and exciting one, but in consequence of his having shuffled a few moral Tarocchi into the old pack of numeral cards of four suits, whether of Swords, Cups, Batons, and Money, or of Bells, Hearts, Leaves, and Acorns. In support of this conclusion, it may further be observed, that though the manufacture of cards was extensively carried on both in Italy and Germany, before the year 1450, no so-called Tarocchi cards of that period have been discovered which can fairly be supposed to have been intended, either from their size or execution, for the common purposes of play; while, on the contrary, there are in existence several specimens of numeral cards of four suits, either stencilled or engraved on wood, and evidently of a cheap manufacture, for common use, of a date not later than 1450.

The kind of game for which the emblematic figures usually called Tarocchi cards were used, remains to be discovered. Mons. Duchesne has, indeed, hazarded a conjecture on the subject, which is equally incapable of refutation or of proof. "The number of players," he says, "necessary to form a party, would scarcely be limited to two, and probably might vary from three to twelve, or rather from three to eight; and the manner of playing might simply consist in the appropriate laying down of such of the figures as, according to an order agreed upon, might belong to the suit of the card first played. The holder of certain privileged cards would have doubtless some additional advantage; and we may further suppose that each player being obliged, in turn, to lay down a card drawn at random, striking contrasts resulting from unexpected combinations would afford a subject of amusement. This supposition would seem to agree with the subject of a book entitled 'Les Cartes Parlantes,' [227] printed at Venice, in 1545; each card there has conferred on it an interpretation or allusion, more or less ingenious, applicable to the figure which it represents: thus the Pope represents fidelity in the game and sincerity in the player; the Emperor, the laws of the game; the Valets, the service attached to the game; the Swords, the death of despairing gamesters; the Batons, the punishment of those who cheat; Money, the sustenance of play; and the Cups, the drink over which the players settle their disputes." Mons. Duchesne's conjecture can scarcely be said to be supported by the conceits of Aretine; who, moreover, in the whole course of his book, speaks of cards as a hazardous, exciting game, at which both money and credit might be lost; while Mons. Duchesne asserts that the game played with Tarocchi was merely one of amusement, originally devised to instruct children under the semblance of play.

The earliest known specimens of what are called Tarocchi cards are those preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi, at Paris, and which are supposed by Mons. Duchesne to have formed a portion of one of the three packs painted for the amusement of Charles VI, in 1393. [228] They formerly belonged to Mons. de Gaignières, who had been governor to the grandchildren of Louis XIV, and who bequeathed them, together with his entire collection of prints and drawings, to the king, in 1711. Those cards appear to have been seen in the possession of Mons. de Gaignières by the Abbé de Longuerue; [229] and also by Dr. Martin Lister, who thus mentions them in his account of his journey to Paris, in 1698: "I waited upon the Abbot Droine to visit Mons. Guanieres [de Gaignières] at his lodgings in the Hostel de Guise. One toy I took notice of, which was a collection of playing cards for 300 years. The oldest were three times bigger than what are now used, extremely well limned and illuminated with gilt borders, and the pasteboard thick and firm; but there was not a complete set of them."

The following particulars respecting those cards are chiefly derived from Mons. Duchesne's description of them in his 'Observations sur les Cartes à jouer,' published in the 'Annuaire Historique' for the year 1837. There are seventeen of them, and there can scarcely be a doubt of their having formed part of a set of what are called Tarocchi cards, which, when complete, consisted of fifty. They are painted on paper, in the manner of illuminations in old manuscripts, on a gold ground, which is in other parts marked with ornamental lines, formed by means of points slightly pricked into the composition upon which the gilding is laid. They are surrounded by a border of silver gilding, in which there is also seen an ornament, formed in the same manner, by means of points, representing a kind of scroll or twisted riband. Some parts of the embroidery on the vestments of the different figures are heightened with gold, while the weapons and armour are covered with silver, which, like that on the borders, has for the most part become oxydized through time. There is no inscription, letter, nor number, to indicate the manner in which they were to be arranged. Mons. Leber agrees with Mons. Duchesne in ascribing them to a French artist of the time of Charles VI, and even seems inclined to conclude that they might have been intended for the amusement of that lunatic king. Looking at those cards, however, as they appear in the fac-similes published by the Society of Bibliophiles Français, I should rather take them to be the work of an Italian artist, and be inclined to conclude, as well from the general style of the drawing as from the costume, that they were not of an earlier date than 1425.

The following is Mons. Duchesne's enumeration of the seventeen cards which he supposes to have been executed by Gringonneur: the names in capitals are those which occur in a series of so-called Italian Tarocchi cards, with which he considers them to correspond.

1. Le Fou—the Buffoon. This figure is found in the Tarots of the present day, and is perhaps the same character as that which in the series of old Italian engraving—called Tarocchi cards—is inscribed Misero I.

2. L'Ecuyer—the Squire. Chevalier VI.

3. L'Empereur—the Emperor. Imperator VIIII.

4. Le Pape—the Pope. Papa X.

5. Les Amoureux—the Lovers. Young men and women courting, while two winged Cupids are discharging arrows at them. Mons. Duchesne gravely queries whether this subject does not represent Apollo and Diana killing the children of Niobe, and whether it ought not to be considered as corresponding with Apollo XX. It has, however, as little relation to the story of Niobe as it has to Apollo, as figured in the engraving referred to.

6. La Fortune—Fortune. This figure, standing on a circle which represents the world, holds a globe in one hand, and in the other a sceptre. Mons. Duchesne considers that it corresponds with that named Astrologia, in the series of Italian engravings, and there erroneously numbered XXXVIIII, instead of XXVIIII.—Bartsch, it seems had not observed this error.

7. La Tempérance—Temperance. Temperancia XXXIIII.

8. La Force—Fortitude. Fortezza XXXVI.

9. La Justice—Justice. Justicia XXXVII.

10. La Lune—the Moon. Luna XXXXI.

11. Le Soleil—the Sun. Sol XXXXIIII.

12. Le Char—the Chariot. The subject here is a figure in armour, standing on a kind of triumphal car, and having in his right hand a battle-axe. Mons. Duchesne says that this subject certainly corresponds with Marte XXXXV.

13. L'Ermite—the Hermit. This figure is supposed to correspond with that named Saturno XXXXVII.

The four following subjects have no corresponding figures in the series of old Italian engravings, supposed by Mons. Duchesne and others to be Tarocchi cards: they are, however, to be found among the "Atous" of the modern game of Tarots.

14. Le Pendu—A man hanging from one leg, head downwards. Court de Gebelin, speaking of this figure as it is seen in a modern pack of Tarots, conjectures, with his usual absurdity, that the card-maker had erroneously represented it upside down. On turning it the contrary way, he sees in it an emblem of Prudence,—to wit, a man standing upon one foot, and sagely deliberating where he has to place the other.—The figure of Le Pendu, even when thus viewed, is much more like a capering opera-dancer, than a prudent philosopher cautiously picking his steps; and bears not the slightest resemblance to the figure of Prudence, in the series of old engravings, called Tarocchi cards.

15. La Mort—Death.

16. La Maison-Dieu—The Hospital. A tower struck by lightning.

17. Le Jugement dernier—The last Judgment.

Old Painted Cards ascribed to Gringonneur. —'La Justice.' (p. 198)

Old Painted Cards ascribed to Gringonneur. —'La Lune.' (p. 198.)

These seventeen subjects, engraved in lithography, and carefully coloured by hand after the original drawings, are given in the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales,' published by the Society of Bibliophiles Français, 1844. The two annexed cuts will afford some idea of the style of the drawing, and of the manner in which the ornaments are pricked into the gold ground. They are of the same size as the originals; the one is that named Justice, No. 9, and the other that named La Lune, No. 10, in the preceding enumeration. It may be here observed that the latter is totally different from that named Luna XXXXI, in the series of old Italian engravings, with which it is supposed by Mons. Duchesne to correspond: the only figure common to both is that of a crescent moon. The drawing indeed seems to be an emblem of Astrology, which, in the Italian engravings, is represented by a winged female figure, having on her head a crown of stars, and holding in her left hand a book, and in her right a divining rod.

The complete series of old Italian engravings, known to collectors of prints by the name of Tarocchi cards, consists of fifty pieces, divided into five classes distinguished by the first five letters of the alphabet, A, B, C, D, E, but numbered consecutively from 1 to 50, commencing with the class marked E. At the foot of each subject is engraved its name; together with the letter of its class, and its number, which is given both in Roman and Arabic numerals,—the Roman being placed immediately after the name, and the Arabic on the extreme right. The distinctive letter of the class is on the left. Zani [230] has conjectured that the letters might have been intended for abbreviations of Atutto, Battoni, Coppe, Denari, and Espadone,—Atous, Batons, Cups, Money, and Swords. Spadone, however, and not Espadone, is the proper Italian name for swords; but as the names are in the Venetian dialect, Mons. Duchesne appears inclined to allow that the form Espadone might have been admitted into it at that period. That the letters, however, had no such meaning, and that they were merely used to mark the order of each class, seems to be proved by the fact that in another set of the same subjects, executed about the same period, the numeral 5 is substituted for the letter E. Even if Zani's supposition were correct, it would only strengthen the conclusion that those so-called Tarocchi cards originated in an attempt to recombine, under new emblems, the principles of an old game which had acquired a disreputable character. Whatever the game might have been, it has long become obsolete; and the only reason for supposing it to have been cognate with that of cards, is grounded on the fact that a certain number of the characters of those so-called Tarocchi cards occur as Atous in the pack of Tarocchi or Tarots, previously described.

Of those old Italian engravings there are two series known to amateurs, agreeing in the subjects, but differing in their style of execution; though it is evident that the one has been copied from the other. [231] In one of them, which is considered by Bartsch to be the earliest, the date 1485 is inscribed on a tablet in the hands of the figure named Arithmeticha XXV. [232] In the other series, which is by much the best engraved, and is certainly the earliest, there is no date; and the figure which there represents Arithmetic, appears to be counting money. This series Mons. Duchesne thinks was executed about 1470; and some writers have supposed that the subjects were engraved by Tomaso Finiguerra. Zani, however, is inclined to believe that they were engraved at Padua; while Otley ascribes them to a Florentine artist. Seeing, however, that the names are in the Venetian dialect, and that authorities on the subject of old Italian engraving disagree with respect to them, I am inclined to suppose, without any regard to their style of execution, that they were either engraved by a Venetian artist, or for the Venetian market. It has also been supposed, but erroneously, that they were designed by Andrea Mantegna, to whom a number of other things of a similar kind have, with equal probability, been ascribed; and amongst the dealers in old engravings, at Paris, they are commonly known as Cartes de Baldini. Both the originals and the copies are of great rarity; and though several single subjects are to be found in the possession of amateurs, it is questionable if there be more than four collections in Europe, whether private or national, that have either the one series or the other complete. In the British Museum there is a complete series of the originals, and also forty-five of the copies; the five pieces wanting in the latter are: Misero I, Fameio II, Imperador VIIII, Primo Mobile XXXXVIIII, and Prima Causa XXXXX. There is also a complete series of the originals, in the 'Bibliothèque du Roi;' and copies of them are given in the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales,' published by the Society of Bibliophiles Français. Fac-similes of two,—Papa X and Rhetorica XXIII,—are also given by Singer in his 'Researches into the History of Playing Cards.' From their size—about nine inches and three quarters high, by about four inches wide,—as well as from other circumstances, Mr. Singer considers that they were not intended for any game analogous to that of cards, properly so called. Mons. Leber considers them to have been merely "Cartes de Fantaisie," and observes that subjects so delicately engraved on copper, when the invention of the art was still recent, could scarcely have been intended to receive the colouring required for the completion of a pack of cards. [233] It, however, may be observed that colour is not essential to a pack of playing cards; and that several packs of cards of four suits, evidently intended for play, without being coloured, were delicately engraved on copper, before the end of the fifteenth century.

Even Mons. Duchesne, while contending that those fifty old engravings were really Tarocchi cards, admits that they bear no relation to any games played with numeral cards, which, according to the number of players, and the regulations of each game, always consist of a number which is divisible by four; for instance, 20 for Bouillotte; 28 for Brelan; 32 for Piquet, and several other games; 36 for Trappola; 40 for Ombre; 48 for Reversis; 52 for Lansquenet, and several other games; 96 for Comet; 104 for Lottery; 312 for Trente-et-un; and 78 for Tarots. "The ancient Tarocchi cards," he says, "have not then been intended for games of calculation [jeux mathématiques], but solely for an instructive game. In this game, consisting of five classes, we find the seven planets, representing the celestial system; the seven virtues which constitute the basis of all morality; the sciences, which man alone is capable of acquiring, and the knowledge of which raises him above all other animals; the Muses, whose cultivation yields so many charms to life; finally, several of the conditions of life in which man may be placed, from misery, the most painful of all, to that of the most elevated, the Sovereign Pontificate." [234] A complete series of those old engravings consists of fifty pieces, as has been previously observed, named and numbered as follows:

[Class E.—The Conditions of Life.]

[Class D.—The Muses.]

[Class C.—The Sciences.]

[Class B.—The Virtues.]

[Class A.—The Celestial System.]

Having now given such an account of the so-called Tarocchi cards, as may enable the reader to determine for himself, both with respect to their original use, and their relation to playing cards proper, I shall now proceed to notice some of the principal varieties of numeral cards; that is, of cards consisting of four suits, and each suit containing a certain number of coat cards, together with eight or ten lower cards, having their numeral value designated by the marks of the suit to which they belong.

The oldest specimens of undoubted playing cards are either stencilled, or engraved on wood; and of a date which, looking at the style of their execution, the drawing, and the costume of the figures, cannot fairly be supposed to be later than 1440. Amongst the earliest are the stencilled cards preserved in the print-room of the British Museum, and previously described at page 89. In these the coat cards appear to have been a King, a Chevalier, and a Fante, Footman, or Knave; without any Queen. The marks of three of the suits are Hearts, Bells, and Acorns; the mark of the fourth suit does not occur,—as the specimens preserved are far short of a complete pack,—but it is highly probable that it was Leaves, called Grün by the Germans, as in the old pack formerly belonging to Dr. Stukeley, and described by Mr. Gough, in the eighth volume of the 'Archæologia.'

The cards formerly belonging to Dr. Stukeley were given to him by Thomas Rawlinson, Esq. [236] They were found in the cover of an old book,—supposed to be an edition of Claudian, printed before the year 1500,—and one or two leaves of an edition of the Adagia of Erasmus were interspersed between the layers of the cards, thus forming a kind of pasteboard. The marks of the suits are Hearts, Bells, Leaves, and Acorns; and the coat cards are the King, Chevalier, and Knave. The numeral value of the lower cards, from the Deuce to the Ten, is indicated by a repetition of the marks of the suits, as in modern cards. As there is no Ace, this pack, supposing it to be complete, would consist of forty-eight cards. These cards are rudely coloured, and of smaller size than those in the British Museum. On the Deuce of every suit is a shield, displaying what is supposed to be the card-maker's arms, namely, a kind of pick-axe, with one of the ends blunt like a hammer, and a mallet, in saltire. Fac-similes of Dr. Stukeley's cards are given in Singer's Researches.

As the distinctive marks of the suits on the oldest cards in existence are Hearts, Bells, Leaves, and Acorns, it may reasonably be supposed that these marks were used at as early a period as any of the others which occur on cards of a later date, but yet executed before the close of the fifteenth century. Next to these in point of antiquity, and perhaps of as early a date, are Swords, Cups, Batons, and Money, which would appear to have been the most common marks on early Italian cards, and to have been almost exclusively adopted in Spain. For the sake of distinction, in future, cards with these marks will be referred to as Spanish cards, as in Spain the suits are still distinguished by Swords, Cups, Batons, and Money; while cards having Hearts, Bells, Leaves, and Acorns, will be referred to as German cards, as such appear to have been the kind most generally used in Germany. Of the marks on what were more particularly called "French cards," in the sixteenth century,—Cœur, Trèfle, Pique, and Carreau, or as we call them, Hearts, Clubs, Spades, and Diamonds,—two of them at least, the Cœur and the Pique, are evidently derived from the Heart and the Leaf of the earlier pack, while there is good reason to believe that the form of the Trèfle was copied from that of the Acorn. [237]

The mark now called the Trèfle, in France, was formerly known as the Fleur. Peignot, referring to a poem entitled "La Magdaleine au Désert de la Sainte-Baume en Provence," printed at Lyons, in 1668, says: "We learn from this poem that, in 1668, the word Trèfle was not yet in use, as the designation of one of the suits of cards; that suit was then called Fleurs. The Valets were also then termed Fous."

The type of the Carreau, or Diamond, is not to be found in any of the marks of the other two packs above noticed. In the time of Pietro Aretine, the suits of French cards appear to have been known in Italy by the names of Cori, Quadri, Fiori, and Cappari, [238] as we learn from his 'Carte Parlanti,' first printed in 1545, in which a Paduan card-maker holds a long dialogue, moral and entertaining, with his cards:

"Paduan. As French cards are used in Italy, tell me, I pray, what, amongst that people, may be the signification of Capers? [Cappari.]

Cards. Their piquancy whets the appetite of tavern-haunters.

Paduan. And the Diamonds? [Quadri.]

Cards. The firmness of the player.

Paduan. And the Hearts? [Cori.]

Cards. Inclination to cheat in play.

Paduan. And the Flowers? [Fiori.]

Cards. The pleasure of saying a good thing." [239]

The invention of cards with these marks, and having a Queen for the second coat card, instead of a male figure, as in the Spanish and German cards, has been claimed by the French; and this substitution has been considered by some French writers as peculiarly characteristic of the gallantry of their nation. The French also appear to have been the first who gave to their coat cards the names of historical personages. From those names, and the marks of the suits, Père Daniel has been enabled to discover the origin and meaning of the game of Piquet, which he supposes to have been devised about 1430, in the reign of Charles VII; admitting, however, that Playing Cards of another kind were of a much earlier date, but yet considering even these to have been of French invention.

In the time of Père Daniel, the coat cards were named as follows:

These names, which appear to have been given to the French coat cards, at an early period, were not uniformly retained; in the time of Henry IV, the Kings were Solomon, Augustus, Clovis, and Constantine; and the Queens, Elizabeth, Dido, Clotilde, and "Pantalisea;" while the Valets had no proper names, but were merely designated from their office, and all the characters appeared in the costume of the period. In the reign of Louis XIV, however, the former names and an antique costume were restored.

According to Père Daniel's reading of the cards, which is of the same ingenious character as that of the soldier who is said to have used his pack as a Manual of Devotions, [241] the Ace is the Latin As, a piece of money, which also signifies wealth; and as money is the sinews of war, the Ace has for this reason the precedence at Piquet. The Trèfle, or clover plant, which abounds in the meadows of France, denotes that a general ought always to encamp his army in a place where he may obtain forage for his cavalry. Piques and Carreaux signify magazines of arms, which ought always to be well stored. The Carreaux were a kind of heavy arrows which were shot from a crossbow, and which were so called from their heads being squared [carré]. Cœurs,—Hearts,—signified the courage of the commanders and the soldiers.

David, Alexander, Cæsar, and Charlemagne are at the head of the four suits at Piquet, because troops, however brave and numerous, yet require prudent and experienced leaders. The Queens are, Argine, for Trèfle; Rachel, for Carreau; Pallas, for Pique; and Judith, for Cœur. In Argine, Père Daniel finds the anagram of Regina, and having made this capital discovery, he is enabled to determine that this Queen was Mary of Anjou, wife of Charles VII. Rachel represents the fair Agnes Sorel, mistress of Charles VII; and the chaste and warlike Pallas is but an emblem of Joan of Arc. Judith is not the Jewish heroine who cut off the head of Holofernes, but the Empress Judith, wife of Louis le Debonnaire; but even this Judith is merely a representative of Isabel of Bavaria, wife of Charles VI. In David he sees a typification of Charles VII, in consequence of a conformity in their destinies: David, after having been long persecuted by Saul, his father-in-law, at length obtained the crown; but, in the midst of his prosperity, was troubled with the revolt of his son Absalom: and Charles VII, after having been disinherited and proscribed by his father Charles VI,—or rather by Isabel of Bavaria,—gloriously reconquered his kingdom; but the latter years of his life were rendered unhappy by the restless spirit and wicked character of his son, Louis XI.

In his account of the Valets, Père Daniel is not so imaginative as in the explication of the double and triple characters which he sees represented by the Kings and Queens. La Hire is the famous Stephen de Vignoles, surnamed La Hire, a devoted adherent of Charles VII; while Hector is supposed to be intended for Hector de Galard, another famous captain of the same period. Hogier and Lancelot are allowed to pass simply in their own proper characters, as heroes of romance. [242]

It would appear to be the opinion of Mons. Duchesne, that the oldest French Piquet cards that have been discovered, are those formerly belonging to a Mons. Henin, who found them in the cover of an old book. Mons. Henin having disposed of them to Messrs. Colnaghi, the well-known printsellers, of London, they were purchased of the latter for the Bibliothèque du Roi. They are engraved on wood, and coloured; and in the table of contents prefixed to the 'Jeux de Tarots et de Cartes Numérales,' it is asserted they were executed about 1425. [243] But whatever may be their date, they are not, in my opinion, of so early a period as either the old uncoloured cards, preserved in the British Museum, previously described at page 88; or as those formerly belonging to Dr. Stukeley. I indeed question much if they be really older than the coloured French cards, the four Valets, now in the British Museum, and of which some account will be found in a subsequent page.

The old French cards in question have the outlines printed in pale ink, and the colours appear to have been applied by means of a stencil. There are ten of them, all impressed on one piece of paper; and they are placed in two rows, of five each, in the following order:

Valet, King and Queen of Trèfle.
Valet, Queen and King of Pique.
King and Queen of Carreau.
Queen and King of Cœur.

On each of those cards, except the King of Cœur, there is an inscription in Gothic letters. On the Valet of Trèfle is the name Rolan, while the King is named Faut-sou,—Penniless; and the Queen, Tromperie,—Deceit. The King of Carreau bears the name Coursube, which in old romances is the name given to a Saracen King; and on the Queen of Carreau is the inscription En toi te fie,—Trust to thyself; "that is," says Mons. Duchesne, "ne te fie qu'en toi,—trust to thyself only. The Valet of Pique bears an inscription which Mons. Duchesne reads ctarde, and of which he says he can make nothing. On the Queen of Pique is an inscription which appears to Mons. Duchesne to be te aut dict, but the meaning of which he cannot divine. Mons. Leber, however, reads it Léauté due,—leal homage; and so gives it, in unmistakable characters, in the copy of this card, in his 'Etudes Historiques.' The King of Pique bears the name of Apollin, which is the name given to a Saracen idol in old romances. The inscription on the Queen of Cœur is la foy et pdu—la foi est perdue,—faith is lost.

It is supposed that there was also an inscription on the King of Cœur, but that it has been cut off, as this card is deficient in its due proportions. [244] The annexed four cards, executed in their proper colours, are copied from those given by Mons. Leber in his 'Etudes Historiques.' The whole ten are given in the 'Jeux de Tarots et de Jeux Numérales,' published by the Society of Bibliophiles Français.

Mons. Leber considers that the names Coursube and Apollin, which occur on these cards, corroborate his opinion that cards were of Eastern origin, and introduced into Europe by the Saracens, or Arabs. [245] Though agreeing with Mons. Leber, in the opinion that cards are of Eastern origin, I cannot yet see how this opinion is confirmed by two names, which, as designating a Moorish king, and a Mahometan idol, appear to have been merely the invention of a French romance writer, and to have been capriciously bestowed upon a King of Diamonds and a King of Hearts by an old French card-maker. The supposition, indeed, that figures with these names were to be found on old Arabic cards is most preposterous; there is not a shadow of evidence to show that any characters, whether real or imaginary, were ever popularly known by these names, amongst people of Arabic origin; and even if there were, the painting them upon cards would have been considered as a violation of the law of Mahomet, by whom all such representations were strictly prohibited. With equal probability, Mons. Leber might assert that cards were a Jewish invention, because the names of David, Rachel, and Judith are to be found on them; or that Piquet was invented in the time of Charlemagne, in consequence of one of the Kings bearing his name, and two of the Valets being named after two of his Paladins,—Hogier and Roland. The long note in the 'Précis Historique sur les Cartes à jouer,' pp. 13-17, on the subject of Coursube and Apollin, and Mons. Leber's more lengthy comment on it, have much of the character of that kind of discussion which was compared by Demonax to one man milking a he-goat, and another holding a sieve to catch the milk.

The originals of the annexed four cards, representing the Valets, or Knaves, of the four suits known in England as Hearts, Diamonds, Clubs, and Spades, are, in my opinion, of, at least, as early a date as the cards containing the names Coursube and Apollin. Mons. Duchesne and Mons. Leber, judging from the costume of the last-named cards, agree in supposing, or, rather, confidently asserting, that they were executed about 1425, in the reign of Charles VII. Conclusions, however, drawn from the costume displayed on cards are not of much weight in the determination of a date, seeing that persons supposed to be well acquainted with the subject of costume have not been able to determine, from that alone, the date of any old drawing, even within fifty years. To whatever period the costume of the "Coursube" cards may belong, that of the four Knaves may be fairly presumed to be of as early a period; but yet, looking at the costume of the latter, and the style of their execution, I should not take them to be of an earlier date than 1480. Supposing them to be of that date, I think it will be generally admitted, by all acquainted with the subject, that, in point of drawing, as expressive of action and character, they may fairly rank with the best specimens of wood-engraving executed previously to that period.

Those four Knaves, which are now in the print-room of the British Museum, were discovered by the writer, in the covers of an old book, which he bought of Mr. Robert Crozier, bookseller, 27, Bow Street, about the latter end of December, 1841. The book, which is a small quarto, had formerly belonged to the Cathedral Library of Peterborough, [246] and its subject is the Sermons of St. Vincent de Ferrer, a Spanish friar, of great repute in his day, who died in 1419: it wanted both the title-page and the last leaf, and, consequently, had no date; but, looking at the character of the type,—old Gothic—and the rude execution of the initial letters, I should conclude that it was printed in France, within the last ten years of the fifteenth century. The other leaves forming, with the cards, the "boards" of the cover, were portions of the gloss, or commentary, of Nicholas de Lyra, on the Old Testament; which leaves, apparently, are of a date somewhat older than the volume. Seeing that old cards have so often been found in the covers of old books, it might be conjectured that certain pious persons had made it a point of conscience to thus employ them, for useful purposes; this supposition is, however, rendered untenable by the fact of those cards being intermixed with the pious lucubrations of Nicholas de Lyra. Besides the two squares of paper containing the four Knaves, there were also two other squares, consisting of "pips" of Diamonds and Hearts, which were so arranged that each square of paper might be cut into four cards: the low cards on one square were, the Nine, Four, Five, and Seven of Diamonds; and those on the other, the Ten, Four, Five, and Eight of Hearts. The "pips" on those low cards were evidently impressed by means of a stencil.

On one square of paper were the Valets of Clubs and Spades,—Lancelot and Hogier; and on another, the Valets of Diamonds and Hearts,—that of Diamonds being named Rolant, and that of Hearts containing the inscription, "Valery: f." Though each piece of paper contained four cards, it yet displayed only two different characters,—the Valet of each suit occurring on it being repeated in the alternate compartments. The outlines of the figures and the names have evidently been engraved on wood, and are printed in a brownish colour,—something like Indian ink mixed with bistre; and the colours have been laid on by means of stencils. The names of these Valets,—Rolant, "Valery: f," Lancelot, and Hogier,—compared with those occurring on other French cards of an early date, seem to prove that, originally, the French coat cards received their names merely at the caprice of the card-maker. Any argument, therefore, respecting the origin of cards, or the invention of Piquet, as founded on the names of the coat cards, must be utterly without foundation.

With respect to the names of those Valets, it seems to be generally agreed that Roland, spelled Rolant on the cards, was the nephew of Charlemagne, so famed in romance, and that Hogier, or Ogier, was the renowned Hogier of Denmark. According to a modern author, this hero was a grandson of Pepin of Heristal, the great-grandfather of Charlemagne; and the appellation, "of Denmark," was conferred on him, not from his being of that kingdom, but from his being a native of Dane-marche, that is, of the district now called Ardennes. The same author also informs us, that Hogier was a descendant of St. Hubert of Ardennes; and, for a confirmation of the fact, refers to the dog seen in an old Valet of Spades, of which he gives a copy in his work: in the irregular line of the more distant ground, in the same card, he sees an indication of the uneven surface of the district of Ardennes. [247] An inspection of the four Valets in question will enable any person to decide on the value of his speculations: three of those Valets,—Rolant, Hogier, and Lancelot,—are accompanied by dogs; and the line of the more distant ground in two of the subjects is nearly level; while the slight eminence in the third—Rolant—evidently indicates a rabbit-burrow. If such stuff as Mons. Barrois drivels forth on the subject of cards pass for antiquarian knowledge in France, it would seem that an ass-load of useless book-learning constituted the grand qualification of a French antiquary.

With respect to Lancelot, the reader is left to determine whether the name were intended for one of the Paladins of the court of Charlemagne, or Lancelot du Lac, one of the Knights of King Arthur's Round Table. The appearance of this name on the Valet of Clubs proves that Daniel was right in his conjecture, as has been previously observed; though Mons. Leber seems to argue that he either was, or ought to have been, wrong. [248]

The name Valery, which occurs on the Knave of Hearts, has not been found on any one of the other old cards hitherto discovered; and from the circumstance of its having the letter f after it, which might be intended to signify "fecit" it might be supposed that it was the card-maker's name. It is, however, to be observed that the word "fecit" is of very rare occurrence, as signifying the work of the artist whose name precedes it, on engravings, for whatever purpose executed, of the fifteenth century. It may even be asserted, with small hazard of contradiction, that f as an abbreviation of "fecit," in its artistic application, is not to be found on a single engraving, whether on wood or copper, executed previous to the year 1500.

For whatever person the name of Valery may have been intended, it seems certain that it is not to be found as that of a distinguished character in any of the old French romances. Mons. Paulin Paris, having been consulted on this subject, thus gives his opinion, in a letter addressed to his friend, Thomas Wright, Esq., so well known for his numerous publications on Middle-Age Literature: "The name of the Valet of Hearts seems to me extremely curious, for it ought necessarily to bring to mind the name of Erart de Valeri, the famous companion of Charles of Anjou, King of Sicily, to whom his contemporaries chiefly ascribed the gain of the battle of Tagliacozza, in which Manfred [the opponent of Charles] was killed. [249] It might, therefore, be supposed that the pack [to which the four Valets in question belonged] was either of Sicilian or Italian fabrication; for the names Lancelot, Roland, Ogier, and Valeri were equally familiar to the Sicilians of the fourteenth century. I have said a few words about this Erard de Valery in the article on Charles of Anjou, in my Romancero François." [250]

Though by no means agreeing with Mons. Paulin Paris, that these cards were either of Italian devising, or manufacture, I am yet inclined to think that his conjecture about the name of Valery is correct, and that a corroboration of it is to be found in the inscription on the Valet de Pique, in the "Coursube" cards, previously noticed at page 211. This inscription is read ctarde, by Mons. Duchesne; but, to my eye, the letters, as they appear in the fac-simile given in the specimens of cards published by the Society of Bibliophiles François, appear much more like the name erarde; and if, on a careful examination of the original, it should be ascertained that this was the word intended, I should then unhesitatingly conclude that the person represented by this was Erard de Valery. The objection that one of those cards is the Valet of Hearts, and the other the Valet of Spades, is of no weight, for the old French card-makers were by no means consistent in the practice of always giving the same name to the same card. From the red rose which appears on the shield held by Valery, an Englishman might be justified in supposing that those cards, if not of English manufacture, were more especially, if not exclusively, fabricated for the English market, at a period shortly after the accession of Henry VII, [251] when the Red Rose of Lancaster had obtained the ascendency. By assuming, indeed, a small portion of French license on this subject, it might even be asserted that those cards were of English manufacture; seeing that they were discovered in the covers of a book which had formerly belonged to an English monastery, and that the features, expression, and bodily proportions of the Valets are rather characteristic of Englishmen than Frenchmen. In support of this speculation, it may further be observed that, in former times, monks were accustomed to act as their own bookbinders, and that there is reason to believe that playing cards were manufactured in England as early as 1463. [252]

In the latter quarter of the fifteenth century, several packs, or sets, of cards were engraved on copper, having the suits distinguished by figures evidently introduced according to the fancy of the artist, and bearing no resemblance to those which occur on cards of an earlier date. As the art of engraving on copper was then of recent invention, and its productions comparatively scarce and high priced, it may be concluded that those cards were chiefly intended for the amusement of the wealthier classes. Though Mons. Leber is of opinion that such cards were not intended for the purpose of play, it is yet certain that they might be so employed; seeing that they consist of the same number of suits as the common cards of the period, and have also in each suit, like the latter, a certain number of coat cards, and a certain number of others which have their value determined by the number of marks impressed on them. One of Mons. Leber's reasons for concluding that such cards were not intended for the purposes of play, is, that being delicately engraved on copper, it cannot be supposed that they were meant to receive the colouring which, in his opinion, was essential to a pack of cards. [253] It may, however, be observed that people may play very well with uncoloured cards, more especially when the suits are so strikingly distinguished as in the cards alluded to.

Perhaps the earliest specimens of the cards in question are those which have Hares, Parroquets, Pinks, and Columbines as the marks of the suits, and of which a complete pack, or set, of fifty-two pieces, is now in the Bibliothèque du Roi. [254] They are not cut up, but appear just as they came from the hands of the printer, and each separate piece of paper contains either four or six cards. The four Aces form one plate; the numeral cards from Four to Nine are contained on four plates; and the Twos and Threes appear promiscuously mixed with the coat cards on five plates more.

Circular Cards. XVth Century. (p. 222)
1

Circular Cards. XVth Century. (p. 222.)
2

Circular Cards. XVth Century. (p. 222.)
3

Circular Cards. XVth Century. (p. 222.)
4

The form of these cards is circular, and in each suit there are four coat cards, namely, a King, a Queen, a Squire, and a Knave. [255] The distinction between the two latter is not indeed very clearly expressed in the costume; though there cannot be a doubt that the lowest character is that which in each suit is represented as running, and thus plainly corresponding with the Italian Fante. The highest of the numeral cards is the Nine, there being no Ten in this pack. The respective number of each is marked at the top in Arabic cyphers, and at the bottom in Roman numerals. At the bottom also, within the outer circle of the border, are the letters T. W., probably intended for the initials of the engraver. [256] Whoever he might be, his name is unknown; and only one other subject of his engraving is noticed by Bartsch. In the annexed specimens are shown the King, Queen, and Ace of Hares; the Squire of Columbines; the Deuce and Squire of Pinks; and the Knave and Nine of Parroquets. On each of the Aces there is an inscription on a scroll, as on the Ace of Hares; on the latter, the language is low German—"Platt Duitsch"—and the words form a rhyming couplet:

The precise meaning of this it is not easy to make out; but taking the contracted word Av͞e to have been intended for Auwe, a meadow, the couplet may be thus "done into English:"

But supposing the word Av͞e to have been meant for Augen, the eyes, and giving a slight turn to one or two other words, the meaning would be that the hare was called Lepus—quasi Lippus—on account of its blear eyes.

Mons. Duchesne says that, on the plate containing the Aces, there is a date written in an old hand, but he omits to mention what it is. In the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales,' where all the fifty-two pieces are given, they are said to have been engraved about 1477. These cards, though of the same form, and having the same marks of the suits as those described by Bartsch, and noticed by Singer, are yet the work of a different engraver.

In the circular cards described by Bartsch and Singer, the inscription on the Ace of Hares is in Latin, and the initials of the engraver, T. W., are wanting. From a wrapper, of which a fac-simile is given by Singer, it would appear that those cards were engraved at Cologne; and it has been supposed that they are of as early a date as 1470. They are unquestionably the work of either a German or a Flemish artist; and some amateurs of engraving have erroneously ascribed them to Martin Schön, or Schöngauer. Bartsch, in his description of them, includes a fifth suit, namely, that of Roses; and says that each suit consisted of thirteen cards, which would thus give sixty-five pieces for the complete pack. Mr. Singer, also, in his account of such of those cards as were formerly in the collection of Mr. Douce, gives it as his opinion, that the complete pack ought to consist of five suits of fourteen cards each,—in all, seventy pieces. [257] Mons. Duchesne, however, thinks that those authors are wrong, and that the complete pack consisted of only four suits of thirteen cards each, as displayed by those preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi. But as he entirely overlooks the difficulty of accounting for a suit of Roses, engraved in the same style, he does not seem to be justified in pronouncing so decisively that Bartsch and Singer are wrong in supposing that a complete pack consisted of five suits; for it is by no means unlikely that a fifth suit might have been introduced by the artist, with a view of giving variety to the game, but which might have been subsequently discarded, as inconsistent with the old established principles of the game, and as only making it more interesting.

There is another pack, or set, of cards, also engraved on copper, and of the same period as those last described, which seems to require some notice here, not only on account of the marks employed to distinguish the suits, but also on account of the means by which those marks were repeated on the different cards. The complete pack appears to have consisted of fifty-two pieces; each of the four suits containing four coat and nine numeral cards—the place of the Ten, as in the other two packs, being supplied by a fourth coat card. The marks of the suits are: 1, Human figures; 2, Bears and Lions; 3, Deer; and 4, Birds. These cards are of large size, being about five inches and seven eighths high, by about three and a half wide. The name of the engraver is unknown; but they are believed to be the work of the German artist usually known to amateurs as "The Master of 1466." In the coat cards the mark of the suit is impressed from a different plate; and as it sometimes occurs surrounded by the work of the coat card, it has been ascertained that in such instances a blank space had been left for its subsequent impression. The marks on the numeral cards were also printed in the same manner, by means of impressions from separate plates.

In the collection of Thomas Wilson, Esq., there were twenty-nine of those cards, together with fourteen drawings of other cards of the same pack, and eleven animals on separate plates, forming the marks of the suits. [258] Those cards were purchased of Mr. Wilson by Mr. Tiffin, printseller, West Strand, who again sold them to the Bibliothèque du Roi, where others of the same pack are also preserved. Fac-similes of thirty-seven are given in the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales,' published by the Society of Bibliophiles François. In the Table des Matières prefixed to that work, it is indeed said that there are forty; but, on looking at their plate, No. 91, it will be perceived that the three coat cards there given do not properly belong to the pack in question; for the mark on two of them is a kind of flower something like a sweet-pea, and on the other it is a rose. [259] Mons. Duchesne, who appears to have supplied the Précis Historique prefixed to the work above named, should have distinctly mentioned that the three coat cards in question were not of the same pack or set, which has Human figures, Bears and Lions, Deer, and Birds, as the marks of the suits. If they really did belong to the same pack, it must then have consisted of at least six suits.

The annexed four cards, engraved on copper, are copied from specimens given by Breitkopf, in his 'Enquiry into the Origin of Playing Cards;' who there describes them as "German Piquet cards of the fifteenth century with Trappola characters." [260] The complete pack appears to have consisted of fifty-two cards; each of the four suits containing a King, Queen, and Valet, or Knave, as we term the character; together with ten numeral cards. The marks of the suits were Swords; Clubs (proper, not Trèfles); Cups; and Pomegranates. The latter mark is substituted for that of Money; and was perhaps intended by the artist to commemorate the marriage of Philip the Fair, son of the Emperor Maximilian, with Joanna, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, King and Queen of Spain; who, on their subjugation of the kingdom of Grenada, in 1497, appear to have adopted the Granada, or Pomegranate, as one of their badges. [261] The cards unquestionably belong to that period; and in support of the speculation, it may be further observed that they are generally ascribed to Israel van Mecken; who, as a native of Bocholt, was a subject of Philip, who inherited the Netherlands, in right of his mother, Mary of Burgundy.

Von Murr, in the second volume of his Journal, gives a description of a nearly complete pack of those cards, which were then in the possession of a gentleman named Silberrad, residing at Nuremberg, but which are now in the British Museum. [262] He calls them old Trappola cards, and says that they are certainly of an earlier date than the time of Israel van Mecken the younger; or rather, that they were engraved by Israel the elder. "The suits," he says, "are distinguished, after the Italian manner, by Spade; Coppe; Danari (represented by Pomegranates); and Bastoni." [263] The cards displayed in the preceding specimens are: the Deuce of Swords; the Valet of Cups; the Ten of Pomegranates; and the Ten of Clubs. In the latter, the Club seen on the banner is rough and knotty, and not an artificially-formed Baton, as is sometimes seen on old Italian cards: it has previously been observed that the Bastoni were sometimes called Colonne, from their being something like slender pillars.

Swords. (p. 227.)

Cups. (p. 227.)

Batons. (p. 227.)

Money. (p. 227.)

It would appear, from the testimony of contemporary authors, that the cards most commonly used in Italy in the latter part of the fifteenth century, were those which had Spade, Coppe, Bastoni, and Danari—Swords, Cups, Batons, and Money,—as the marks of the suits. These continued to be the common marks on Italian cards in the sixteenth century, and even to a much later period; and such also would appear to have been the marks of the cards used in Spain, from the period of their first introduction into that country, to the present day. The annexed woodcuts, copied from a plate in Breitkopf, [264] are the Sevens of each of the four suits in a pack of Tarots. The marks are precisely the same as in modern Tarots; and there is reason to believe that they are nearly the same, with respect to form, as those of the earliest Italian Tarocchi cards, properly so called.

The relation which the marks of the suits bear to each other in the three varieties of cards most generally known in Europe, will perhaps be best understood from the following summary, which shows, at one view, the names given to the suits of each variety in the country where such cards were chiefly used.

GERMAN CARDS.

German Names of the Suits.

Herzen, oder Roth. (Hearts, or Red).

Grün. (Green (Leaves).)

Eicheln. (Acorns.)

Schellen. (Bells.)

SPANISH AND ITALIAN CARDS.

Spanish Names.

Copas.Espadas. Bastos. Oros.

Italian Names.

Coppe. (Cups.)

Espadas. (Swords.)

Bastoni. (Clubs, or Batons.)

Danari. (Money.)

FRENCH CARDS.

French Names.

Cœur. (Hearts.)

Pique (Spades.)

Trèfle. (Clubs.)

Carreau. (Diamonds.)

In the oldest cards of the German and Spanish type there appears to have been no Queen. In the German pack, the second coat card was a kind of superior officer, distinguished as Ober,—Upper, Superior; while the third, corresponding with our Knave, was named Unter,—Inferior. [265] The Spaniards called the second coat card Caballo,—the Horseman or Knight;—and the Knave they called Sota, a word which, in the Dictionary of the Spanish Academy, is said to be derived from the Italian soto, signifying 'under.' [266] The Italians called their second coat card Cavallo, and the third Fante; in each of the four suits the principal coat card was the King. It would, however, appear that at an early period, the Italians occasionally substituted a Queen for the Cavallo; and if the cards formerly belonging to the Marquis Girolamo be really of so early a date as is assigned to them by Millin, [267] it would seem that the French have no just title to the "honour" of being the first to introduce a Queen as the second coat card, and that in having made "Place aux Dames," in the pack, they had only followed the example set them by the Italians.

Millin's notice of those cards is to the following effect: "In the collection of the Marquis Girolamo, at Venice, there are some cards of very early date,—about the beginning of the fifteenth century. They are larger than the ordinary cards of the present day; they are also very thick; and the material of which they are formed resembles the cotton paper of ancient manuscripts. The figures, which are impressed—'imprimées'—on a gold ground, consist of three Kings, two Queens, and two Valets, one of the last being on horseback. Each figure has a Baton, a Sword, or a piece of Money [as the mark of the suit]. The design is very like that of Jacobello del Fiore; but the work has the appearance of impression, and the colours seem to have been applied by means of a stencil. They are the most ancient specimens of their kind." [268]

As the names, Clubs and Spades, given to two of the suits in this country, by no means correspond with the marks by which they are distinguished,—to wit, the French Trèfle and Pique—I am inclined to consider them as the old names for the suits of Bastoni and Spade; Clubs being merely a translation of Bastoni, and Spades probably a corruption of Spade, or Espadas,—Swords. [269] From these names, indeed, it may be fairly supposed that the cards first known in England were those having Swords, Clubs, Cups, and Money, as the marks of the suits; and that two of those suits retained their names when the old cards of Spanish or Italian type were superseded by those of more recent French design. There are also other circumstances which strengthen the conclusion, that cards, on their first introduction into England, as a popular game, were brought either from Spain or Italy; the character of the third coat card, the Knave, or Jack, is more in accordance with the Spanish Sota, or the Italian Fante, than with the French Valet, which, in the earliest French cards, always bears the name of some person of note, either in romance or history. The term Valet, at the time when it was first bestowed on the third coat card by the French, did not signify a "Gentleman's Gentleman" or a menial servant; but was more especially applied to young noblemen—the "Dilecti Regis"—holding appointments at court. The term Knave was never applied, like Valet, to signify a courtier, or person of distinction; it was used to signify a serving-man of low condition. It seems to be derived from the same root as the German Knabe, the primary meaning of which is a Boy, but which was also used, in the same way as the Latin Puer, to signify a servant. Subsequently the term Knave became obsolete in the sense of servant, and was exclusively applied to designate a dishonest person. The term Jack, another name for the Knave of cards, was in former times very frequently applied to a "serving-man of low degree," without any regard to the name which might have been given to him by his godfathers and godmothers.

Though Dr. Johnson, and most other English lexicographers, derive the term Jackanapes from Jack and Ape, and though this derivation seems to be supported by the meaning attached to the term by one of the earliest writers who makes use of it, yet "Jack-a-Naipes," that is, Jack of Cards, is at least as probable an etymology; and much more so than that of "Jack Cnapa," suggested by Sharon Turner, in his 'History of England,' from which the following passage is extracted.

"In the British Museum, Vesp. B, 16, is a ballad written at this time on the catastrophes of the Duke of Suffolk and his friends. (Temp. Henr. VI, May, 1450.) It treats these horrors with an exulting levity, which shows the barbarous unfeelingness of political rancour; but it is curious for giving the names of those friends of the government who were most hated by the people. They are the clerical statesmen who were employed either in the offices of government or on its embassies, and it shows how much the dominant church had, by these employments, become identified with the crown. It designates the Duke of Suffolk by the cant term of 'Jac Napes,' and is perhaps the earliest instance we have of the abusive application of the word Jackanapes. Our lexicographers derive this word from Jack and Ape; but the ballad shows, that Napes was a term of derision signifying a Knave; and must therefore be the Saxon Cnapa, which bore also this meaning. This will explain the reason why our third figured card is called Jack, and also Knave. The word Jackanapes therefore seems to be Jack Cnapa, and to mean Jack the Knave. In this sense it is applied to Suffolk; and as the Knave is next in power at cards to the King and Queen, the nickname may be used in the ballad with an allusion to Suffolk's being the prime minister of Henry and Margaret." [270]

The following are two of the stanzas of the ballad in which the term occurs:

Mr. Turner's remark, that "the ballad shows that Napes was a term of derision, signifying a Knave, and must therefore be the Saxon Cnapa," does not appear to be well founded; for if it were derived from Cnapa, and merely signified a Knave, or Cheat, it is difficult to conceive why it should be written Napes, and not Knave, or Knape, as required, according to Mr. Turner's etymology; besides, it is evident from the context, that, in the mind of the writer, the idea of a Jac Napes was associated with that of a monkey, or an ape, with his clog and his chain. That this was not the primary signification of the term, may be confidently asserted; and no writer who has derived it from Jack and Ape, has produced any authority to show that it originally meant a man who travelled about with apes or monkeys. In the following passage, from a tract printed about 1540, [271] the term "Yack an napes" evidently refers to a mummer or buffoon in a particoloured dress, like that of a knave of cards. The writer, after having noticed the assembling of the poor on holidays, at the "personis barne," [272] and there committing "ydolatre in mayntenynge his ambision, pride, and bestly lyvinge," thus proceeds: "Nobyl statis were better to hunte the bull, here, hert, or ony othere thynge lyke to suckure the powre with the mette, then to here Sir Jhon Singyl Sowle stombel a payer of mattens in laten, slynge holy water, curse holy brede, and to play a caste lyke yack an napes in a foles cotte." When John Bale, in his work entitled, 'Yet a Course at the Romish Foxe,' speaks of Jack-a-Naipes "swearing by his ten bones," it would seem that he in some manner or other associated the term with the Jack-a-Naipes, or Jack of Cards; for his ten bones can only be supposed to relate to the numerical value of the Jack of Naipes, as a coat card. In Bale's time a "card of ten" would appear to have been a general expression for a coat card, as well as for a card distinguished by that number of pips.

From the following passage in Pulci's 'Morgante Maggiore,' it would seem that, in Italy, in the fifteenth century, the King of cards was occasionally referred to as the type of a presumptuous person:

In Scotland, about 1508, the Knave of cards was the representative of a forward impertinent person,—a very Jack-a-Naipes,—as is evident from the "Flyting of Dunbar and Kennedy," where the latter, among other bad names, calls the former "Valet of cards":

"Waik walidrag, and verlot of the cairtis." [273]

Even in modern times the Knave of Hearts has been referred to as the ideal of a presumptuous, thickset little man, as appears from the following passage which occurs in the second edition of Brockett's Glossary, 1829, under the word Purdy.

"Purdy, a little thickset fellow.—I owe this word," says Mr. Brockett, "to the communication of a clerical friend in the county of Durham, who first heard it at Barnard Castle. On ascertaining the meaning, the following dialogue took place.

Q. What does Purdy mean?

A. A little throstan-up thing like a Jack at Warts. [Jack o' 'Arts,—Jack of Hearts.]

Q. What's that?

A. Something like a lime-burner.

Q. What is a lime-burner?

A. Oh, nobbut a Kendal stockener.

Q. What is that?

A. A little thickset fellow."

If cards were actually known in Italy and Spain in the latter part of the fourteenth century, it is not unlikely that the game, as a common amusement, was introduced into this country by some of the English soldiers who had served under the banners of Hawkwood, and other Free Captains, in the wars of Italy and Spain, about the period in question. But, however this may be, it seems at least certain that the earliest cards commonly used in this country, were of the same kind, with respect to the marks of the suits, as those used in Italy and Spain.

The German cards of the fifteenth century, and even of a much later period, display more of fanciful embellishment than the cards of other countries; more especially in the numeral, or low cards; which, in addition to the "pips," or marks of the suits, frequently contain figures of men and women, quadrupeds, birds, foliage, and such like, introduced by way of ornament, at the caprice of the designer. These ornamental appendages are frequently of a grotesque character, and sometimes indecent. The two annexed figures are the second coat cards of the suits of Grün and Eicheln,—Leaves, and Acorns,—in a pack of German cards engraved on wood, of the date 1511. The figures are drawn with great freedom, and are much in the style of Lucas Cranach. On the Two of Acorns are the letters F.C.Z.; the F and the C being probably the initials of the designer, and the Z signifying that he made the drawings,—zeichnet. On the Two of Leaves are two shields suspended from a tree; the one displays two strait swords, in saltire; and the other the arms of the house of Saxony, the same as are frequently seen in wood engravings designed by Lucas Cranach. In a third shield at the bottom of the same card, are a pic-kaxe and mallet, in saltire, the same as in Dr. Stukeley's cards, and probably the mark of the card maker. Thirty-six cards of this pack, which appears to have originally consisted of fifty-two, are preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi; and fac-similes of them are given in the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales,' published by the Society of Bibliophiles Français, planches 92-95.

Specimens of a pack of cards designed by Erhard Schön, and engraved on wood, are given by Singer in his Researches. In this pack, the marks of the suits are Flowers, Pomegranates, Leaves, and Roses. [274] These cards are very inferior, both in design and execution, to those just described, of the date 1511. Erhard Schön flourished about 1530. About 1550, Virgil Solis engraved a pack of cards on copper, with Lions, Apes, Peacocks, and Parrots as the marks of the suits: they are noticed by Bartsch, in his 'Peintre-Graveur'; and six of the pack were recently in the possession of Messrs. Smith, of Lisle street.

The best of all the fanciful cards that appeared in Germany during the sixteenth century, are those engraved on wood from the designs of Jost Amman. They were published at Nuremberg in 1588, in a quarto volume, with illustrative verses, in Latin and German, composed by J. H. Schroter, the imperial poet-laureate. [275] From the following verses,—'Liber de Seipso,'—it would seem that those cards were not designed for the purposes of play:

In this set of cards, the marks of the suits are Books; Printers' inking balls; Wine-cups, of metal "formed by the skill of the goldsmith;" and Goblets, with bosses of glass or earthenware. Correct and beautifully executed specimens of those cards are given in Singer's 'Researches,' pp. 180-96.

Bells. (p. 239.)

Hearts. (p. 239.)

Leaves. (p. 239.)

Acorns. (p. 239.)

The four annexed German cards, are the Sevens of the four suits: Schellen; Herzen, oder Roth; Grün; Eicheln,—Bells; Hearts, or Red; Green, or Leaves; and Acorns. They are copied from Breitkopf, and are of the seventeenth century. The four small ones given below are of the same period, and were probably intended for the amusement of children,—like the "pretty little cards for pretty little fingers," manufactured at the present day. The subjects are, the second Coat card and the Three of Leaves; the Four of Acorns; and the Six of Hearts.

As small bells were worn as ornaments by the emperors of Germany and the higher classes in the 12th and 13th centuries, Breitkopf is inclined to think that bells might have been introduced on cards as a distinctive mark of the class of kings and nobles; and that cards might even have been known in Germany at the period referred to. In corroboration of his opinion, he gives a plate, entitled "Alte Deutsche Furst Schellen-tracht,"—that is to say, Ancient German Princely Bell-costume,—containing four figures, all adorned with small bells. The first figure is that of the Princess Wulphilde, who was living in 1138; the second and third represent the Emperor Henry VI, who died in 1197; and the fourth is that of the Emperor Otho IV, who died in 1218. [276] —Breitkopf's conjecture is undeserving of remark: had he asserted that his old German emperors and princes were adorned with bells to indicate their rank and precedence, in the manner of leading packhorses, he would perhaps have been as near the truth.

The tinkle of the bell rouses the questing spirit of Mons. Leber, who pursues the inquiry with singular ardour and perseverance, though not with success. His researches, however, on the subject of bells, though throwing not a glimmer of light on the history of cards, are yet so amusing, that they are here given entire, notes and all. They also furnish an additional proof of the wide field afforded for speculation by the history of cards.

"After the Fou of European Tarots, the Bells on Indian cards are another proof of the Oriental origin of the game. The use of bells in India, whether as a mark of distinction and greatness, or as a means of diversion, is of remote antiquity; while everything shows that they were not known to the ancient nations of Europe. The Baladins and female dancers of India have their legs decked with small bells, which they shake when dancing; and certain idols are decorated with the same ornament; girdles formed of bells are also worn by infants, without any other clothing; and sometimes a single bell supplies the place of the girdle. Herbert relates that 'as this bell contains a viper's tongue, it might be supposed to be annoying and disgraceful. It is, however, neither the one nor the other, for it is made an ornament, and it is esteemed one of their most superb, when given by the king to a person whom he wishes to honour.' [277] —We have already said that the use of bells for various purposes is of great antiquity; and a proof of this is furnished by the Pentateuch. [278] Bells appear to have passed from the Hebrews to the Arabs, and to have been with these two nations the same as we see them to have been in India, a sign of distinction and power, when not prostituted to the use of the Baladins. An English author, who has not been unmindful of the remarks of Calmet, [279] mentions, in the following terms, a kind of devotion paid to the bell among the Arabians: 'The Arabian courtesans, like the Indian women, have little golden bells fastened round their legs, neck, and elbows, to the sound of which they dance before the king.—The Arabian princesses wear golden rings on their fingers, to which little bells are suspended, as in the flowing tresses of their hair, that their superior rank may be known, and they themselves receive in passing the homage due to them.' [280]—Such are bells in the East: let us now see what they have been in Europe at different periods.

"The Emperor Henry IV, who died in 1197, and Wulphilde, the wife of Count Rodolph, living in 1138, are represented in ancient monuments in habits ornamented with bells similar to those which are seen on Tarots. It would seem that this singular ornament, which subsequently became the attribute of the buffoon, or professional jester, was then a mark of dignity in the West as well as in the East, and that it held a conspicuous place amongst the distinctive ornaments of the princes and nobles of Germany, from the eleventh to the thirteenth century. [281] Some English critics, however, have supposed that the bell indicated falconry, [282] a sport which the high nobility only had the privilege of indulging in; and it is certain that small bells were attached to the feet of trained falcons. [283] But the question is, did the bells stand for the falcon, and was the falcon, indeed, a mark of high nobility?

"What renders this conjecture probable is, that we find the use of the small bell [grelot] established in the West before the introduction of heraldic signs, and that we have no evidence of its having been known to the ancient Greeks and Romans. [284] As the bell was used in falconry by princes and nobles of the first class, it might thus become the emblem of the falcon, and, subsequently, that of the nobility to whom it was confined. The falcon, and things pertaining to falconry, were certainly among the marks of grandeur with which the sovereigns and barons of the middle ages loved to surround themselves in their formal displays, and which alone were sufficient, in the same manner as armorial bearings, to indicate the rank of the persons to whom they belonged. In the tapestry ascribed to Queen Matilda, Harold is seen travelling with his falcon on his fist; and the Count Guy de Ponthieu, who conducts him prisoner to Beaurain, carries also his bird in the same manner, although he, doubtless, had no thought of the chase. [285] Besides, sceptres are surmounted with three-branched fleurons, like those which form the ornament on the top of a falcon's hood. [286] We also see hawks and falcons on ancient tombs; and it is not unlikely that they were there placed as indications of rank before the introduction of armorial bearings. The same conventional distinctions were still in existence in much more recent times; for Anne de Montmorency made his entry into London as ambassador of Francis I, preceded by twenty-six gentlemen of the best houses of France, each bearing a falcon on his fist; [287] and even our kings themselves, on occasions of grand display, were preceded by their falconers fully equipped. Falconry was not known to the ancients; but it is certain that it was in use among the nations of the North before the conquest of the Gauls by the Franks. Sidonius Apollinaris commemorates the skill of a person named Vectius in the art of training dogs, horses, and birds of prey: "In equis, canibus, accipitribus instituendis, spectandis, circumferendis, nulli secundus." [288]

"The question, however, would still be, 'if bells were used in falconry at so early a period?' and it may be presumed that they were not so used until long afterwards. German princes, as referred to by Breitkopf, are decorated with them as marks of high birth, on monuments from the eleventh to the thirteenth century. Now, it was just towards the close of the eleventh century, that the intercourse between Europeans and Orientals became more extended by means of the crusades; and the invention of heraldry is of the same period. Armorial bearings, which originated in over-sea expeditions and in tournaments, are not of higher antiquity than the eleventh century; their use became more frequent in the twelfth; and, in the thirteenth, we find them generally established. [289] From the concurrence of these circumstances, it may be concluded that bells of this kind were brought into Europe from the East, towards the end of the eleventh century; and, that on their first introduction, the German nobility adopted them as marks of distinction, either from the idea of grandeur attached to them by the people from whom they had them, or on account of the noble bird to whose use they had dedicated them; and that this mark of nobility fell into disuse when heraldry could supply its place by signs better adapted to gratify the pride of the great, on account of their indicating, at the same time, both rank and personal distinction. The Bayeux tapestry, already referred to as the work of Queen Matilda, seems to confirm this opinion. The conquest of England by William Duke of Normandy was achieved in 1066; and the tapestry representing it is supposed to be of the same century: and of this there could be no doubt, if it were true that the work was executed by the wife of William, and her attendants. [290] It may thus have been worked about twenty or thirty years before the first crusade, which was determined on at the council of Clermont, held by Urban II, in 1095. Now, the birds of chase which some of the persons in this tapestry carry on their fist, have no bells at their feet. We perceive there only the jesses, or leathern strings with tassels at the ends, which serve to retain the bird. [291] These jesses, without any appearance of bells, are easily to be distinguished in the compartment which contains the inscription, Dux Willelm: Cum Haraldo: Venit: Ad Palatin. If this be not evidence that bells of this kind were not then common in Europe, it is at least a proof that they were not then used in falconry, although this sport had been practised for several centuries." [292]

Mons. Leber calls both Spanish and German cards Tarots, even though they may contain no Atous; which yet appear to have been the very pieces which were more especially distinguished as Tarocchi or Tarots; and from the use of which, in combination with other cards, a particular kind of game was called Tarocchino, or Tarocchio. Thus, in consequence of his not sufficiently distinguishing between Spanish and German cards, he speaks of the marks which occur on them indiscriminately; and explains Swords and Money as if they belonged to the same pack which has one of its suits distinguished by Bells. His account of the marks on the French cards is to the following effect. "The Cœur explains itself; it is a symbol of the most noble and generous sentiments, and more especially indicates courage, valour, and intrepidity, qualities the most brilliant in princes. The Trèfle has its name from its resemblance to the plant so-called; though properly it is a Flower, or rather a Fleuron with three branches, symbolical of the mysterious number Three, which, in ancient times, was regarded with religious veneration. This number being the first which contained in itself the principal characteristics of numbers,—namely, Unity and Plurality, Odd and Even,—became the symbol of a union of the most excellent virtues, such as Power, Wisdom, Love; and, by analogy, Sovereignty, Wisdom, Justice. It is this three-branched Fleuron which appears on the monuments of the French kings of the first and second race; but, in consequence of its being badly designed and worse understood, it became confounded with the heraldic Fleur-de-Lis, and is in fact now displaced by it. The Carreau seems to have been better understood by the French than their neighbours, with whom this figure is a jewel, a precious stone, an ornamental article. The English take it for a diamond, and the Spaniards, for a jewel worn by ladies, or for the decoration of the toilet. Their error has doubtless arisen from the comparison which they made between the Carreaux of cards and the figures of precious stones which they had before their eyes. [293] The diamonds and precious stones forming the ornaments of royal vestments, and of dresses of court ladies, have usually the form of carreaux, and are painted in vermilion, or in carmine in the manuscripts of the middle age; and this conventional form, having been adopted by heralds, was introduced into armorial bearings as the macle and lozenge. The Carreaux of cards, however, have no connexion with diamonds and precious stones, any more than they have with the quarrells or square-headed arrows of a crossbow. The Carreau, as well as each of the other marks of the suits, is a symbol, and not a rebus. All iconographers represent Fortune as standing, upon one foot, on a wheel or a ball, to signify her instability. The contrary idea was necessarily attached to the figure of a square or a cube, considered as a firm and immoveable base. It was for this reason that the ancients placed the figure of Wisdom and Firmness on a cube; and Aristotle speaks in the same sense when he informs us that a true philosopher ought to be square,—carré—that is to say, immoveable in courage and virtue. Heraldry has also admitted the square, placed lozenge-wise, as an emblem of Constancy and Firmness; and the Squares of cards, called Carreaux, can only be supposed to have the same signification. As to the Pique, there can be no doubt with respect to its meaning. It represents the head of a lance, and is thus an emblem of military force. The Germans, however, seem to have misconceived the character of this figure, which they converted into a Leaf,—Grün; [294] —but this mistake, or rather this difference, may be ascribed to the imperfection of the painting in ancient cards; and more especially to the coarseness of the first essays of wood-engraving, in which it was almost impossible to distinguish the figure of a leaf from that of a pike-head. On comparing the earliest German cards with shields of arms, of the same period, and with old wood-engravings which contain trees, it will be immediately seen how easy it was to confound the two forms. There is no difference between the Piques of cards and the leaves of the tree on the right of the woodcut of St. Christopher of the date 1423; and the Crequier [295] of heraldry is precisely the same as the seven of Pique [296] in German cards of the fifteenth century. But whatever may have been the cause of this anomaly, it is generally admitted that the Pique in French cards is the figure of a weapon; and it can scarcely be doubted that it was the equivalent of the Sword in the Tarots. In this respect the Spanish and Italian nomenclature is in perfect accordance with our own. In the southern parts of Europe the French Pique is La Picca or La Spada."

Thus, according to Mons. Leber, the four suits of French cards have the following signification: Cœur, valour, greatness of soul; Trèfle, wisdom and justice united with power; Carreau, firmness, stability, constancy; Pique, physical force, or the power of the military. The suits, again, may be considered as representing four monarchies, or political societies; namely, Cœurs, governed by a generous and courageous prince; Trèfles, by a sovereign just, wise, and powerful; Carreaux, by a king consistent in principle, and decided in action; and Piques, by a warlike prince, who owes his power to his arms.

Though Mons. Leber has freely censured Daniel for writing on the subject of cards chiefly from books, without referring to cards themselves, he is yet exceedingly prone to follow Daniel's example; and though his explanation of the symbolical meaning of cards be less extravagant than the latter's account of the origin and signification of the game of Piquet, it can scarcely be called more reasonable; since both writers interpret the marks on the cards according to their own conceit. The one informs us that the Trèfle signifies that a general ought only to encamp in a place which affords plenty of fodder for his cavalry; and the other says that the Carreau, which, as it stands, in the cards, seems the very emblem of instability, signifies firmness, stability, constancy; an interpretation which seems to rest chiefly on the ingenious hypothesis of the Carreau being an emblem of the cube.

The variations which occur on cards from the commencement of the sixteenth century, either as regards the marks of the suits or the names of the coat cards, throw no light on their origin; as such variations have evidently been introduced merely at the caprice of the card-maker in accordance with the prevalent taste of the period. In a pack of French cards, engraved by Vincent Goyraud, in the time of Henry IV, all the coat cards appear in the costume of the period; though the Kings and Valets still display in their dress that variety of colour which is to be seen on cards of an earlier period, but which, at that time, appears to have been out of fashion. Such cards would appear to have been in common use in England in the early part of the reign of James I. In Rowland's 'Knave of Hearts,' first printed in 1612, the Knave, in his supplication to the card-makers, complains of the pie-bald suits which he and his fellows are compelled to wear. [297] In the pack referred to the names and designations of the Coat cards are as follows:

The Valet de Court has his hat under his arm; the Valet de Chasse holds a dog in a leash; the Valet d'Eté carries a large flower; and the Valet de Noblesse bears a hawk on his fist. The mark of the card-maker appears on two of the Valets, namely, on the Valet of Cœur, and on the Valet of Pique. A pack of those cards is preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi; and fac-similes of the Kings, Queens, and Valets, in their proper colours, are given in the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales,' published by the Society of Bibliophiles Français. From those fac-similes the outlines of the four Valets here given have been copied.

Valet de Cour. (p. 250.)

Valet de Chasse. (p. 250.)

Valet de Été. (p. 250.)

Valet de Noblesse. (p. 250.)

In the same work are given fac-similes of coat cards executed in the reign of Louis XIII, and displaying the costume of that period. The names given to the Kings, Queens and Valets on those cards are: Cœur, Alexandre, Pentasilee [Penthesilea], Roland. Carreau, Cirus Major, Roxane, Renault. Trèfle, Ninus, Semiramis; the name of the Valet wanting. [298] Pique, Jule Cæsar, Pompeia, Roger. Each of the Aces is surrounded with an ornamental bordering; and at the foot is an inscription, which, when read consecutively, through all the four, is as follows: "Vive le Roy | Vive la Reyne | J'ayme l'Amour | Et la Court."

Some of the specimens of Portuguese cards given in the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales' have very much the appearance of having been originally suggested by, if not copied from, an Oriental type; more especially in the suits of Danari and Bastoni,—Money and Clubs. In those cards the circular figure, generally understood as representing Danari, or Money, is certainly much more like the Chakra, or quoit of Vichnou, as seen in Hindostanee drawings, than a piece of coin; while on the top of the Club there is a diamond proper, which is another of the attributes of the same deity. The dragon seen on each of the Aces is perfectly Oriental in character; and the shields which appear on the Kings and Queens are very much like those which are to be seen in Hindostanee drawings. The coat cards in this pack are King, Queen, and Horseman; and the suits are Coppe, Danari, Bastoni, and Spade—Cups, Money, Clubs proper, and Swords. The Queen, which here appears as the second coat card, is of unusual occurrence in cards of this kind, and more especially in such as are of Spanish or Portuguese manufacture. [299] In two of the suits,—Clubs and Swords,—the Queen appears in the act of encountering a dragon. The coat cards and aces have letters both at top and bottom, indicating the suit, and the rank or name of the card. Specimens of those cards, which appear to have been executed in 1693, are preserved in the Bibliothèque du Roi. The four annexed cuts show the outlines of the four Valets. The letters CC, CD, CB, CS, signify respectively the Caballo, or Chevalier of Coppe, Danari, Bastoni, and Spade.

The most remarkable changes that cards have undergone, with respect to the characters displayed on them, are to be found in certain packs manufactured at Paris in the time of the Revolution. Specimens of the coat cards of two of those packs engraved by Chossonnerie and Gayant, in 1793-4, are given in the 'Jeux de Cartes Tarots et de Cartes Numérales.' In one of them the places of the Kings are occupied by four Philosophers, namely, Molière, La Fontaine, Voltaire, and J. J. Rousseau; the Queens are substituted by the four Virtues, Prudence, Justice, Temperance, and Fortitude; while the Valets are superseded by four Republicans, one of whom is a grim-looking ruffian, with a red cap on, and his shirt-sleeves turned up, brandishing a pike; the second is a soldier armed with a musket; the third an artilleryman; and the fourth a young man, in fancy costume, armed with a musket. In the other pack, four Sages, Solon, M. P. Cato, J. J. Rousseau, and J. J. Brutus, serve instead of Kings; four Virtues, as in the other pack, represent the Queens; though with this difference, that Temperance is displaced by Union; while four "Braves,"—Annibal, Horatius, P. Decius Mus, and M. Scævola, supply the place of Valets.

Another pack of Republican cards of the same period is thus described by Peignot, in his 'Analyse de Recherches sur les Cartes à jouer.'

"For Kings we have Genii; for Queens, Liberties; and for Valets, Equalities. In place of the King of Hearts there is the Genius of War,—'Génie de la Guerre.' This Genius, which is winged, is seated on the breech of a cannon; he holds in the right hand a sword and a wreath of laurel, and in the left, a shield, round which is the inscription, 'Pour la République Française.' On the right, read vertically from the top, is the word 'Force.' At the feet of the Genius are a bomb, a lighted match, and a heap of bullets. At the bottom of the card is the inscription, 'Par brevet d'invention. Naume et Dugouec, au Génie de la Rép. franç.'

"For the Queen of Hearts: 'Liberté des Cultes,'—Religious Liberty. This is a female seated, very badly draped, and with her legs bare. She holds a pike surmounted with a red cap; and on a bannerol attached to the pike are the words 'Dieu seul.' Towards her feet are seen three volumes, inscribed 'Thalmud,' 'Coran,' and 'Evangile.' The vertical inscription is, 'Fraternité.'

"Knave of Hearts: 'Égalité des Devoirs,'—Equality of Duties. This is a soldier seated on a drum, with his musket between his knees. In his left hand he holds a paper containing the words, 'Pour la patrie.' The vertical inscription is 'Sécurité.'

"King of Spades: 'Génie des Arts,'—the Genius of Arts. The figure of Apollo with a red cap on his head; in one hand he holds the Belvedere statue of himself, and in the other a lyre. The vertical inscription: 'Goût.' At the bottom, emblems of painting, sculpture, and such like.

"Queen of Spades: 'Liberté de la Presse,'—Liberty of the Press. A female figure with a pen in one hand, and with the other sustaining a desk, on which lies a roll of paper partly unfolded, and displaying the words 'Morale, Religion, Philosophie, Physique, Politique, Histoire.' At the bottom, masks, rolls of manuscript, and such like.

"Knave of Spades: 'Egalité de Rangs,'—Equality of Ranks. The figure of a man whose costume accords rather with that of a 'Septembriseur' than with that of a mere 'Sans-culotte' of the period. He wears sabots, and has a red cap on his head. He has no coat on, and his shirt-sleeves are tucked up to the elbows. His small-clothes are loose at the knees, and his legs are bare. He is seated on a large stone, on which is inscribed: 'Démolition de la Bastille. 10 Août, 1792.' Under his feet is a scroll inscribed 'Noblesse,' and displaying shields of arms. The vertical inscription is 'Puissance.'

"King of Clubs: 'Génie de la Paix,'—Genius of Peace. In his right hand he holds the 'Fasces' and an olive branch, and in the left a scroll containing the word 'Lois.' The vertical inscription is 'Prospérité.'

"Queen of Clubs: 'Liberté du Mariage,'—Liberty of Marriage. The figure of a female holding a pike surmounted with the red cap; and on a scroll attached to the pike is the word 'Divorce.' The vertical inscription is 'Pudeur.' On a pedestal is a statue of the crouching Venus entirely naked,—without doubt intended for the emblem of Modesty.

"Knave of Clubs: 'Egalité de Droits,'—Equality of Rights. A judge in tricolor costume, holding in one hand a pair of scales, and in the other a scroll containing the inscription 'La loi pour tous.' He is trampling on a serpent or dragon, the tortuous folds of which represent legal chicanery. The vertical inscription is 'Justice.'

"King of Diamonds: 'Génie du Commerce,'—the Genius of Commerce. He is seated on a large bale, which contains the inscription 'P. B. d'inv. J. D. à Paris.' In one hand he holds a purse, and in the other a caduceus and an olive-branch. The vertical inscription is 'Richesse.' At the bottom are an anchor, the prow of a ship, a portfolio, and such like.

"Queen of Diamonds: 'Liberté des Professions,'—Liberty of Professions and Trades. A female figure who, in the same manner as the other three Liberties, holds a pike surmounted with the red cap. With the other hand she holds a cornucopiæ and a scroll containing the word 'Patentes.' The vertical inscription is 'Industrie.'

"Knave of Diamonds: 'Egalité de Couleurs,'—Equality of Colours. The figure of a Negro, seated, and leaning upon a musket. Below is the word 'Café.' Near to him are a sugar-loaf, a broken yoke, fetters, iron collars for the neck, and such like. The vertical inscription is 'Courage.'

"Such are the coat cards of this Republican pack. The numeral cards are the same as the old ones, with the exception of the Aces, which are surrounded by four fasces placed lozenge-wise, with these words: 'La Loi. Rép. Franç.;' the whole coloured blue. It is scarcely necessary to say that those ridiculous cards had not even a momentary vogue." [300]

The coat cards of a Republican pack, of recent American manufacture, have been forwarded to me by a friend, resident at New York. From the name of the maker,—R. Sauzade,—which occurs on the Ace of Spades, I am inclined to think that their invention is to be ascribed rather to a Frenchman than to an American. For the Kings we have: Hearts, Washington; Diamonds, John Adams, the second President of the United States; Clubs, Franklin; Spades, La Fayette. For the Queens: Hearts, Venus,—modestly concealing her charms with a mantle, in accordance with American notions of delicacy. Diamonds, Fortune; Clubs, Ceres; Spades, Minerva. The Knaves are represented by Four Indian chiefs. The figures appear to be engraved on copper, and are coloured. The marks of the suits are the same as those on the cards in common use in England. Those cards, I am informed, are held in no estimation by the card-players of America, who continue to prefer those of the old pattern.—The chief town in America for the manufacture of cards is Boston; whose discreet, meeting-going people seem to have no objection to make a profit by supplying the profane with the instruments of perdition.

No cards of an "instructive" character have ever obtained popularity amongst regular card-players; for when people sit down to play at cards they do not like to have their attention withdrawn from the game by the historical or biographical reminiscences suggested by Coat cards, either containing portraits of distinguished characters, or commemorating remarkable events; and least of all can they bear that the heads of a sermon or moral lecture should be presented to them in the shape of the four cardinal virtues; which are just as appropriate in a pack of cards as they would be on the proscenium of her Majesty's Theatre.

The best of the costume cards that I have seen are those designed by Armand Houbigant, a French artist, who named them "Cartes Royales," and obtained from Louis XVIII, a license to manufacture them for general use, in 1818. They did not, however, acquire any vogue, and are now seldom to be met with, except in the collections of amateurs of prints. The coat cards, which are etched, and delicately coloured by hand, display the costume of the French Court at four different periods. The characters represented are as follows.

Spades. King, Charlemagne, "Carolus Magnus;" crowned, and seated on a throne, with a globe in the right hand, and a long sceptre in the left.—Queen, Hildegarde, second wife of Charlemagne; erect, crowned, and holding a book in her hands.—Knave, Roland, described in romances as the nephew of Charlemagne; and said to have been killed at the battle of Roncevalles in 778; holding a spear and shield, and clothed in armour, which appears rather to belong to the sixteenth century than to the time of Charlemagne.

Diamonds. King, Louis IX, "Sainct Loys;" crowned, seated on a throne, wearing a blue robe powdered with fleurs-de-lis, and having a sceptre in his left hand.—Queen, Blanche de Castille, wife of Louis VIII, and mother of St. Louis; erect, crowned, and holding a rosary in her right hand.—Knave, Sire de Joinville, the biographer of Louis IX, and one of the nobles of his court; clothed in chain-mail, over which is a surcoat of arms.

Clubs. King, Francis I; seated, wearing the broad bonnet in which he is usually represented, and holding a sceptre.—Queen, Marguerite de Valois, Queen of Navarre, sister of Francis I; erect, holding a rose in her right hand.—Knave, Bayard; in plate-armour, leaning on a kind of pedestal on which is inscribed "Sans peur, sans reproche."

Hearts. King, Henry IV; seated, holding a sceptre, and wearing the characteristic hat and feather which, in modern times, are designated by his name.—Queen, Jeanne d'Albret, mother of Henry IV; erect, holding a fan in her right hand.—Knave, Sully; bald and bearded, as he is usually represented in engravings, holding in his right hand a paper inscribed "Economie Roy. [301] ..."

A set of Picture Cards, published by Cotta, the bookseller of Tubingen, in one of his Card Almanacs—'Karten Almanach'—is noticed by Mons. Peignot. The designer has chosen for the coat cards the principal characters in Schiller's Joan of Arc, and has clothed them, as well as he could, in the costume of the period. The King of Hearts is Charles VII; the Queen, Isabella of Bavaria; the Knave, La Hire.—The King of Clubs is the English commander, Talbot, dying; the Queen, Joan of Arc; the Knave, Lionel, taking away the sword of Joan of Arc.—The King of Diamonds is Philip, Duke of Burgundy; the Queen, Agnes Sorel; the Knave, Raimond, a villager.—The King of Clubs is Réné of Anjou, with the crown of Sicily at his feet; the Queen, Louise, sister of Joan of Arc; and the Knave, Montgomery, on his knees, and weeping. The low cards from 1 to 10 also contain fanciful designs; but with the subjects so arranged that the numbers and marks of the suits can be readily distinguished. The subject of the Four of Clubs is an illustration of Burger's ballad of Leonore—Death armed, and mounted on horseback, appears to be threatening with his dart a young woman who rides behind him; the scene is laid in a churchyard, and a skeleton appears crawling towards an open grave. The mark of the suit is seen on four crosses in the churchyard. Cotta's Card Almanack first appeared in 1806, and was continued for several years. It was published as a small pocket volume of a square form; and the illustrations consisted entirely of fanciful cards,—the mark of the suit being always introduced into each subject, either by hook or by crook. The designs for the cards in the first four volumes, from 1806 to 1809 inclusive, are said to have been made by a lady.—Numerous packs of fancy cards have appeared in Germany since the commencement of the present century; some displaying costume, ancient and modern; some representing eminent characters, and others devoted to the illustration of trades and professions. In one of them, published at Frankfort-on-the-Maine, in 1815, in memory of the principal military events of 1813-14, the Duke of Wellington figures as the Knave of Diamonds, and Marshal Blucher as the Knave of Clubs.

In 1811 two different packs of caricature cards, imitated, or rather adapted, from the picture-cards in Cotta's Almanack, appeared in England. The one was published by S. and J. Fuller, Rathbone place, London; and the other, by Jones, at the Repository of Arts, Market hill, Cambridge. Neither of those packs was intended for the purposes of play. They have very much the appearance of having been designed by the same artist. On the wrapper of both packs the inscription is the same: "Metastasis. Transformation of Playing-cards."—A set of costume cards was published by Ackermann, in the 'Repository of Arts,' in 1806: a particular description of them would be just as interesting as a description of the plates in 'La Belle Assemblée' of the same period.

A pack of cards published by Baker and Co., in 1813, requires more particular notice. On the wrapper they are entitled "Eclectic Cards;" and in a pamphlet giving an account of them, they are announced as "Complete, Grand, Historical, Eclectic Cards, for England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales; being a Selection or an Eclectic Company of Twelve of the most eminent Personages, that ever distinguished themselves in those respective Countries, for Heroic deeds, Wisdom, &c. And the other Forty Cards descriptive of the Local and National Emblems of the Four Nations.

These cards, which are considerably larger than those in common use, display considerable skill and fancy in the designs, and are beautifully coloured. Hearts and Diamonds are retained as marks of two of the suits; but Acorns are substituted for Clubs; and instead of Spades there is a "true representation of the real Spata, which is not a coal-heaver's spade, but a two-edged heavy sword, without a point, as used by the ancient Britons to fight with; cut, hew, and slash down, either enemy or tree. So says our ancient history." A fac-simile of this formidable weapon is here subjoined, in order that the reader may judge for himself of its peculiar fitness for cutting, hewing, or slashing down. It has very much the appearance of a heavy cast-metal article, new from the Carron foundry, and of modern Gothic design. In the descriptive pamphlet, the coat cards are thus explained:

"FOR ENGLAND.

King of Clubs.—Arthur, the Great and Victorious Hero, King of Britain.

Queen of Clubs.—Elizabeth, the Wise and Virtuous Queen of England.

Knight of Clubs.—Sir John Falstaff, the Facetious Knight, and companion of Henry V, Knight of England.

FOR IRELAND.

King of Hearts.—Gathelus, the Grecian Prince, King of Ireland.

Queen of Hearts.—Scotia, his Wife, the Egyptian Princess, Queen of Ireland.

Knight of Hearts.—Ossian, the Warrior and Poet, Son of Fingal, Knight of Ireland.

FOR SCOTLAND.

King of Diamonds.—Achaius, the fortunate Contemporary, and in alliance with Charlemagne, King of Scots.

Queen of Diamonds.—Mary Stuart, the unfortunate Dowager Queen of France, and Queen of Scots.

Knight of Diamonds.—Merlin, the Magic Prophet, Cabinet Counsellor to Vortigern, Aurelius Ambrosius, Uter Pendragon, the Father of King Arthur, and to King Arthur, who was his Pupil, Knight of Scotland.

FOR WALES.

King of Spata.—Camber, the third Son of Brute, King of Cambria.

Queen of Spata.—Elfrida, the beautiful Queen of Mona, and of the Mountains.

Knight of Spata.—Thaliessin, the Welch Bard and Poet, dressed like a Herald or King at Arms of the Divine and Ancient Druids, as he sang to King Henry II of the great deeds of Arthur, the justly termed hero of the British Isle, Knight of Cambria."

"In the selection which we have made," say the proprietors, "to form our set of court cards, we have chosen them from among those characters who have rendered themselves most conspicuous in the history of the United Kingdom. In this particular, we have had recourse not only to historical truth, which we have rigidly observed, but we have taken care to fix upon personages, who lived at different periods, and which are calculated in colour, variety of dress, and characteristic features, to form an agreeable and elegant contrast, and to avoid that unpleasant monotony which must have taken place if they had all been selected from the same period of time; and it will be a peculiar gratification to us, in our attempts to form a set of cards, should we contribute in the smallest degree, to augment the elegant and rational amusements of taste and fashion.

"Nor have we been inattentive to minor objects in our anxiety to complete the plan. We believe it has never been attempted to be explained why the coarse and vulgar appellation of knave, was originally given to the card next in degree to the queen. Perhaps the following demonstration is the most plausible way in which it can be accounted for. It was usual with kings in ancient times to choose some ludicrous person, with whose ridiculous and comical tricks they might be diverted in their hours of relaxation, from the cares and formalities of royalty. This person was generally chosen from among men of low condition, but not wholly destitute of talent, particularly in that species of low cunning and humour calculated to excite mirth and laughter, and the tricks of knavery (in which he was allowed free indulgence in the presence of the king), gave him the appellation of the king's fool, or knave.

"Whether this explanation be really the origin from whence the knave in the old cards is derived, may still remain undetermined, but it appears to us the most rational way of accounting for it. Nor is it indeed essential to our present purpose; the name of knave in our opinion is vulgar, unmeaning, and inconsistent, and being moreover absolutely incompatible with the dignity of our characters, and the uniformity of our plan, we have entirely rejected it, and substituted a knight in its stead. This being a title of honour, not only in immediate succession to that of king and queen, but is ever considered as an honorable appendage to royalty itself."

About 1819, a set of cleverly drawn satirical cards, with the marks of the suits introduced in the same manner as in Cotta's cards, appeared at Paris. Their satire is directed against the political party then in the ascendant; and in the Nine of Hearts, portraits of Chateaubriand and other persons, both lay and clerical, are introduced as advocates of the old order of things; in the background are the ruins of the Bastille, and at the foot is the inscription, "Les Immobiles." The coat cards of the suit of Hearts consist of figures representing three popular journals: King, "Constitutionnel,"—a figure in Roman costume, with sword and shield, defending a column inscribed: "Charte constitutionnel. Liberté de la Presse. Liberté Individuelle. Loi des Elections. Tolérance." Queen, "Minerve,"—Minerva putting to flight certain evil spirits of the "Partie Prêtre."—Knave, "Figaro,"—the character in proper costume. The coat cards of Spades are: King, "Conservateur,"—a Jesuit with a sword in one hand, and a torch in the other. Queen, "Quotidienne,"—an old woman holding in her left hand a book inscribed, "Pensée Chrétienne quotidienne;" and in her right an extinguisher, which she is about to clap upon a figure of Truth seen emerging from a well. Knave, "Bazile,"—figure of Chateaubriand, in clerical costume, but concealing a Jesuit's cap under his robe; beside him is a braying ass, on its knees. Clubs: King, "Débats,"—the Editor endeavouring to carry two large bags, the one inscribed, "Débats" and the other "Empire:" in the distance, two asses mutually caressing each other. Queen, "Gazette,"—a hard-featured old lady, with a pen in her hand, at a writing table: near to her a magpie in a cage. Knave, "Clopineau,"—the figure of Talleyrand; towards the top are the signs of the political zodiac which he had already passed through. In the only pack which I have had an opportunity of examining, the Queen of Diamonds is wanting. The representative of the King is the "Moniteur,"—a brazen head on a kind of pedestal, round which are stuck flags of various colours, indicative of the different parties whose cause the paper had advocated. Knave, "Don Quichotte,"—the Don, with shield and lance, attacking a windmill: the person intended by this figure I have not been able to discover. [302]

With respect to the common names of the first three numeral cards,—Ace, Deuce, and Tray,—it may be observed that the term Ace or As is common in almost every country in Europe as the designation of the One at cards; [303] and that the terms Deuce and Tray, signifying Two and Three, may have been derived either from the Spanish Dos and Tres, or from the French Deux and Trois. The Deuce of cards, it may be observed, has no connexion with the term Deuce as used in the familiar expression "to play the Deuce;" in which it is synonymous with the Devil, or an evil spirit, and is of Northern origin. In some parts of the country, the Deuce, though lower in value, is considered to be a more fortunate card than the Tray; and "There's luck in the Deuce, but none in the Tray," is a frequent expression amongst old card-players, who like to enliven the game with an occasional remark as they lay down a card. In Northumberland, the Four of Hearts at Whist is sometimes called "Hob Collingwood," [304] and is considered by old ladies an unlucky card. As far as memory can trace, according to Captain Chamier, in his novel entitled the 'Arethusa,' the Four of Clubs has been called by sailors the "devil's bedpost." In Northamptonshire, according to a writer in the 'Gentleman's Magazine,' 1791 (p. 141), the Queen of Clubs is called "Queen Bess," and the Four of Spades, "Ned Stokes." [305]

In various parts of Ireland, but more particularly in the county of Kilkenny, the Six of Hearts is known by the name of "Grace's card;" and it is said to have acquired that name from the following circumstance. A gentleman of the name of Grace, being solicited, with promises of royal favour, to espouse the cause of William III, gave the following answer, written on the back of the Six of Hearts, to an emissary of Marshal Schomberg's, who had been commissioned to make the proposal to him:—"Tell your master I despise his offer; and that honour and conscience are dearer to a gentleman than all the wealth and titles a prince can bestow."

The Nine of Diamonds is frequently called the "Curse of Scotland;" and the common tradition is that it obtained this name in consequence of the Duke of Cumberland having written his sanguinary orders for military execution, after the battle of Culloden, on the back of a Nine of Diamonds. This card, however, appears to have been known in the North as the "Curse of Scotland" many years before the battle of Culloden; for Dr. Houstoun, speaking of the state of parties in Scotland shortly after the rebellion of 1715, says that the Lord Justice-Clerk Ormistone, who had been very zealous in suppressing the rebellion, and oppressing the rebels, "became universally hated in Scotland, where they called him the Curse of Scotland; and when the ladies were at cards playing the Nine of Diamonds, (commonly called the Curse of Scotland) they called it the Justice Clerk." [306]

In the 'Gentleman's Magazine' for 1786, a correspondent offers the following heraldic conjecture on the subject. "There is a common expression made use of at cards, which I have never heard any explanation of. I mean the Nine of Diamonds being called the Curse of Scotland. Looking lately over a book of heraldry, I found nine diamonds, or lozenges, conjoined,—or, in the heraldic language, Gules, a cross of lozenges,—to be the arms of Packer. Colonel Packer appears to have been one of the persons who was on the scaffold when Charles the First was beheaded, and afterwards commanded in Scotland, and is recorded to have acted in his command with considerable severity. It is possible that his arms might, by a very easy metonymy, be called the Curse of Scotland; and the Nine of Diamonds, at cards, being very similar, in figure, to them, might have ever since retained the appellation." Another correspondent says that he has always understood that the application of the expression, "the Curse of Scotland," to the nine of diamonds was not earlier than the year 1707; and that he thinks it more probable that the nine lozenges in the arms of the Earl of Stair, who made the Union, should have given rise to the phrase, than the arms of Packer. In the same Magazine, for 1788, we have "One more conjecture concerning the Nine of Diamonds." It is syllogistic in form, and appears to have been intended as a clinch to the controversy. [307] "The Curse of Scotland must be something which that nation hate and detest; but the Scots hold in the utmost detestation the Pope; at the game of Pope Joan, the Nine of Diamonds is Pope; therefore the Nine of Diamonds is the Curse of Scotland. Q. E. D."

In the 'Oracle, or Resolver of Questions,' a duodecimo volume, printed about 1770, the following solution is given, which is perhaps as near the truth as any of the preceding conjectures. "Q. Pray why is the Nine of Diamonds called the Curse of Scotland? A. Because the crown of Scotland had but nine diamonds in it, and they were never able to get a tenth."

The word Trump, signifying a card of the suit which has the superiority at certain games, such superiority being determined by hazard, is derived either from the French Triomphe, or the Spanish Triunfo: at cards, these words have precisely the same meaning as the English Trump. [308] With the French, Triomphe is also the name of a game at cards; and in England the old game of Ruff seems also to have been called Trump or Triumph. [309] At Gleek, the Ace was called Tib; the Knave, Tom; and the Four, Tiddy. The Five and Six appear to have been respectively called Towser and Tumbler, and to have counted double when turned up. At All-Fours, the Knave appears in his proper character of Jack,—a serving-man, not a cheat, or rogue.

At certain games the Knave of Clubs is called Pam. A few years ago the name was applied to the celebrated public character whom Byron is supposed to have designated as "a moral chimney-sweep," in one of the cantos of Don Juan. [310] Most of the terms in the game of Ombre are Spanish.

Formerly a pack of cards was usually called a "Pair of cards;" and it appears deserving of remark, that the Italians use the word Pajo, which properly signifies a pair, in precisely the same sense when applied to a pack of cards,—Pajo di carte. In the time of Queen Elizabeth a pack of cards appears to have been sometimes called a bunch. In the time of Charles II the term "Pair of Cards" fell into disuse; and perhaps one of the latest instances of its employment, is to be found in Poor Robin's Almanac for 1684, under the month December, where the writer, in his introductory verses, laments the decline of good housekeeping in the houses of the rich:

The French call a pack of cards "Un Jeu de cartes,"—a game, or play of cards; and the German name, "Ein Spiel Karten" has the same literal meaning as the French.

As the object of this work is not to teach people how to play at cards, those who wish for information, with respect to the different games, are referred to Cotton's 'Complete Gamester,' Seymour, Hoyle, and the Académie des Jeux,—taking with them this piece of advice:

With respect to the manufacture of cards, it would appear to have been a regular business, both in Germany and Italy, about 1420; but, though it has generally been asserted that the earliest cards for common use were engraved on wood, there is yet reason to believe that they were at first executed by means of a stencil; and that the method of engraving the outlines on wood was of subsequent introduction. However this may be, it is certain that the art of wood-engraving was at an early period applied to the manufacture of cards, and that in Germany, in the latter quarter of the fifteenth century, the term Briefdrucker, or Briefmaler,—card-printer, or card-painter—was commonly used to signify a wood-engraver. From the importation of playing cards into England being prohibited by an act of parliament in 1463, as injurious to the interests of native tradesmen and manufacturers, it might be concluded that at that time the manufacture of cards was established in this country. No cards, however, of undoubted English manufacture of so early a date have yet been discovered. In the sixteenth century, there is reason to believe that most of the cards used in England were imported either from France, or the Netherlands. In the reign of Elizabeth the importation of cards was a monopoly; [312] but from the time of her successor James I, it would appear that most of the cards used in this country were of home manufacture. From the reign of Charles II to the present time, cards have, either directly or indirectly, been subject to a duty.

In France, by an ordonnance dated 21st February, 1581, a tax of "un ecu sou" was ordered to be paid upon each bale of cards of two hundred pounds weight intended for exportation; and, by an ordonnance of the 22d May, 1583, a tax of "un sou parisis" was laid upon each pack of cards intended for home use. By an ordonnance of the 14th January, 1605, the exportation of cards was prohibited; but, as a compensation to the manufacturers, the duty on cards for home consumption was reduced. As the collection of the duties was rendered difficult in consequence of the manufacturers residing in so many different places, it was, at the same time, determined that the only places where the manufacture of cards might be carried on, should be Paris, Rouen, Lyons, Toulouse, Troyes, Limoges, and Thiers in Auvergne. Shortly afterwards, the same privilege was accorded to Orleans, Angers, Romans, and Marseilles; and, by way of recompense to other places, it was determined that the tax should be expended in the encouragement of manufactures. Louis XV, having established the Ecole Militaire, in 1751, ordered that the money raised by the tax on cards, should be applied to its support. The company, or guild, of card-makers of Paris was suppressed in 1776, but re-established a few months afterwards. The period of their first establishment appears to be unknown. In their statutes of the year 1594, they call themselves Tarotiers. [313] In Russia, at the present day, the manufacture of cards is a royal monopoly. A few months ago a paragraph appeared in the Literary Gazette, stating that though 14,400 packs were manufactured daily, yet the supply was unequal to the demand, and that a petition had been presented to the emperor praying for a more liberal issue. In Mexico a considerable revenue was derived from a tax on cards; and it would appear to be still productive, notwithstanding the unsettled state of the country, as it is one of those which have been appropriated, ad interim, by the American commander-in-chief.

Most of the cards engraved on copper are merely "cartes de fantaisie," designed rather for the entertainment of the more wealthy classes, than for the ordinary purposes of play. Until a comparatively recent period the coat cards, after having been printed in outline from wood blocks, were coloured by means of stencils; but at present, in this country, the colours are all applied by means of the press. The following account of the manner of making cards at the manufactory of Messrs. De La Rue and Company, of London, is extracted from Bradshaw's Journal, No. 24, 16th April, 1842.

"The first object that engages our attention, is the preparation of the paper intended to be formed into cards. It is found that ordinary paper, when submitted to pressure, acquires a certain degree of polish, but not sufficient for playing-cards of the finest quality. In order therefore that it may admit of the high finish which is afterwards imparted, the paper is prepared by a white enamel colour, consisting of animal size and other compounds. This substance, which renders the paper impermeable to the atmosphere, is laid on by a large brush, and left to dry by exposure to the atmosphere.

"The paper being ready for use, we proceed to explain the printing of the fronts of the cards, which are technically distinguished as pips and têtes.

"To commence with the simpler, the pips (i.e. the hearts, diamonds, spades, and clubs:)—sets of blocks are produced, each containing forty engravings of one card; and as the ordinary method of letterpress printing is employed, forty impressions of one card are obtained at the same moment. As the pips bear but one colour, black or red, they are worked together at the hand-press, or at one of Cowper's steam printing machines.

"For the têtes, however (i.e. the court cards), which, with the outline, contain five colours—dark blue, light blue, black, red, and yellow,—a somewhat different contrivance is employed. The colours are printed separately, and are made to fit into each other with great nicety, in the same manner as in printing silks or paper-hangings. For this purpose a series of blocks are provided, which, if united, would form the figure intended to be produced. By printing successively from these blocks, the different colours fall into their proper places, until the whole process is completed. Great care is of course necessary in causing each coloured impression to fit in its proper place, so that it may neither overlap another, nor leave any part imprinted upon; but as the hand-press is employed, the workman is enabled to keep each colour in register by means of points in the tympan of the press or on the engraving.

"The whole operation of printing at the press being completed, the sheets are next carried to drying-rooms, heated to about 80° Fahrenheit, and are allowed to remain there three or four days, in order to fix the colours.

"The successful printing of playing-cards greatly depends upon the quality of the inks which are employed. The common printing ink, even after the lapse of years, is liable to slur or smutch. In the manufacture of playing-cards, such inks only must be used as will bear the friction to which the cards are subjected in the process of polishing, as well as in passing between the fingers of the players. The colours employed by the Messrs. De La Rue are prepared from the best French lamp-black, or Chinese vermilion, ground in oil;—this is effected by a machine, consisting of cylinders revolving at regulated speeds, by which any defects from the inattention of the workman, in grinding by hand, are avoided. These colours are now brought to such perfection, that the card itself is not more durable than the impression on its surface.

"The paper intended for the backs, being previously prepared with the colour desired, in the same manner as the fronts, is printed in various devices at the hand-press or steam-machine. The plaid or tartan backs are produced from a block engraved with straight lines, and printed in one colour, which is afterwards crossed with the same or any other colour, by again laying the sheet on the block, so that the first lines cross the second printing at any required angle. A variety of other devices are obtained from appropriate blocks; and some, like the court cards, and by the same process, are printed in a number of colours.

"In printing gold backs, size is substituted for ink; the face of the card is then powdered over with bronze dust, and rubbed over with a soft cotton or woollen dabber, by which the bronze is made to adhere to those parts only which have received the size. The printing of gold backs is usually executed after the card is pasted, but we have described the process here for the sake of convenience.

"As connected with the printing of backs, we may mention that the Messrs. De La Rue have lately taken out a patent for printing from woven wire, from which some highly beautiful patterns are obtained, bearing, of course, a perfect resemblance to the woven fabric. The wire when prepared for printing, is merely fastened at the ends by two pieces of wood, and stretched over a cast-iron block, on which it is fixed by means of screws passing through the wood into the iron. The variety of these patterns is very great; the printing is effected in the ordinary manner.

"Hitherto we have been referring to printed sheets of paper, which are either the size of double or single foolscap; the next object, therefore, is the conversion of these sheets into card-boards of the usual thickness. In France the card generally consists of two sheets of paper; but in England a more substantial article is demanded; it is generally four sheets thick, that is, the foreside and the back, and two inside leaves of an inferior description.

"In order to make a firm and smooth card, it is first necessary to obtain a paste of an equable well-mixed substance. A paste of this quality is produced from flour and water, mixed together, and heated to the boiling point, in a forty-gallon copper, by steam; which is made to pass into the interstices between the copper and an external casing of cast-iron, of the same shape as the boiler. By employing steam, instead of fire, the paste is not liable to burn, or adhere to the sides of the copper, and thus become deteriorated in its colour and quality.

"Previous to the commencement of pasting, it is necessary that the sheets be arranged in the order in which they are to be pasted. This operation is termed mingling. The insides, which are merely two sheets of paper pasted together, are placed between the foresides and backs, so that the paste may take them up without the possibility of error. A heap of paper so pasted will therefore uniformly consist of the foreside and back, between which, the inside, pasted on each side, is placed.

"The paste is laid on by means of a large brush, resembling the head of a hair-broom, with which the workman, by a series of systematic circular movements, distributes a thin coat. And by way of illustration of the long practice and manual dexterity which are necessary for perfection in even the simplest departments of art or labour, it may be worthy of notice that card-pasting is in itself a branch of labour, and that three or four years' practice is necessary to render the operator complete master of his business.

"These newly-pasted cards are then, in quantities of four or five reams at a time, subjected to the gradual but powerful pressure of a hydraulic press of one hundred tons, worked by a steam-engine. By this means the water in the paste exudes, and the air between the leaves is expelled, which would otherwise remain, and give the card a blistered appearance.

"After remaining a short time in the press, they are hung up on lines to dry; and to prevent, as much as possible, their warping while in this limpid state, small pins or wires are passed through the corners, and are then dexterously bent over the lines in the drying-room.

"The card-boards, after thus drying, are subjected to the pressure and friction of a brush-cylinder,—the face of which is covered with short thickset bristles, which not merely polish the surface, but even penetrate into the interstices. At this stage of the manufacture, cards of a superior description are waterproofed on the back with a varnish prepared for the purpose, so that they may not be marked by the fingers in dealing. When so prepared, they will keep perfectly clean, and may even be washed, without injuring the impression or softening the card.

"In continuation of the process of polishing, the card-boards are passed between revolving rollers of moderate warmth, one being of iron, the other of paper cut edge-ways; they are next subjected to two bright iron-faced rollers; and finally, to the number of ten or fifteen at a time, they are interleaved with thin sheets of copper, and effectually milled by being passed about a dozen times between two large and powerful cylinders. After being thus thoroughly polished, for the purpose of being flattened they are subjected to the pressure of a hydrostatic press of eight hundred tons, worked by steam.

"It may appear surprising that so much labour and machinery, and such circuitous means—requiring the operation of four distinct cylindrical machines, as well as a hydraulic press, all worked by steam,—should be required for effecting an object apparently so simple as that of polishing and flattening a card-board. It is, however, found that this end cannot be attained in a more expeditious manner, but that the means adopted must be gradual, though increasingly powerful in their different stages.

"The boards being printed and pasted, polished and flattened, are next cut up into single cards. The apparatus by which this is effected, and by which perfect exactness in the size of the cards is preserved, may be briefly described as a pair of scissors from two to three feet long, one blade of which is permanently fixed on the table. The card-board, being placed upon the bench, is slipped between the blades of the scissors, and pushed up to a screw-gauge adjusted to the requisite width; the moveable blade, by being then closed, cuts the card-board into eight narrow slips, called traverses, each containing five cards. These traverses then undergo a similar operation at a smaller pair of gauge-scissors, where they are cut up into single cards, to the amount of thirty thousand daily.

"All that now remains is the making-up into packs. After assorting the cards, the workman begins by laying out on a long table a given number (say two hundred) at one time; he then covers these with another suit, and so on consecutively until he has laid out all the cards that constitute a pack; so that by this operation two hundred packs are completed almost simultaneously. The best cards are called Moguls, the others Harrys, and Highlanders,—the inferior cards consist of those which have any imperfection in the impression, or any marks or specks on the surface.

"It may be necessary to remark that the Aces of Spades are printed at the Stamp Office, whether the cards be for exportation or for the home market,—the paper for printing being sent to the Stamp Office by the maker; and an account of the number of aces furnished by the Stamp Office is kept by the authorities. Before cards are delivered by the manufacturer an officer is sent to seal them, and a duty of a shilling per pack is paid monthly for those that are sold for home consumption. But as they are not liable to duty when intended for exportation, the card-maker enters into a bond that they shall be duly shipped, and an officer is sent to see them put into the case, and to seal it up."

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?

"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.

• Act of Parliament, of 1463, prohibiting the importation of cards, 96.—Acts to protect gamesters who play on credit, 147; the reason of their partial repeal, 148.
• Advice to professional card-players, 270.
• Alea, a general term for play; supposed to include cards, 61.
• Almanac, Cotta's card, 259; the Perpetual, or Gentleman-Soldier's Prayer Book, 321.
• Amadeus VIII, Duke of Savoy, forbids gaming in 1430, 80.
• Ames, William, 129; preaches against cards and dice at Cambridge in 1610, 281.
• Amman, Jost, his designs in a book of trades, 84; cards of his designing, 238.
• Anderson's History of Commerce, 96.
• —— Christopher, Annals of the English Bible, 109, 112.
• —— R., Ballads in the Cumberland dialect, 185.
• Anson, Lord, the circumnavigator, caricatured as a gamester, 181.
• Anstis's History of the Garter, 18.
• Arabian Nights, cards not mentioned in, 46.
• Aretine, Pietro, his Carte Parlanti, 194, 207.
• Assembly-rooms devoted to dancing and cards, 185.
• Astragali, 11.
• Avatars of Vichnou, 38.

• Bacon, Lord, his inquisitive spirit excited when a boy by a juggling trick with cards, 118.
• Baker's chronicle, 108.
• Baker and Co.'s eclectic cards, 261.
• Bale, John, uses the word Jack-a-Naipes, 233.
• Balmford's, James, tract concerning the unlawfulness of games of hazard, 129, 279.
• Barbeyrac's Traité du Jeu, extracts from, 282-94, 310.
• Barrington's, the Hon. D., Observations on the Antiquity of Card-playing in England, 18, 46, 65, 107, 132, 145, 160.
• Barrois, J., on the proper meaning of the name Gringonneur, 76.
• Bartsch's Peintre-Graveur, 200, 223.
• Basset, prohibited by Louis XIV, 147.
• Battle of the Reed Swire, 113.
• Bells, an ornament of dress, 240.—Leber's researches on the subject, 240-5.
• Bernardin, St., his address to the citizens of Bologna, 90.
• Bibliophiles Français, specimens of cards published by, 190, 201, 236, 250-3.
• Blacksmith's coat of arms, 6.
• Bonds, voluntary, to abstain from gaming, 79.
• Bras-de-fer, his moral exposition of a pack of cards, 320, 324.
• Brietkopf's Inquiry into the Origin of Playing Cards, 7, 26, 225, 227, 239.
• Briefe, the German name for cards, 26.
• Briefmaler, 84.
• Brunet, the younger, his note prefixed to a 'Notice Bibliographique sur les Cartes à jouer,' 100, 326.
• Bullet's Recherches Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer, 27-8.
• Buoninsegni's, Father Thomas, Discorso del Giuoco, 90.
• Bussi's History of Viterbo, 23, 73.

• Cabinet du Roi de France, cited, 111.
• Capability of cards as a subject of disquisition, 2.
• Capistran, John, his discourse against gaming at Nuremberg in 1452, 91.
• Card-playing at Bologna in 1423, 90.
• —— in Germany in the fifteenth century, 92.
• Card-playing common in England as a Christmas game about 1484, 97.
• —— in Scotland, 98, 110, 113.
• —— at Rhodes in 1498, 99-100.
• —— in Ireland and Spain, about 1590, 114-15.
• —— in the reign of James I, 125.
• —— in the reign of Charles II, 146-9.
• —— in the reign of Queen Anne, 165.
• —— in the reign of George II, 170-80.
• —— in the reign of George III, 186.
• Cards.—Hindostanee, 32-50.
• —— Chinese, 55-9.
• —— old stencilled, in the British Museum, 88.
• —— Heraldic, 150. Historical, 153. Mathematical, 155. For carving, 156. Satirical, 157-9.
• —— old painted, ascribed to Gringonneur, 195-8.
• —— Dr. Stukeley's, 205.
• —— old French, 211, 214.
• —— old German, engraved on copper, 220-6.
• —— engraved on copper, ascribed to Israel van Mecken, 226.
• —— German, engraved on wood, 1511, 236.
• —— French, of the time of Henry IV, 250.
• —— Portuguese, of the date 1693, 251.
• —— French Republican, 253-6.
• —— American, 256.
• Caricatures in the reign of George II, 181.
• Cartas (Epistolæ) from Carthage, 26.
• Cartes, chartæ, cards, probable etymology of, 20, 22.
• Carving, cards teaching the art, 156.
• Castillo's, Diego del, Satyra contra los Tahures, 115.
• Catharine of Arragon, wife of Henry VIII, a card-player, 107.
• Cervantes' Comical History of Rinconete and Cortadillo, 115.
• Charta, paper, probable etymology of, 24.
• Chaturanga, the Hindostanee name for chess, 16.
• Cheating at cards, trial on the subject, 296.
• Chess, said to have been invented by an Indian, 13.
• Chesterfield, the Earl of, a card-player, 173.
• Chinese cards, 55-9.
• Christie, James, his inquiry into an ancient Greek game, 13.
• Clubs for gaming, 170.
• Cole's, Dr. loss of his commission, 327.
• Collier, Jeremy, on gaming, 312.
• Colours of the ground of the Hindostanee cards, 17, 35, 36, 37.
• Comedy devised on the game of cards, 122.
• Controversy on the lawfulness of playing at cards and other games of chance, 128, 279.
• Cook's, Aurelian, Titus Britannicus, 145.
• Cotta's Card Almanacs, 259.
• Cotton's Complete Gamester, 159.
• Counting and guessing, 11.
• Covelluzzo's account of the introduction of cards into Viterbo, 23, 73.
• Cuffe, secretary to the Earl of Essex, his fortunes told by cards, 119.
• Curse of Scotland, 266-8.
• Cyprian, St., his treatise, de Aleatoribus, 61, 290.

• Daniel's, Père, Origine du Jeu de Piquet, 4, 209, 265.
• Dictionary of the Spanish Academy; its sanction of a conundrum as an etymology of Naipes, 23.
• Dominotiers, an old name for engravers and colourers of woodcuts, 87.
• Ducange's glossaries, 63, 99.
• Duchesne's, Observations sur les Cartes à jouer, and Précis Historique, 65, 99, 189, 204, 206, 210, 225.
• Dunbar's, Wm., poems, 110; Valet of cards, 234.
• Dutch names of the suits of cards, 230.

• Elizabeth, Queen, a card-player, 120.
• Engravings, a series of, improperly called Tarocchi cards, 199-204.
• Epitaph on Beau Nash, 173; on a noble gambler, 297.
• Equity, natural, how to be enforced in games of hazard, 287.
• Evelyn's Memoirs, 146.
• Exchequer, derivation of the word, 16, 21.

• Fante, the Italian name for the Knave of cards, 229.
• Fierge, the Pherz of Persian chess, 14.
• Fleur-de-lis, on coat cards, and in the compass, 7.
• Foreign Quarterly Review, article on Whist, 36.
• Formschneider, a wood-engraver, as distinguished from a card-painter, 83.
• Forret, Thomas, his objections to the manner in which many of the Scottish clergy, about 1539, spent their tithes, 111-12.
• Fortune, the gambler's goddess, 11.
• Fortune-telling by cards, 116-19.
• Four Kings, a name given to cards, 19.
• Franklin, Dr., his definition of man, 1.
• Freret on the origin of chess, 14.
• Furny card, explained, 109.

• Game, the first played at, 9.
• Games at cards in 1709, 159. Before the time of Charles II, 160.
• Games, various, enumerated by Taylor, the water-poet, 163.
• Games, three different species of, 294.
• Gaming, excessive, of the French clergy, about 1580, 111.
• Gammer Gurton's Needle, cards mentioned in, 109.
• Gataker, Thos. B. D., on Lots, 129, 279.
• Gebelin, Court de, finds in cards an abstract of Egyptian learning, 5; his explanation of the word Tarocchi, 189.
• Geiler, John, his remarks on card-playing about 1508, 100.
• Geographical cards, 150.
• German cards, names of the suits, 228.
• Gittern, guitar, derivation of the word, 25.
• Goethe's Götz von Berlichingen, 61.
• Gough's Observations on the Invention of Cards, 22.
• Goyraud, Vincent, a French card-manufacturer, of the time of Henry IV, 249.
• Grace's card, 266.
• Gregory, Dr., reply of, respecting cards, 77.
• Gringonneur, Jac., paints cards in 1393, 76.
• Guevara's epistles translated into French by Gutery, 66.
• Guilleville's, William de, Pelerinaige de l'Homme, 69.
• Güldin Spil, 74.
• Gungefu, the name for cards among the Moslems, in Hindostan, 41.

• Heineken's Idée générale d'une Collection d'Estampes, 15, 27, 82, 228.
• Helgen, a name given to woodcuts in Suabia, 87.
• Heller's History of Wood-engraving cited, 91, 93.
• Henry VII, a card-player, 98.
• Henry VIII, Act of Parliament against card-playing, 108.
• Henry, Prince of Wales, son of James I, a card-player, 125.
• Heraldic cards, 150-2.
• Herrera relates that Montezuma took pleasure in seeing the Spanish soldiers play at cards, 106.
• Hieroglyphics, 6.
• Hindostanee cards, 33-52.
• Historical cards, relating to the Popish plot, and the death of Sir E. Godfrey, 153-5.
• Homer, his notice of the games of Petteia and Astragali, 12.
• Houbigant's Cartes Royales, 257.
• Hoyle, Edmond, his treatise on Whist, 162, 170.
• Hume, David, apostrophised as a whist-player, 160.
• Hycke-Scorner, cards mentioned in, 108.
• Hyde, Dr. T., De ludis orientalibus, 16, 265.

• Ingilby, Sir Wm., his examination on the trial, Lord De Ros versus Cumming, 295.
• Ingold, a Dominican friar, author of the Güldin Spil, 74.
• Injunctions to the clergy, 1559, against card-playing, 121.
• Interpolations of the word Cartes, in old MSS., 67-71.
• Isis, the horned, the original of the Virgin with the crescent on her head, 5.
• Italian names of the suits of French cards, 207.

• Jackanapes, the probable etymology of the word, 231-5.
• Jack at Warts—Jack o'Hearts, 235.
• James IV of Scotland a card-player, 98.
• James I of England a card-player, 126.
• Jansen's Essai sur l'Origine de la Gravure, 67.
• Jeux de Cartes, Barrington's opinion of the signification of the term, 78.
• Johanneau, Eloi, on the etymology of Naipes, and the invention of cards, 27-30.
• Johnson, Dr. Samuel, his opinion of card-playing, 302.
• Jones, Sir Wm., on Chess, 15-17.
• Jonson, Ben, his device for Abel Drugger's sign, 6.
• Juggling tricks with cards, 118.
• Junius, F., his explanation of the word Quartes, 22.
• Justus, Pascasius, his work on gaming, 115, 174, 271.

• Kartenmacher at Augsburg in 1418, 81; at Ulm, 82.
• Knave, the original meaning of the word, 231.

• Lassale, Antoine de, author of the Chronicle of Jehan de Saintré, 68.
• Latrunculi, 12.
• Leber's, M. C., Etudes Historiques sur les Cartes à Jouer, 8, 23, 73, 85, 103, 132, 155, 211-13, 217, 220, 240-9.
• Le Normand, Mlle., the Parisian fortune-teller, 324.
• Leo X, a trick of his at cards, 174.
• List of specimens of cards published by the Society of Bibliophiles Français, Appendix, No. 1, 331.
• List of works relating to cards, Appendix, No. 2, 334.
• Locke, John, his opinion of card-playing, 302.
• Lookup, the gamester, 173-6.
• Loyola, St. Ignatius, wins, miraculously, at billiards, 292.
• Lusty Juventus, cards mentioned in, 108.
• Lyly, John, represents Cupid and Campaspe playing at cards, 123.
• Lyndsay, Sir David, satirises the card-playing of the clergy in Scotland, about 1535, 110.

• Machiavelli on Fortune, 10.
• Madden's, Sir F., Privy-purse Expenses of the Princess Mary, daughter of Henry VIII, 109.
• Magasin Pittoresque, article on cards in, 71.
• Manners in the time of Charles II, 143; George II, 176.
• Manufacture of cards, extensive in Germany about 1450, 82; at Venice, 1441,194; in England, 131, 166, 272.
• Mappa, its ancient meaning, 29.
• Margaret, daughter of Henry VII, found playing at cards by her affianced husband, James IV of Scotland, 98.
• Marks of the suits of cards, 206.
• Martius, Galeottus, speculates on the meaning of the marks of the suits, 93.
• Mary, the Princess, daughter of Henry VIII, afterwards queen, a card-player, 109.
• Mary, daughter of James II, afterwards queen, a card-player, 146.
• Mazarine, Cardinal, played at cards when dying, 310.
• Mecken, Israel van, cards supposed to be engraved by, 226.
• Meerman's reference to the chronicle of Petit-Jehan de Saintré, 68.
• Menestrier's, Père, Bibliothèque curieuse et instructive, 3, 76, 80, 151, 191.
• Meré, the Chevalier de, submits certain questions to Pascal respecting chances at play, 157. [See the treatise on Probability, by Lubbock and Drinkwater, published by the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, p. 12; 41-50.]
• Merrels, the game of, 13.
• Meursius, de Ludis Græcorum, 5.
• Millin's description of the Marquis Girolamo's cards, 229.
• Morelli's chronicle, 73.
• Moxon's cards for carving, 156; astronomical cards, 157.
• Murner's Chartiludium, or logical card-play, 101-5.
• Murr's, C. G. von, Journal, 75, 81, 85, 133, 226.
• "Murry neet," in Cumberland, 185.

• Nabob, the meaning of the word, 22.
• Naibi, and Naipes, speculations on the name as applied to cards, 22-9.
• Names of the suits of Hindostanee cards, 41-2; of German, Spanish, Italian, and French cards, 228.
• —— given to coat cards, 208, 211, 215.
• —— of particular cards, 265-9.
• Nash, Beau, his reign at Bath, 171.
• Nine of Diamonds,—the Curse of Scotland, 266-8.
• Noctes Ambrosianæ., extract from, relative to card-playing, 303.

• Ombre, Barrington's conjecture as to the time of its introduction into England, 145.
• —— Pope's description of, frequently praised, 167.
• One-and-thirty, a popular game at cards in Ireland and Spain, 115.

• Pair of Cards, the old name for a pack, 269.
• Pam, the Knave of Clubs, 269.
• Pamphlets with titles borrowed from the game of cards, 138.
• Paris, Mons. Paulin, his collation of MSS. of Wm. de Guilleville's poem of the Pilgrimage of Man, 70; his conjectures respecting the name Valery on a Knave of cards, 218.
• Parson, the, that loved gaming better than his eyes, 321.
• Paston, Margery, mentions cards as a Christmas game, about 1484, 97.
• Peignot's Analyse de Recherches sur les Cartes à jouer, 20, 69, 81, 253-6, 259, 265.
• Pepin, Nicolas, said to be the inventor of cards, 23.
• Pepys's Diary, 146.
• Perlimpimpim, the by-name of an Italian juggler in 1622, 117.
• Phaer's Book of Precedents, 121.
• Picture cards in Cotta's Card Almanac, 259.
• Piozzi, Mrs., refers to the game of the Four Kings, 20.
• Piquet, the meaning of the game explained by Père Daniel, 209.
• Platina, B., cards mentioned by, 93.
• Pollux, Julius, his account of the game of Petteia, 13.
• Pomegranate, a mark on cards, 226.
• Poupart, C., pays Gringonneur for cards in 1393, 74.
• Prayer-book, the soldier's, in a pack of cards, 321.
• Prayers, playing for, 311.
• Price of a pack of cards in the time of Roger Ascham, 133; in the reign of Queen Anne, 167.
• Process of card-making at De La Rue and Co.'s, 272.
• Prodigal, picture of a, 163.
• Protestants of Ireland, in the reign of Queen Mary, how saved from persecution, 327.
• Pulci's Morgante Maggiore—Re di Naibi, 234.

• Quartes, 22.
• Quatuor Reges, a game so called, mentioned in the wardrobe accounts of Edward I, 18, 64.
• Queen, none in the earliest European cards, 15.
• Quire, derivation of the word, 25.

• Rabelais, translated by Urquhart, 19.
• Rabbinical treatise against gaming, 316-20.
• Reiffenberg, the Baron de, his account of a woodcut discovered at Malines, with the supposed date 1418, 86; mistakes the Spanish sota for a female, 229.
• Rennell, Dr. Thomas, his sermon against gaining, 187.
• Republican cards, 253-6.
• Rey, M., on cards, 7.
• Ringhieri's Cento Giuochi liberali, 53.
• Rive's, the Abbé, Eclaircissements Historiques sur les Cartes à jouer, 20, 66.
• Roccha, Angelus, Commentarius contra Ludum Alearum, 61.
• Rogers represents the followers of Columbus playing at cards, 105.
• Rowlands, Sam., his Knave of Hearts, and More Knaves yet, 134-7.
• Roy's, William, satire on Cardinal Wolsey, 109.
• Russia, great consumption of cards in, 272.

• Sadler's, Sir Ralph, State Papers, 112.
• Saint Foix's historical essays on Paris, 123.
• Saintré, Petit-Jehan de, 68.
• Sales, St. Francis de, a card-player when young, 309.
• Sandro di Pipozzi, cards mentioned in a MS. work of his, 65.
• Sarisberiensis, Joannes, 62.
• Satirical cards, French, about 1819, 264.
• Schön, Erhard, cards of his designing, 238.
• Sciential and grammatical cards, 139-41.
• Sex of the East India Company, 32.
• Seymour's Court Gamester, 168.
• Sheppard, W., his England's Balm, 141.
• Sheridan's character of the East India Company, 32.
• Shufflers, diplomatic, 181.
• Singer's Researches into the History of Playing Cards, 7, 201, 223, 238.
• Skelton's Bowghe of Court,—Card of Ten, 234.
• Solis, Virgil, cards of his designing, 238.
• Solme, Thomas, 'the Bushoppes poure thresshere,' uses the term Yack an napes, 233.
• Sota, the Spanish name for the Knave of cards, 229.
• South-sea bubble, cards ridiculing the speculators, 169.
• Spata, a weapon figured in Baker and Co.'s eclectic cards, 261.
• St. Christopher, woodcut of, with the date 1423, in Earl Spencer's collection, 86.
• Stencilling, early cards executed by means of, 83.
• Stephens, Henry, relates an anecdote of a losing gamester's swearing, 312.
• Strutt's Sports and Pastimes, 107.
• Stubbes, Philip, his opinion of playing at cards and other games, 124; on ruffs, 165.
• Stukeley, Dr., old cards formerly belonging to, 205.
• Suits of cards, names of, 228, 230.
• Sunday, card-playing on, 146.
• Sûr Mera, the title of a Rabbinical treatise against gaming, 317.
• Swabbers, 161.
• Swearing, a vice to which gamesters are prone, 311.

• Tahures, a Spanish name for gamesters, etymology of the word, according to Diego del Castillo, 115, 116.
• Taj, or Tas, a name for cards in Hindostan, 41.
• Tali, 11.
• Tarocchi, or Tarots, 190-5.
• Tarotiers, French card-makers called by this name in 1594, 272.
• Tax on cards, when first levied in England, 131.
• Taylor, the water-poet, his picture of a prodigal, 163.
• Taylor, Dr. Jeremy, on card-playing, 297-300.
• Teniers, in a picture represents two soldiers playing at cards in the hall of the high priest, 123.
• Terms used at the game of cards in Hindostan, 43.
• Thiers, Dr. J. B., his Traité des Jeux, 80, 293, 309, 311.
• Thimble-rig superseded by railway speculation, 101.
• Toplady, the Rev. Augustus, on card-playing, 300.
• Townshend, Lord George, caricatures ascribed to, 184.
• Transformation of cards, 260.
• Turner, Sharon, his derivation of the word jackanapes, 231.
• T. W., the initials of the engraver of a pack of cards of the 15th century, 222.

• Urquhart, Sir Thomas, his translation of Rabelais, 19.

• Valery, a name on an old Knave of Hearts, 217.
• Valet, the original meaning of the word, 231.
• Vega, Garcilasso de la, his account of the Spanish soldiers manufacturing cards, 106.
• Vichnou, incarnations of, in a pack of Hindostanee cards, 36-40.
• Vierge, Fierge, Pherz, the queen at Chess, 15-21.
• Visconti, Philip, Duke of Milan, cards painted for him, 230.
• Volay, Jean, a French card manufacturer, 132.
• Volpato, Mons., cards formerly belonging to, 221.

• Ward, Samuel, preacher, of Ipswich, his Woe to Drunkards, 130.
• Wesley, John, sometimes sought an answer by lot, 129: fond of whist when a young man, 301.
• Whist, its relation to chess, 17.
• ——, a game of English origin, 160-5.
• White's coffee-house, 161-2; club at, 178.
• Wilson, Mr. T., old cards engraved on copper, formerly belonging to, 224.
• Wilson, Professor, on card-playing, in the 'Noctes Ambrosianæ,' 303-7.
• Wood-engraving, the earliest with an authentic date, 85.
• Worcester, council of, prohibitions in its canons, 62.
• Wuruq, a leaf, the name for a card with the Moslems in Hindostan, 25.

• Xavier, St. Francis, card-playing in the East in his time, 53; his lenity towards gamesters, 307.

• Yack an napes, Jackanapes, Jack-a-Naipes, the Knave of cards, 233.

• Zani, P. on the Pipozzi MS., 65.

C. AND J. ADLARD, PRINTERS, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE.