CHAPTER II
I.—SEDENTARY GAMES.
This chapter is appropriated to sedentary games, and in treating upon most of them I am under the necessity of confining myself to very narrow limits. To attempt a minute investigation of their properties, to explain the different manners in which they have been played, or to produce all the regulations by which they have been governed, is absolutely incompatible with my present design. Instead, therefore, of following the various writers upon these subjects, whose opinions are rarely in unison, through the multiplicity of their arguments, I shall content myself by selecting such of them as appear to be most cogent, and be exceedingly brief in my own observations.
II.—DICE PLAY—ITS PREVALENCY AND BAD EFFECTS.
There is not, I believe, any species of amusement more ancient than dice-playing; none has been more universally prevalent, and, generally speaking, none is more pernicious in its consequences. It is the earliest, or at least one of the most early pastimes in use among the Grecians. Dice are said to have been invented, together with chess, by Palamedes, the son of Nauplius, king of Eubœa. [914] Others, agreeing to the time of the invention of dice, attribute it to a Greek soldier named Alea, and therefore say that the game was so denominated. [915] But Herodotus [916] attributes both dice and chess to the Lydians, a people of Asia; in which part of the world, it is most probable, they originated at some very remote but uncertain period. We have already seen that the ancient Germans, even in their state of barbarism, indulged the propensity for gambling with the dice to a degree of madness, not only staking all they were worth, but even their liberty, upon the chance of a throw, and submitted to slavery if fortune declared against them. [917] The Saxons, the Danes, and the Normans their descendants, were all of them greatly addicted to the same infatuating pastime. One would not, at first sight, imagine that the dice could afford any great variety of amusement, especially if they be abstractedly considered; and yet John of Salisbury, in the twelfth century, speaks of ten different games of dice then in use; but as he has only given us the names, their properties cannot be investigated. He calls it, [918] "The damnable art of dice-playing." Another author, contemporary with him, says, "The clergymen and bishops are fond of dice-playing." [919]
III.—ANCIENT DICE-BOX—ANECDOTE RELATING TO FALSE DICE.
The common method of throwing the dice is with a hollow cylinder of wood, called the dice-box, into which they are put, and thence, being first shaken together, thrown out upon the table; but in one of the prints which occur in the Vocabulary of Commenius, [920] we meet with a contrivance for playing with the dice that does not require them to be numbered upon their faces. This curious machine [921] is copied below.
The dice are thrown into the receptacle at the top, whence they fall upon the circular part of the table below, which is divided into six compartments, numbered as the dice usually are; and according to the value of the figures affixed to the compartments into which they fall the throw is estimated. Perhaps the inner part of the circle, with the apparatus above it, was so constructed as to move round with great rapidity when the dice were put into the tunnel. It would then be analogous to the E O tables of the present day, wherein a ball is used, and the game is determined by the letters E or O being marked upon the compartment into which it falls. The E O tables may have derived their origin from the above contrivance.
Dice-playing has been reprobated by the grave and judicious authors of this country for many centuries back; the legislature set its face against it at a very early period; [922] and in the succeeding statutes promulgated for the suppression of unlawful games, it is constantly particularised and strictly prohibited.
Supposing the play to be fair on either side, the chances upon the dice are equal to both parties; and the professed gamblers being well aware of this, will not trust to the determination of fortune, but have recourse to many nefarious arts to circumvent the unwary; hence we hear of loaded dice, and dice of the high cut. The former are dice made heavier on one side than the other by the insertion of a small portion of lead; and the latter may be known by the following anecdote in an anonymous MS. written about the reign of James I., and preserved in the Harleian Collection. [923] "Sir William Herbert, playing at dice with another gentleman, there rose some questions about a cast. Sir William's antagonist declared it was a four and a five; he as positively insisted that it was a five and six; the other then swore, with a bitter imprecation, [924] that it was as he had said: Sir William then replied, 'Thou art a perjured knave; for give me a sixpence, and if there be a four upon the dice, I will return you a thousand pounds;' at which the other was presently abashed, for indeed the dice were false, and of a high cut, without a four." The dice are usually made of bone or ivory, but sometimes of silver, and probably of other metals. The wife of the unfortunate Arden of Feversham, sent to Mosbie, her paramour, a pair of silver dice, in order to reconcile a disagreement that had subsisted between them, and occasioned his abstaining from her company. [925]
IV.—CHESS—ITS ANTIQUITY.
This noble, or, as it is frequently called, royal pastime, is said, by some authors, to have originated, together with dice-playing, at the siege of Troy; and the invention of both is attributed to Palamedes, the son of Nauplius, king of Eubœa; [926] others make Diomedes, and others again, Ulysses, the inventor of chess. [927] The honour has also been attributed to Ledo and Tyrrheno, two Grecians, and brothers, who being much pressed by hunger, sought to alleviate their bodily sufferings by diverting the mind. [928] None of these stories have any solid foundation for their support; and I am inclined to follow the opinion of Dr. Hyde and other learned authors, who readily agree that the pastime is of very remote antiquity, but think it first made its appearance in Asia.
V.—THE MORALS OF CHESS.
John de Vigney wrote a book which he called The Moralization of Chess, wherein he assures us that this game was invented by a philosopher named Xerxes in the reign of Evil Merodach, king of Babylon, and was made known to that monarch in order to engage his attention and correct his manners. "There are three reasons," says de Vigney, "which induced the philosopher to institute this new pastime: the first, to reclaim a wicked king; the second, to prevent idleness; and the third, practically to demonstrate the nature and necessity of nobleness." He then adds, "The game of chess passed from Chaldea into Greece, and thence diffused itself all over Europe." I have followed a MS. copy at the Museum in the Harleian Library. [929] Our countryman Chaucer, on what authority I know not, says it was
The Arabians and the Saracens, who are said to be admirable players at chess, have new-modelled the story of de Vigney and adapted it to their own country, changing the name of the philosopher from Xerxes to Sisa. [931]
VI.—EARLY CHESS-PLAY IN FRANCE AND ENGLAND.
It is impossible to say when the game of chess was first brought into this kingdom; but we have good reason to suppose it to have been well known here at least a century anterior to the Conquest, and it was then a favourite pastime with persons of the highest rank. Canute the Dane, who ascended the throne of England A. D. 1017, was partial to this pastime. [932] The following story is told of William, duke of Normandy, afterwards king of England. When a young man, he was invited to the court of the French king, and during his residence there, being one day engaged at chess with the king's eldest son, a dispute arose concerning the play; and William, exasperated at somewhat his antagonist had said, struck him with the chess-board; which obliged him to make a precipitate retreat from France, in order to avoid the consequences of so rash an action. [933] A similar circumstance is said by Leland to have happened in England. [934] John, the youngest son of Henry II., playing at chess one day with Fulco Guarine, a nobleman of Shropshire, a quarrel ensued, and John broke the head of Guarine with the chess-board, who in return struck the prince such a blow that he almost killed him. It seems, however, that Fulco found means of making his peace with king Henry, by whom he was knighted, with three of his brethren, a short time afterwards. John did not so easily forgive the affront; but, on the contrary, showed his resentment long after his accession to the English throne, by keeping him from the possession of Whittington Castle, to which he was the rightful heir. [935] It is also said of this monarch, that he was engaged at chess when the deputies from Rouen came to acquaint him that the city was besieged by Philip king of France, but he would not hear them out till he had finished the game. In like manner Charles I. was playing at chess when he was told that the final resolution of the Scots was to sell him to the parliament; and he was so little discomposed by the alarming intelligence, that he continued the game with great composure. [936] Several other instances to the same purpose might be produced, but these may suffice; and in truth, I know not what interpretation to put upon such extraordinary conduct; it proves at least that the fascinating powers of this fashionable diversion are very extensive upon the minds of those who pursue it earnestly.
VII.—THE CHESS-BOARD.
The number of the pieces and the manner in which they are placed do not appear to have undergone much, if any, variation for several centuries. The following is the most ancient representation of the pastime that I have met with.
This engraving· is from a drawing in a beautifully illuminated MS. preserved in the British Museum among the Harleian Collection. [937] This MS. was written at the close of the fourteenth century, and bears every mark of being the very copy presented to Isabel of Bavaria, the queen of Charles VI. of France. Her portrait, very neatly finished, occurs twice, and that of the king her husband once. The author of this MS. makes Ulysses to be the inventor of chess; and the painting is intended to represent that chieftain engaged with some other Grecian hero who is come to visit and play the game with him, the two bystanders, I presume, are the umpires to decide the matter in case of any dispute.
The Cotton Library contains a MS. of the thirteenth century with the following:
In this representation is exhibited the manner of placing the pieces, which are thus called in Latin verse:
The same MS. supplies a perfect singularity:
It will be observed that the pieces are also placed on the above board.
VIII.—CHESS-PIECES, AND THEIR FORM.
The names of the chess pieces, as they are given in the foregoing manuscript, are these: Rey—Reyne, or Ferce—Roc—Alfin—Chivaler— Poun:—that is, 1. The King—2. The Queen, or Ferce [938]—3. The Rock—4. The Alfin—5. The Knight—6. The Pawn. Their forms are annexed.
In modern times the roc is corruptedly called a rook, but formerly it signified a rock or fortress, or rather, perhaps, the keeper of the fortress; the alfin was also denominated by the French fol, and with us an archer, and at last a bishop.
IX.—THE VARIOUS GAMES OF CHESS.
In a manuscript in the Royal Library, [939] written about the same time as that last mentioned, we find no less than forty-four different names given to so many games of chess, and some of them are played more ways than one, so that in the whole they may be said to amount to fifty-five; and under every title there are directions for playing the game, but I apprehend they would be of little use to a modern player. I shall, however, give the several denominations as they occur, with an attempt at a translation. If the learned reader should find that I have mistaken the meaning of any of these titles, which is very likely to be the case, he will consider the difficulty I had to encounter, and remember I give the translation with diffidence.
1. Guy de chivaler, played three ways—2. De dames—3. De damoyseles—4. De alfins, two ways—5. De anel—6. De covenant—7. De propre confusion—8. Mal assis—9. Cotidian, two ways—10. Poynt estraunge, two ways—11. Ky perde sey sauve—12. Ky ne doune ces ke il eyme, ne prendrant ke disire—13. Bien trove—14. Beal petit—15. Mieut vaut engyn ke force—16. Ky est larges est sages—17. Ky doune ganye—18. Ly enginous e ly coveytous—19. Covenaunt fet ley—20. Ve pres sen joyst ke loyns veyt—21. Meschief fet hom penser—22. La chace de chivaler—23. La chace de ferce et de chivaler—24. Bien fort—25. Fol si prent—26. Ly envoyons—27. Le seon sey envoye—28. Le veyl conu—29. Le haut enprise—30. De cundut—31. Ky put se prenge—32. La batalie sans array—33. Le tret emble, two ways—34. Ly desperes—35. Ly marvelious, two ways—36. Ne poun ferce home fet—37. Muse vyleyn—38. De dames et de damoyceles—39. Fol si sey fie, two ways—40. Mal veysyn, two ways—41. Je mat de ferces—42. Flour de guys—43. La batalie de rokes—44. Double eschec.
1. The knights' game—2. The ladies' game—3. The damsels' game—4. The game of the alfins—5. The ring—6. The agreement—7. Self-confounded—8. Ill placed or bad enough—9. Day by day—10. The foreign point—11. The loser wins—12. He that gives not what he esteems, shall not take that he desires—13. Well found—14. Fair and small—15. Craft surpasses strength—16. He that is bountiful is wise—17. Who gives gains—18. Subtilty and covetousness—19. Agreement makes law—20. He sees his play at hand who sees it at a distance—21. Misfortunes make a man think—22. The chace of the knight—23. The chace of the queen and the knight—24. Very strong—25. He is a fool if he takes—26. The messengers—27. Sent by his own party—28. The old one known—29. The high place taken—30. Perhaps for conduit, managed or conducted—31. Take if you can—32. The battle without arrangement—33. The stolen blow—34. The desperates—35. The wonder—36. A pawn cannot make a queen—37. The clown's lurking place—38. The ladies and the damsels—39. A fool if he trusts—40. Bad neighbour—41. I mate the queen—42. The flower or beauty of the games—43. The battle of the rooks—44. Double chess.
X.—ANCIENT GAMES SIMILAR TO CHESS.
The ancient pastimes, if more than one be meant, which bear the names of ludus latrunculorum, ludus calculorum, et ludus scrupulorum, have been generally considered as similar to chess, if not precisely the same; but the authors of the Encyclopédie Françoise, assure us they did not bear any resemblance to it, at least in those essential parts of the game which distinguish it from all others; but were played with stones, shells, or counters. The ancients, we are told, used little stones, shells, and nuts, in making their calculations without the assistance of writing. These little stones were called by the Greeks Ψηφοι, and calculi or scrupuli by the Romans; and such articles, it is supposed, were employed by them in playing the games above mentioned. This method of reckoning passed from the Greeks to the Romans, but when luxury introduced itself at Rome, the stones and shells were laid aside, and counters made with ivory became their substitutes. If the foregoing observations be well founded, we may justly conclude that the ludus calculorum which Homer mentions as a pastime practised by his heroes, called in Greek πετος or πεσσος, consisted in a certain arrangement and combination of numbers, every piece employed in the game being marked with an appropriate number, and probably might resemble a more modern pastime, which still retains the Greek name of Rithmomachia, from αριθμος, numerus, et μαχι, pugna, expressive of a battle with numbers, said by some to have been invented by Pythagoras, [940] and by others to be more ancient: with us it is called the Philosopher's Game, and seems indeed to have been well calculated for the diversion of soldiers, because it consists, not only in a contention for superiority by the skilful adjustment of the numbers, but in addition, allows the conqueror to triumph and erect his trophy in token of the victory; this part of the game, we are told, requires much judgment to perform with propriety, and if the player fails, his glories are but half achieved.
XI.—THE PHILOSOPHER'S GAME.
We have some account of the philosopher's game, but very loosely drawn up, in a manuscript in the Sloanian Library [941] at the British Museum. It is called, says the author, "a number fight," because in it men fight and strive together by the art of counting or numbering how one may take his adversary's king and erect a triumph upon the deficiency of his calculations. It is then said, "you may make your triumph as well with your enemy's men taken, as with your own not taken."
The board or table for playing this game is made in the form of a parallelogram just as long again as it is broad; it is divided into eight squares the narrow way, and extended to sixteen the other, and bears the resemblance of two chess-boards fastened together: the chequers in like manner being alternately black and white, and two persons only at one time can properly play the game; to either party is assigned twenty-four soldiers, which constitute his army, (hoste, in the original,) and one of them is called the Pyramis or king: one third of these pieces are circular, which form two rows in the front of the army; one third are triangular, which are placed in the middle; and one third are square, which bring up the rear, and one of these situated in the fifth row is the Pyramis. The men belonging to the two parties are distinguished by being black and white, and every one of them is marked with an appropriate number. There were sometimes added to these numbers certain signs or algebraic figures, called cossical signings, which increased the intricacy of the game. The army that presents a front of even numbers is called the even hoste, and the other the odd hoste. The two armies at the commencement of the play are drawn up in the order represented below. [942]
It was my wish to have subjoined a general outline of the method of playing the game, but the author is so exceedingly obscure in his phraseology, and negligent in his explanations, that I found it impossible to follow him with the least degree of satisfaction. [943] It is, however, certain, that the great object of each player is to take the king from his opponent, because he who succeeds may make his triumph and erect his trophy.
Burton, speaking of this pastime, in his Anatomy of Melancholy, [944] calls it the Philosophy Game, and thinks it "not convenient for students;" to which he adds, "the like I say of Dr. Fulke's Metromachia, and his Ouronomachia, with the rest of those intricate, astrological, and geometrical fictions, for such as are mathematically given, and other curious games." Dr. Fulke was a Cambridge man, and his book was printed at London 1566.
XII.—DRAUGHTS—FRENCH AND POLISH.
This pastime is well known in the present day; and I believe there are now in London as excellent draught-players as ever existed. Draughts, no doubt, is a modern invention, and easier to be learnt than chess, because it is not so intricate; for the pieces are of equal value till they become kings, and can only move one way, that is, diagonally; but, like chess, it depends entirely upon skill, and one false move frequently occasions the loss of the game. There are two methods of playing at draughts, the one commonly used in England, denominated the French Game, which is played upon a chess-board, and the other called the Polish Game, because, I presume, the first was invented in France and the latter in Poland. This requires a board with ten squares or chequers in each row, and twenty men, for so the pieces are usually named. The draught-man is called in French dame. The men in the Polish game can only move forwards as they do in the French game, but they have the privilege of taking backwards as well as forwards; and the king, if not opposed by two men close together, can move from one corner of the board to the other. The Polish game admits of most variety, and is, in my opinion, infinitely the best; but it is little known in this country, and rarely played, except by foreigners. We have a recent publication upon the French game of draughts, which fully explains the nature of the pastime, and points out most of the important moves, published by Sturges, who, I am told, is an excellent player.
XIII.—MERELLES—NINE MENS' MORRIS.
Merelles, or, as it was formerly called in England, nine mens' morris, and also five-penny morris, is a game of some antiquity. Cotgrave describes it as a boyish game, and says it was played here commonly with stones, but in France with pawns, or men, made on purpose, and they were termed merelles; hence the pastime itself received that denomination. It was certainly much used by the shepherds formerly, and continues to be used by them, and other rustics, to the present hour. But it is very far from being confined to the practice of boys and girls. The form of the merelle-table, and the lines upon it, as it appeared in the fourteenth century, is here represented.
These lines have not been varied. The black spots at every angle and intersection of the lines are the places for the men to be laid upon. The men are different in form or colour for distinction sake; and from the moving these men backwards or forwards, as though they were dancing a morris, I suppose the pastime received the appellation of nine mens' morris; but why it should have been called five-penny morris, I do not know. The manner of playing is briefly this: two persons, having each of them nine pieces, or men, lay them down alternately, one by one, upon the spots; and the business of either party is to prevent his antagonist from placing three of his pieces so as to form a row of three, without the intervention of an opponent piece. If a row be formed, he that made it is at liberty to take up one of his competitor's pieces from any part he thinks most to his own advantage; excepting he has made a row, which must not be touched if he have another piece upon the board that is not a component part of that row. When all the pieces are laid down, they are played backwards and forwards, in any direction that the lines run, but only can move from one spot to another at one time: he that takes off all his antagonist's pieces is the conqueror. The rustics, when they have not materials at hand to make a table, cut the lines in the same form upon the ground, and make a small hole for every dot. They then collect, as above mentioned, stones of different forms or colours for the pieces, and play the game by depositing them in the holes in the same manner that they are set over the dots upon the table. Hence Shakspeare, describing the effects of a wet and stormy season, says,
XIV.—FOX AND GEESE.
This is a game somewhat resembling that of merelles in the manner the pieces are moved, but in other respects, as well as in the form of the table, it differs materially; the intersection and angles are more numerous, and the dots of course increased, which adds to the number of the moves.
To play this game there are seventeen pieces, called geese, which are placed as we see them upon the engraving, and the fox in the middle, distinguished either by his size or difference of colour, as here, for instance, he is black. The business of the game is to shut the fox up, so that he cannot move. All the pieces have the power to move from one spot to another, in the direction of the right lines, but cannot pass over two spots at one time. It is to be observed, that this board is sometimes made with holes bored through it, where the dots are made, and pegs equal to the number of geese put into them, and the fox is distinguished by being larger and taller than the rest. The geese are not permitted to take the fox if he stands close to them, but the fox may take a goose, in like case, if the spot behind it be unoccupied, or not guarded by another goose; and if all be taken, or the number so reduced that the fox cannot be blocked, the game is won. The great deficiency of this game is, that the fox must inevitably be blocked if the geese are played by a skilful hand; for which reason, I am told, of late some players have added another fox; but this I have not seen.
XV.—THE SOLITARY GAME.
This is so denominated because it is played by one person only. It is said to have been invented by an unfortunate man who was several years kept in solitary confinement at the Bastile in Paris. The board for this pastime is of a circular form, and perforated with holes at half an inch distance from each other, to the amount of fifty or sixty. A certain number of pegs are then fitted to these holes, but not enough to fill them all; and the manner of playing the game is, to pass one of the pegs over another into a hole that is unoccupied, taking the peg so passed from the board, and to continue doing so till all the pegs but one are taken away; which is an operation much more difficult to perform than any one could readily imagine who had not made the attempt. It must be remembered that only one peg can be passed over at a time, and that no peg can be put over another, unless it stands close to it without an intervening hole.
XVI.—BACKGAMMON, OR TABLES.
The game of chess, and most of the pastimes derived from it, depend entirely upon the skill of the players, and afford no chance of success to an indifferent one if his antagonist be possessed of more knowledge in moving the pieces than himself. Therefore, in order to bring two players of unequal talents nearer to a level, other diversions were invented, in which both chance and skill were united, as we see they are in the game at tables, which in Latin is called tabularum ludus, and in French tables. Hence the following line in the romance of Parise la Duchesse:
Then he learned to play at tables and at chess. [945] The game of tables is better known at present by the name of Backgammon. This pastime is said to have been discovered about the tenth century, [946] and the name derived from two Welsh words signifying "little battle." But I trust, as before observed, that the derivation may be found nearer home. The words are perfectly Saxon, as Bac, or Bæc, and gamen, that is, Back Game; so denominated because the performance consists in the players bringing their men back from their antagonists' tables into their own; or because the pieces are sometimes taken up and obliged to go back, that is, re-enter at the table they came from. The ancient form of the backgammon-table is represented by the annexed engraving:
The original of the engraving occurs in a beautifully illuminated manuscript in the Harleian Collection. [947] The table, as here delineated, is not divided in the middle, but the points, on either side, are contained in a single compartment. Annexed is the representation of a backgammon-table at least a century more modern.
In this the division is fairly made, but the points are not distinguished by different colours, according to the present, and indeed more ancient usage. The writer of the latter manuscript, which is in the King's Library, [948] says, "There are many methods of playing at the tables with the dice. The first of these, and the longest, is called the English game, Ludus Anglicorum, which is thus performed: he who sits on the side of the board marked 1-12 has fifteen men (homines) in the part marked 24, and he who sits on the side marked 13-24 has a like number of men in the part 1. They play with three dice, or else with two, allowing always (semper, that is, at every throw) six for a third die. Then he who is seated at 1-12 must bring all his men placed at 24 through the partitions (paginas), from 24 to 19, from 18 to 13, and from 12 to 7, into the division 6-1, and then bear them off; his opponent must do the same from 1 to 7, thence to 12, thence to 18, into the compartment 19-24; and he who first bears off all his men is conqueror." Here we may observe, that the most material circumstances in which the game differed, at this remote period, from the present method of playing it, are, first, in having three dice instead of two, or reckoning a certain number for the third; and secondly, in placing all the men within the antagonist's table, which, if I do not mistake the author, must be put upon his ace point. But to go on: "There is," says he, "another game upon the tables called Paume Carie, which is played with two dice, and requires four players, that is, two on either side; or six, and then three are opposed to three." He then speaks of a third game, called "Ludus Lumbardorum, the Game of Lombardy, and thus played: he who sits on the side marked 13-24 has his men at 6, and his antagonist has his men at 19;" which is changing the ace point in the English game for the size point: and this alteration probably shortened the game. He then mentions the five following variations by name only; the Imperial game, the Provincial game, the games called Baralie, Mylys, and Faylis.
XVII.—BACKGAMMON—ITS FORMER AND PRESENT ESTIMATION.
At the commencement of the last century backgammon was a very favourite amusement, and pursued at leisure times by most persons of opulence, and especially by the clergy, which occasioned dean Swift, when writing to a friend of his in the country, sarcastically to ask the following question: "In what esteem are you with the vicar of the parish; can you play with him at backgammon?" But of late years this pastime is become unfashionable, and of course it is not often practised. The tables, indeed, are frequently enough to be met with in the country mansions; but upon examination you will generally find the men deficient, the dice lost, or some other cause to render them useless. Backgammon is certainly a diversion by no means fitted for company, which cards are made to accommodate in a more extensive manner; and therefore it is no wonder they have gained the ascendancy.
XVIII.—DOMINO.
This is a very childish sport, imported from France a few years back, and could have nothing but the novelty to recommend it to the notice of grown persons in this country. It consists of twenty-eight small oblong and flat pieces of ivory or bone, and all of the same size and shape. The back of every piece is plain, and sometimes black; the face is white, divided into two parts by a line in the middle, and marked with a double number, or with two different numbers, or with a number and a blank, and one of them is a double blank. The numbers are the same as those upon the dice, from one to six inclusive. When two play, the whole of the pieces, which are ridiculously enough called cards, are hustled about the table with their faces downwards, and each of them draw seven or nine, according to agreement, and the remaining pieces are undiscovered until the hand is played, which is thus performed: the right of first playing being cut for, he who obtains it lays down one of his pieces, and the other is to match one of the numbers marked upon it with a similar number marked upon a piece of his own, which he lays close to it; the other then matches one of the open numbers in like manner; and thus they continue alternately to lay down their pieces as long as they can be matched; and he who first gets rid of all his pieces wins the game: but if it so happen, as it often does, that neither of them have exhausted their pieces, nor can match the open numbers on the table, they then discover what remains on both sides, and he whose pieces contain the fewest spots obtains the victory. Sometimes four play, in which case they deal out six cards to each, leaving only four upon the table, and then play on in rotation.
XIX.—CARDS—WHEN INVENTED.
The general opinion respecting the origin of playing-cards is, that they were first made for the amusement of Charles VI. of France, at the time he was afflicted with a mental derangement, which commenced in 1392, and continued for several years. The proof of this supposition depends upon an article in the treasury registers belonging to that monarch, which states that a payment of fifty-six sols was made to Jacquemin Gringonneur, painter, for three packs of cards gilded and painted with divers colours and different devices, to be carried to the king for his diversion. [949] If it be granted, and I see no reason why it should not, that this entry alludes to playing-cards, the consequences that have been deduced from it, do not necessarily follow; I mean, that these cards were the first that were made, or that Gringonneur was the inventor of them; it by no means precludes the probability of cards having been previously used in France, but simply states that those made by him were gilt and diversified with devices in variegated colours, the better to amuse the unfortunate monarch.
Some, allowing that Gringonneur was the first maker of playing-cards, place the invention in the reign of Charles V., upon the authority of Jean de Saintre, who was page to that monarch; he mentions card-playing in his chronicle; for he was an author. The words he uses are these: "Et vous qui etes noyseux joueux de cartes et de des.—And you who are contentious play at cards and at dice." [950] This would be sufficient evidence for the existence of cards before the ascension of Charles VI. to the throne of France, if it could be proved that the page did not survive his master; but, on the other hand, if he did, they may equally be applied to the amusements of the succeeding reign.
XX.—CARD-PLAYING MUCH PRACTISED.
A prohibitory edict against the usage of cards was made in Spain considerably anterior to any that have been produced in France. In Spain, as early as A. D. 1387, John I., king of Castile, in an edict, forbade playing of cards and dice in his dominions. The provost of Paris, January 22, A. D. 1397, published an ordinance, prohibiting the manufacturing part of the people from playing at tennice, dice, cards, &c. [951] which has inclined several modern writers upon this subject to refer the invention of cards from France to Spain; and the names of some of the cards, as well as of many of the most ancient games, being evidently derived from the Spanish language, are justly considered as strong corroborating arguments in favour of such an opinion. Such, for instance, as primero and the principal card in the game quinola; ombre and the cards spadill, manill, basto, punto, matador, quadrille, a species of ombre, &c. The suit of clubs upon the Spanish cards is not the trefoils as with us, but positively clubs, or cudgels, of which we retain the name, though we have lost the figures; the original name is bastos. The spades are swords, called in Spain espadas; in this instance we retain the name and some faint resemblance of the figure. [952]
A very intelligent writer upon the origin of engraving, baron Heineken, asserts that playing-cards were invented in Germany, where they were used towards the latter end of the fourteenth century; but his reasons are by no means conclusive. He says they were known there as early as the year 1376. [953]
An author of our own country produces a passage cited from a wardrobe computus made in 1377, the sixth year of Edward I., which mentions a game entitled, "the four kings;" [954] and hence with some degree of probability he conjectures that the use of playing-cards was then known in England, which is a much earlier period than any that has been assigned by the foreign authors. It is the opinion of several learned writers well acquainted with Asiatic history, that cards were used in the eastern parts of the world long before they found their way into Europe. [955] If this position be granted, when we recollect that Edward I. before his accession to the throne resided nearly five years in Syria, it will be natural enough to suppose that he might have learned the game of "the four kings" in that country, and introduced it at court upon his return to England. An objection, which indeed at first sight seems to be a very powerful one, has been raised in opposition to this conjecture: it is founded upon the total silence of every kind of authority respecting the subject of card-playing from the time that the above-mentioned entry was made to 1464, an early period in the reign of Edward IV., including an interval of one hundred and eighty-six years. An omission so general, it is thought, would not have taken place, if the words contained in that record alluded to the usage of playing-cards. A game introduced by a monarch could not fail of becoming fashionable; and if it continued to be practised in after times, must in all probability have been mentioned occasionally in conjunction with other pastimes then prevalent. But this silence is by no means a proof that the game of "the four kings" was not played with cards, nor that cards did not continue to be used during the whole of the above-mentioned interval in the higher circles, though not perhaps with such abuses as were afterwards practised, and which excited the reprehension of the moral and religious writers. Besides, at the time that cards were first introduced, they were drawn and painted by the hand without the assistance of a stamp or plate; it follows of course that much time was required to complete a set or pack of cards; and the price they bore no doubt was adequate to the labour bestowed upon them, which necessarily must have enhanced their value beyond the purchase of the under classes of the people. For this reason it is, I presume, that card-playing, though it might have been known in England, was not much practised until such time as inferior sets of cards, proportionably cheap, were produced for the use of the commonalty, which seems to have been the case when Edward IV. ascended the throne, for in 1463, early in his reign, an act was established on a petition from the card-makers of the city of London, prohibiting the importation of playing-cards; [956] and soon after that period card-playing became a very general pastime.
The increasing demand for these objects of amusement, it is said, suggested the idea of cutting the outlines appropriated to the different suits upon separate blocks of wood and stamping them upon the cards; [957] the intermediate spaces between the outlines were filled up with various colours laid on by the hand. This expeditious method of producing cards reduced the price of them, so that they might readily be purchased by almost every class of persons: the common usage of cards was soon productive of serious evils, which all the exertions of the legislative power have not been able to eradicate. [958]
Another argument against the great antiquity of playing-cards is drawn from the want of paper proper for their fabrication. We certainly have no reason to believe that paper made with linen rags was produced in Europe before the middle of the fourteenth century, and even then the art of paper-making does not appear to have been carried to any great perfection. It is also granted that paper is the most proper material we know of for the manufacturing of cards; but it will not therefore follow that they could not possibly be made with any other; and if we admit of any other, the objection will fall to the ground.
XXI.—CARD-PLAYING FORBIDDEN.
Card-playing appears to have been a very fashionable court amusement in the reign of Henry VII. In an account of money disbursed for the use of that monarch, an entry is made of one hundred shillings paid at one time to him for the purpose of playing at cards. [959] The princess Margaret, his daughter, previous to her marriage with James IV., king of Scotland, understood the use of cards. She played with her intended husband at Harbottle Castle; the celebration of their nuptials took place A. D. 1503, she being then only fourteen years of age. [960] Catherine of Spain, the consort of prince Arthur, afterwards married to Henry VIII. his brother, is said in her youth to have been well acquainted with the art of embroidery and other works of the needle proper for ladies to know, and expert in various courtly pastimes; and she could play at "tables, tick-tacke or gleeke, with cardis and dyce." [961]
The universality of card-playing in the reign of this monarch is evident from a prohibitory statute being necessary to prevent apprentices from using cards except in the Christmas holidays, and then only in their masters' houses. [962] Agreeable to this privilege, Stow, speaking of the customs at London, says, "from All-Hallows eve to the day following Candlemas-day, there was, among other sports, playing at cards for counters, nails, and points, in every house, more for pastime than for gain." [963] But this moderation, I apprehend, was by no means general, for several contemporary writers are exceedingly severe in their reflections upon the usage of cards, which they rank with dice, and consider both as destructive to morality and good order. [964]
XXII.—CARD-PLAYING CENSURED BY POETS.
Henry VIII. preferred the sports of the field, and such pastimes as promoted exercise, to sedentary amusements; his attachment to dice he gave up at an early part of his life; and I do not recollect that Hall the historian, who is so minute in describing the various sources of entertainment pursued by this athletic monarch, ever mentions cards as one of them: I am, indeed, well aware that Shakspeare speaks of his "playing at primero with the duke of Suffolk;" and it is very possible, that the poet might have had some authority for so doing. Sir William Forrest, who wrote at the close of his reign, and presented a poetical treatise entitled The Poesye of Princylye Practice, to his son Edward VI., speaks therein of the pastimes proper for the amusement of a monarch, and says, he may after dinner indulge himself with music, or otherwise