century, there is an evident intention of combining the two modes of
playing on the strings--rubbing with a bow and touching with the
fingers. The box, which was not hollowed out and rounded at the two
ends, was much deeper at the lower end, where the strings commenced,
than higher up, near the pegs, where these strings are sounded open
under the action of the finger, which reaches them through an aperture;
the bow acting on them near the string-bridge in front of the
sounding-holes. It must have been difficult to touch with the bow one
string alone, but it should be remarked that the harmonic ideal of this
instrument consisted in forming accords by consonances of thirds,
fifths, and eighths. The _rote_ was soon developed into a new
instrument, assuming the form that our violoncellos have almost exactly
retained. The box was increased in size, the handle was lengthened
beyond the body of the instrument, the number of strings was reduced to
three or four, stretched over a bridge, and the sounding-holes were made
in the shape of a crescent. From this time the _rote_ acquired a special
character it had not lost even in the sixteenth century, when it became
the bass-viol. This was its true destination. The size of the instrument
dictated the manner in which it was held, either on the knees or on the
ground between the legs (Fig. 195).
[Illustration: Fig. 195.--German Musicians playing on the Violin and
Bass-Viol. Drawn and Engraved by J. Amman.]
The _vielle_ or _viole_, which had no affinity except in shape with the
_vielle_ (hurdy-gurdy) of the present day, was at first a small _rote_
held by the performer against his chin or his breast, in much the same
way as the violin is now used (Fig. 196). The box, which was at first
conical and convex, became gradually oval in shape, and the handle
remained short and wide. It was, perhaps, this handle which terminated
in a kind of ornamental scroll in the shape of a violet (_viola_), that
originated the name of the instrument. The _viole_, just as the _rote_,
formed the accompaniment _obligato_ of certain songs; and among the
jugglers who played upon it good performers were rare (Figs. 197, 198).
Improvements in the _vielle_ came for the most part from Italy, where
the co-operation of a number of skilful lute-players was the means of
gradually forming the violin. Even before the famous Dnifloprugar, born
in the Italian Tyrol, had hit upon the model of his admirable violins,
the handle of the _vielle_ had been lengthened,
[Illustration: Fig. 196.--Oval _Vielle_ with Three Strings, of the
Thirteenth Century. (Sculpture on the Cathedral of Amiens.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 197.--Juggler playing on a _Vielle_, hollowed out at
the Sides. Fifteenth Century. (“Heures du Roi René,” MS. No. 159 in the
Bibl. Imp. of the Arsenal, Paris.)]
its sides hollowed out, and its strings had received a more extended
field of action by removing the stringer (_cordier_) from the centre of
the sounding-board
[Illustration: Fig. 198.--Player on the _Vielle_. Thirteenth Century.
(Taken from an Enamelled Dish at Soissons.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 199.--Angel Playing on a Three-stringed Fiddle.
Thirteenth Century. (Sculpture in the Cathedral of Amiens.)]
Henceforth the play of the board became more free and easy, the
performer was able to touch every string singly, and was in a position
to substitute effects more characteristic instead of the former
monotonous consonances.
[Illustration: Fig. 200.--Rebec, of the Sixteenth Century. From
Willemin.]
[Illustration: Fig. 201.--Long Monochord played on with a Bow. Fifteenth
Century. (MS. of Froissart, in the Bibl. Imp., Paris.)]
England was the birthplace of the _crout_; France invented the _rote_,
and Italy the _viole_; Germany originated the _gigue_,[25] the name of
which may perhaps be derived from the similarity presented by the shape
of the instrument to the thigh of a kid. The _gigue_ was provided with
three strings (Fig. 199), and its special distinction from the _viole_
was, that instead of the handle being as it were independent of the body
of the instrument, it was a kind of prolongation of the sounding-board.
The _gigue_, which bore a considerable resemblance to the modern
mandolin, was an instrument on which the Germans were accustomed to work
wonders in the way of performance; according, at least, to the statement
of Adenès, the _trouvère_, who speaks with admiration of the
“_gigueours_ of Germany.” The _gigue_, however, entirely disappeared, at
least in France, in the fifteenth century; but its name still remained
as the designation of a joyous dance, which for a considerable period
was enlivened by the sound of this instrument.
Among the musical instruments of this class in the Middle Ages, we have
still to mention the rebec (Fig. 200), which was so often quoted by the
authors of the day, and yet is so little known, although it figured in
the court concerts in the time of Rabelais, who specifies it by the term
_aulique_, in contrast to the rustic _cornemuse_ (bagpipes).
We must, in conclusion, speak of the monochord (_monocordium_), which is
always mentioned by the authors of the Middle Ages with feelings of
pleasure, although it appears to have been nothing more than the most
simple and primitive expression of all the other stringed instruments
(Fig. 201). It was composed of a narrow oblong box, on each end of the
front-board were fixed two immovable bridges supporting a metallic
string stretched from one to the other, and corresponding to a scale of
notes traced out on the instrument. A movable bridge, which was shifted
up and down between the string and the scale, produced whatever notes
the performer wished to bring out. In the eighth century there was a
kind of violin or mandolin furnished with a single metallic string
played on with a metallic bow. Later still, we find a kind of harp
formed of a long sounding-box traversed by a single string, over which
the musician moved a small bow handled with a sudden and rapid movement.
The instruments we have named do not, however, embrace all those in use
in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. There certainly were others
which, in spite of the most intelligent investigations, and the most
judicious deductions, are now known to us only by name. As regards, for
instance, the nature and appearance of the _éles_ or _celes_, the
_échaqueil_ or _échequier_, the _enmorache_, and the _micamon_, we are
left to the vaguest conjectures.
[Illustration: Fig. 202.--Triangle of the Ninth Century. (MS. of
Saint-Emmeran.)]
PLAYING-CARDS.
Supposed Date of their Invention.--Existed in India in the Twelfth
Century.--Their connection with the Game of Chess.--Brought into
Europe after the Crusades.--First Mention of a Game with Cards in
1379.--Cards well known in the Fifteenth Century in Spain, Germany,
and France, under the name of _Tarots_.--Cards called _Charles the
Sixth’s_ must have been _Tarots_.--Ancient Cards, French, Italian,
and German.--Cards contributing to the Invention of Wood-Engraving
and Printing.
The origin of playing-cards has for many years past formed a special
subject of investigation among scholars and antiquarians. For, however
trifling the matter may appear in itself, this curious point is
connected with two of the most important inventions of modern
times--engraving and printing.
We must not, however, take upon ourselves to assert too positively that
all the profound researches, persevering study, and ingenious deductions
which have been applied to the subject have entirely succeeded in
elucidating the question. Nevertheless, a certain degree of light has
been thrown upon it, by which we shall endeavour to profit.
The question is, at what date are we to fix the invention of
playing-cards, and to whom are we to attribute it? In order to solve
these queries, they must be divided; for, although the introduction of
playing-cards into Europe may not date back beyond the fourteenth
century, and the invention of our game of piquet may not have been prior
to the reign of Charles VII., it is at least asserted--(1st), that
playing-cards existed in India in the twelfth century; (2nd), that the
ancients played at games in which certain figures and numbers were
represented on dice or tablets; (3rd), that in comparatively recent
times the game of chess and the game of cards presented striking
affinities, proving the common origin of these two games--one connected
with painting, the other with sculpture.
If we are to believe Herodotus, the Lydians, in order to beguile the
sufferings of hunger during a long and cruel famine, invented nearly
every game, especially that of dice. Later authors ascribe the honour of
these inventions to the Greeks, when irritated at the tedious delays of
the siege of Troy. Cicero even mentions by name Pyrrhus and Palamedes as
the originators of the “games in use in camps” (_ludos castrenses_).
What were these games? Some say, chess; others, dice or knuckle-bones.
Certain very ancient specimens prove unquestionably that the Indian
cards were nothing but a transformation of the game of chess; for the
principal pieces in this game are reproduced on the cards, but in such a
way that eight players instead of two could take part in it. In the game
of chess there were only two armies of pawns, each having at its head a
king, a vizier (who was afterwards turned into a “queen”), a knight, an
elephant (which became a “bishop”), and a dromedary (afterwards a
“castle”). There can be no doubt that the course and arrangement of
these games were very different; but in both may be found an original
affinity in the fact that they recalled to mind the terrible game of
war, in which each adversary had to attack by means of stratagems,
combinations, and vigilance.
We have now learned from certain authority (Abel de Rémusat, _Journal
Asiatique_, September, 1822) that playing-cards, proceeding from India
and China, were, like the game of chess (Fig. 203), in the hands of the
Arabians and the Saracens at the commencement of the twelfth century. It
is therefore almost certain they must have been brought into Europe
after the Crusades, with the arts, traditions, and customs which the men
of the West then derived from their Oriental antagonists. There is,
however, every reason to believe that the use of cards spread but
slowly; for at an epoch when the civil and ecclesiastical authorities
were constantly issuing ordinances against games of chance, we do not
find that cards were ever the subject of legal proceedings, like dice
and chess.
The first formal mention made of playing-cards is found in a manuscript
chronicle of Nicolas de Covelluzzo, preserved in the archives of
Viterbo. “In the year 1379,” says the chronicler, “there was introduced
at Viterbo the game of cards, which comes from the country of the
Saracens, and is called by the latter _naïb_.” There is, in fact, a
German book, the “Jeu d’Or,” printed at Augsbourg in 1472, which
testifies to the fact that cards existed in Germany in the year 1300.
But, in the first place, this evidence is not contemporary with the fact
alleged; and, besides,
[Illustration: Fig. 203.--Chess-Players. Fac-simile of a Miniature of
the Thirteenth Century. (MS. 7,266, Bibl. Imp., Paris.)]
we may well suppose that the vanity of the Germans, which had attributed
to themselves the discovery of printing, desired, with about as much
reason, to appropriate also the invention of cards--that is, of
wood-engraving. We shall, therefore, act judiciously in paying but
little attention to this doubtful assertion, and hold to the account
given by the chronicler of Viterbo. But the latter, unfortunately,
furnishes us with no details as to the nature of these cards. Was the
game similar to that which is still extant in India? Or was it one
peculiar to the Arabs? These are questions which must remain unsolved.
The only facts presented to our notice are, that in 1379 cards made
their appearance in Europe, brought from Arabia, or the country of the
Saracens, and that their original name is given. The Italians for a long
time gave to cards the name of _naïbi_. In Spain they are still called
_naypes_. If it be understood that the word _naïb_ in Arabic signifies
“captain,” we shall see that the game in question was one of a military
character, like that of chess, and we shall be led to recognise in these
primitive cards the _tarots_ which were for a long time current in the
south of Europe.
In 1387, John I., King of Castile, issued an ordinance prohibiting to
play with dice, _naypes_, or at chess.
In the archives of the Audit Office, in Paris, there formerly existed an
account of the treasurer, Poupart, who states that, in 1392, he had
“paid to Jacquemin Gringonneur, painter, for three packs of cards in
gold and various colours, ornamented with numerous devices, to lay
before the lord the king (Charles VI.) for his amusement, 50 sols of
Paris.” This game, which seemed at first intended only for the amusement
of the king in his mental derangement, subsequently spread so much among
the people, that the provost of Paris, in an ordinance of January 22,
1397, issued a prohibition “to persons engaged in trade from playing at
tennis, bowls, dice, _cards_, and skittles, except on feast-days.” We
must remark that, twenty-eight years previously, Charles V., in a
celebrated ordinance which enumerates all the games of chance, did not
mention cards.
The “Red Book” of the town of Ulm, a manuscript register preserved in
the archives of that town, contains an ordinance dated in 1397, in which
is conveyed a prohibition of games with cards.
These facts are the only authenticated evidence which can be brought
forward with a view of fixing the approximate period of the introduction
of cards into Europe. Some authors have certainly imagined they were in
a position to determine an earlier epoch, but they have gone upon data
the value of which has since been destroyed by more thorough
investigation.
In the fifteenth century there are evident traces both of the existence
and popularity of cards in Italy, Spain, Germany, and France. Their
names, colours, and emblems, their number and forms, were indeed
constantly changing, according to the country in which they were used
and the fancy of the players. But whether called _tarots_ or “French
cards,” they were in fact nothing but modifications of the primitive
Oriental cards, and an imitation more or less faithful of the ancient
game of chess.
Reckoning from the fifteenth century, we meet with cards in every
enumeration of games of chance; we find them also proscribed and
condemned in ecclesiastical and royal ordinances. The clergy, too,
raised their voices against them; but these measures did not prevent the
trade in
[Illustration: Figs. 204 and 205.--Jean Dunois, King Alexander, Julius
Cæsar, King Arthur, Charles the Great, and Godefroi de Bouillon. From
ancient coloured Wood-Engravings; prints analogous to the first
Playing-Cards of the Fifteenth Century. (Bibl. Imp., Paris, Department
of Manuscripts.)]
them from increasing, nor great attention to their improved manufacture.
Poets and romance-writers vied with each other in speaking of them; they
appeared in the miniatures in manuscripts, and also in the first
attempts at engraving on wood and copper (Figs. 204 and 205). And,
notwithstanding the fragile nature of the cards themselves, some have
been preserved which belong to the earliest years of the fifteenth
century.
As we have already seen, cards had, in principle, been classed among the
number of childish games; but it may be safely asserted that this could
not have long been the case, else how could we explain the legal
strictures and the ecclesiastical anathemas of which they were the
subject?
St. Bernard, for example, speaking on the 5th of March, 1423, to the
crowd assembled in front of a church at Siena, inveighed with so much
energy, and fulminated with so much persuasion, against games of chance,
that all who heard ran at once and fetched their dice, chess, and
_cards_, and burnt them on the very spot. But, adds the chronicle, there
was a card-maker who, being ruined by the sermon of the saint, went to
seek him, and with a flood of tears said to him: “Father, I am a maker
of cards, and I have no other trade by which to live. By preventing me
from following my trade, you condemn me to die of hunger.” “If painting
is all you are capable of,” replied the preacher, “paint this picture.”
And he showed him an image of a radiating sun, in the centre of which
shone the monogram of Christ--I. H. S. The artisan followed his advice,
and soon made his fortune by painting this representation, which was
adopted by St. Bernard as his device.
Although in every direction similar censures were directed against
cards, they nevertheless did not fail to come much into fashion,
especially in Italy; and to have a considerable sale. Thus, in 1441, we
find the master card-makers at Venice “who formed a rather numerous
association,” claiming and obtaining from the senate a kind of
prohibitory order against “the large quantity of _painted_ and _printed_
cards which were made out of Venice and were introduced into the town,
to the great detriment of their art.” It is important to notice that
mention is made here of _printed_ as well as of painted cards. The fact
is, that at this date, not only did all the cities in Italy make their
own cards, but, in consequence of the invention of wood-engraving,
Germany and Holland exported a large quantity of them. We must also
point out that documents of the same date appear to establish a
distinction between the primitive _naïbi_ and cards properly so called,
without, however, affording any detailed characteristics of either. It
is, however, known that prior to the year 1419, one François Fibbia, a
noble of Pisa who died in exile at Bologna, obtained from the
“reformers” of this city, on the score of his being the inventor of the
game of _tarrochino_, the right of placing his escutcheon of arms on the
“queen _de bâton_,” and that of his wife’s arms on the “queen _de
denier_.” _Bâtons_, _deniers_, with _coupes_ and _épées_, were then the
suits of the Italian cards, as _carreau_ (diamond), _trèfle_ (club),
_cœur_ (heart), and _pique_ (spade), were those of the French cards.
No original specimen has been preserved of the _tarots_ (_tarrochi_,
_tarrochini_) or Italian cards of this epoch; but we possess a pack
engraved about 1460, which is known to be an exact copy of them. Added
to this, Raphael Maffei, who lived at the end of the fifteenth century,
has left in his “Commentaries” a description of _tarots_, which were, he
says, “a new invention,”--in comparison, doubtless, with the origin of
playing-cards. From these two documents--though they present some
differences--we may gather that the pack of _tarots_ was then composed
of four or five series or suits, each of ten cards, bearing consecutive
numbers, and presenting so many _deniers_, _bâtons_, _coupes_, and
_épées_, equal in number to that of the card. To these series we must
add a whole assortment of figures, representing the _King_, the _Queen_,
the _Knight_, the _Foot-traveller_, the _World_, _Justice_, an _Angel_,
the _Sun_, the _Devil_, a _Castle_, _Death_, a _Gibbet_, the _Pope_,
_Love_, a _Buffoon_ (Fig. 206), &c.
It is evident that _tarots_ were current in France long before the
invention of the game of piquet, which is unquestionably of French
origin; and among these _tarots_ we must class the cards that are called
those of Charles VI. (Figs. 207 and 208), and are now preserved in the
Print-Room of the Bibliothèque Impériale in Paris; these may be
considered as the oldest to be found in any collection, either public or
private. The Abbé de Longuerue states that he saw the pack with all its
cards complete; but only seventeen have been preserved to our day. These
cards are painted with delicacy, like the miniatures in manuscripts, on
a gilt ground, filled with dots forming a perforated ornamentation; they
are also surrounded by a silvered border in which a similar dotting
depicts a spirally twisted ribbon. This dotting is doubtless the _tare_,
a kind of goffering produced by small holes pricked out and arranged in
compartments, to which the _tarots_ owe their names, and of which our
present cards still retain a kind of reminiscence, in their backs being
covered with arabesques or dotted over in black or various colours.
These cards were about seven inches long and three and a half inches
wide, and were painted in distemper on cardboard ·039 inch thick. The
composition of them is ingenious and to some extent skilful, the drawing
correct and full of character, and the colouring or illumination
brilliant.
[Illustration: Fig. 206.--The Buffoon, a Card from a Pack of _Tarots_.
Fifteenth Century.]
Among the subjects they represent are some which deserve all the more
attention, because they can hardly fail to recall to mind a conception
somewhat similar to that of the “Dance of Death,” that terrible
“morality” which, dating from this epoch, was destined to increase more
and more in popularity. Thus, for instance, by the side of the
_Emperor_, who is covered with silver armour and holds the globe and the
sceptre, a _Hermit_ makes his appearance as an old man muffled in a cowl
and holding up an hour-glass, an emblem of the rapidity of time. Then we
have the _Pope_, who, with the tiara on his head, sits between two
cardinals; but _Death_ is also there, mounted on a grey horse with a
rough and shaggy coat, and sweeping down with his scythe kings, popes,
bishops, and other great men of the earth. If we see _Love_, represented
by three couples of lovers who embrace as they converse, while two
cupids dart at them their arrows from a cloud above; we also see a
_Gibbet_, on which hangs a gambler suspended by one foot, and still
holding in his hand a bag of money. An _Esquire_, clothed in gold and
scarlet, rides gallantly along, proudly waving his sword; a _Chariot_
bears in triumph an officer in full armour; a _Fool_ places his cap and
bells under his arm that he may count upon his fingers. Finally, the
last trumpets are waking up the dead, who come out of their graves to
appear at the Last Judgment.
[Illustrations: Fig. 207.--The Moon.
Fig. 208.--Justice.
(Cards taken from the Pack, said to be of Charles VI., preserved in the
Bibl. Imp., Paris.)]
Most of these allegorical subjects have been retained in the _tarots_,
which include, independent of the sixteen figures of our piquet-pack,
twenty-two cards, representing the _Emperor_, the _Lover_, the
_Chariot_, the _Hermit_, the _Gibbet_, _Death_, the _House of God_, the
_End of the World_, &c.
We should scarcely be justified in imagining that these _tarots_,
presenting as they did a picture of life so gloomily philosophical,
regarded from a Christian point of view, could have enjoyed any great
favour in the centre of a frivolous and corrupt court, devoted to little
else but _fêtes_, masquerades, and singing; this, too, at a time when
the State, a prey to every kind of intrigue, was falling into ruin, and
the voice of insurrection was surging up among a people burdened by
taxes, and decimated by pestilence and famine. On the other hand these
_tarots_ might well please the imagination of certain good people who,
having been deprived of their property in some of the disturbances
incidental to these times, could not fail to accept as a consolation
such emblematical representations of life and death. Artists of every
kind tried their best to reproduce them in all forms; and as these
designs found a place even in the ornaments of the female sex, it was
scarcely probable that playing-cards would form an exception.
We are in possession of the remains of two ancient packs of cards,
produced by means of engraved plates; they were discovered, like most
cards of this date which have come to light, in the bindings of books of
the fifteenth century. These cards, which belong to the reign of Charles
VII., are essentially French in their character. We find in them the
king, the queen, and the knave of each suit, as in our present pack of
piquet cards. In one of these ancient packs we notice, however, traces
of the Saracenic origin of the _naïbi_; the Mussulman “crescent” being
substituted for the “diamond,” while the “club” is depicted in the
Arabian or Moorish fashion; that is, with four similar branches. There
is also another peculiarity; the “king of hearts” is represented by a
kind of savage, or hairy ape, leaning upon a knotty stick. The “queen”
of the same suit is likewise covered with hair, and holds a torch in her
hand. The “knave of clubs,” who is well fitted to serve as an escort to
the “king” and “queen of hearts,” is also covered with hair, and carries
a knotty stick on his shoulder. We may, besides, notice the legs of a
fourth hairy personage among those which have been separated from their
bodies by the knife of the bookbinder. But, with the exception of these,
all the other personages are clothed according to the fashion or the
etiquette which prevailed at the court of Charles VII. The “queen of
crescents” is represented in a costume similar to that of
[Illustration: Fig. 209.--Charles VI. on his Throne, from a Miniature in
the MS. of the Kings of France. (Bibl. Imp., Paris.)]