CHAPTER X.

AMUSEMENTS AFTER DINNER.--GAMBLING.--THE GAME OF CHESS.--ITS

HISTORY.--DICE.--TABLES.--DRAUGHTS.

The dinner hour, even among the highest ranks of society, was, as I

have stated, early in the forenoon; and, except in the case of great

feasts, it appears not to have been customary to sit long after dinner.

Thus a great part of the day was left on people’s hands, to fill up

with some description of amusement or occupation. After the dinner

was taken away, and the ceremony of washing had been gone through,

the wine cup appears to have been at least once passed round, before

they all rose from table. The Camden Society has recently published

an early French metrical romance (“Blonde of Oxford,” by Philippe de

Reimes), which gives us a very interesting picture of the manners of

the thirteenth century. Jean of Dammartin is represented as the son of

a noble family in France, who comes to England to seek his fortune,

and enters the service of an earl of Oxford, as one of the esquires in

his household. There his duty is to attend upon the earl’s daughter,

the lady Blonde, and to serve her at table. “After the meal, they wash

their hands and then go to play, as each likes best, either in forests

or on rivers (_i.e._ hunting or hawking), or in amusements of other

kinds. Jean goes to which of them he likes, and, when he returns, he

often goes to play in the chambers of the countess, with the ladies,

who oblige him to teach them French.” Jean does his best to please

them, for which he was qualified by his education, “For he was very

well acquainted with chamber games, such as chess, tables, and dice,

with which he entertains his damsel (Blonde); he often says ‘check’

and ‘mate’ to her, and he taught her to play many a game:”--

_De jus de cambres seut assés,_

_D’eschés, de tables, et de dés,_

_Dont il sa damoisele esbat;_

_Souvent li dist eschek et mat;_

_De maint jeu à juer l’aprist._

--Blonde of Oxford, l. 399.

This is a correct picture of the usual occupations of the after-part of

the day among the superior classes of society in the feudal ages; and

scenes in accordance with it are often found in the illuminations of

the mediæval manuscripts. One of these is represented in the engraving

(No. 138) on the following page, taken from a manuscript of the

fifteenth century, containing the romance of the “Quatre Fils d’Aymon,”

and preserved in the Library of the Arsenal, in Paris. In the chamber

in front a nobleman and one of the great ladies of his household are

engaged at chess, while in the background we see other ladies enjoying

themselves in the garden, which is shown to us with its summer-house

and its flower-beds surrounded with fences of lattice-work. It may be

remarked, that the attention of the chess-players is withdrawn suddenly

from their game by the entrance of an armed knight, who appears in

another compartment of the illumination in the manuscript.

Of the chamber games enumerated in the foregoing extract from the

romance of “Blonde of Oxford,” that of chess was no doubt looked upon

as by far the most distinguished. To play well at chess was considered

as a very important part of an aristocratic education. Thus, in the

“Chanson de Geste” (metrical romance) of Parise la Duchessse, the son

of the heroine, who was brought up by the king in his palace, had

no sooner reached his fifteenth year, than “he was taught first his

letters, until he had made sufficient progress in them, and then he

learnt to play at tables and chess,” and learnt these games so well,

“that no man in this world was able to mate him:”--

_Quant l’anfès ot xv. anz et compliz et passez,_

_Premiers aprist à lettres, tant qu’il en sot assez;_

_Puis aprist-il as tables et à eschas joier,_

_It n’a ome an cest monde qui l’en peust mater._

--Parise la Duchesse, p. 86.

In this numerous cycle of romances, scenes in which kings and princes,

as well as nobles, are represented as occupying their leisure with the

game of chess, occur very frequently, and sometimes the game forms an

important incident in the story. In “Garin le Loherain,” a messenger

hurries to Bordeaux, and finds count Thiebaut playing at chess with

Berengier d’Autri. Thiebaut is so much excited by his news, that he

pushes the chess-board violently from him, and scatters the chess-men

about the place--

_Thiebaus l’oït, à pou n’enrage vis,_

_Li eschés boute, et le jeu espandit._

--Garin le Loherain, ii. 77.

So, in the same romance, the emperor Pepin, arriving at his camp,

had no sooner entered his tent than, having put on a loose tunic

(_bliaut_), and a mantle, he called for a chess-board, and sat down to

play--

_Eschés demande, si est au jeu assis._

--Ib., ii. 127.

Even Witikind, the king of the pagan Saxons, is represented as amusing

himself with this game. When the messenger, who carried him news

that Charlemagne was on the way to make war upon him, arrived at

“Tremoigne,” the palace of the Saxon king, he found Witikind playing at

chess with Escorfaus de Lutise, and the Saxon queen. Sebile, who was

also well acquainted with the game, looking on--

_A lui joe as eschas Escorfaus de Lutise;_

_Sebile les esgarde, qi do jeu est aprise._

--Chanson des Saxons, i. 91.

Witikind was so angry at this intelligence, that his face “became as

red as a cherry,” and he broke the chess-board to pieces--

_D’ire et de mautalant rugist comme cerise;_

_Le message regarde, le geu peçoie et brise._

In the “Chanson de Geste” of Guerin de Montglaive, the story turns upon

an imprudent act of Charlemagne, who stakes his whole kingdom upon a

game of chess, and losing it to Guerin, is obliged to compound with him

by surrendering to him his right to the city of Montglaive, then in the

possession of the Saracens.

[Illustration: _No. 138. A Mediæval after-dinner Scene._]

These “Chansons de Geste,” formed upon the traditions of the early

Carlovingian period, can only of course be taken as a picture of the

manner of the age at which they were composed, that is, of the twelfth

and thirteenth centuries, and we know, from historical evidence, that

the picture is strictly true. At that period chess certainly was

what has been termed the royal game. The celebrated Walter Mapes,

writing in the latter half of the twelfth century, gives a curious

anecdote relating to tragical events which had occurred at the court

of Britany, apparently in the earlier part of the same century. Alan

of Britany, perhaps the last of the name who had ruled over that

country, had, at the suggestion of his wife, entrapped a feudatory

prince, Remelin, and subjected him to the loss of his eyes and other

mutilations. Remelin’s son, Wigan, having escaped a similar fate,

made war upon Alan, and reduced him to such extremities that, through

the interference of the king of France, he made his peace with Wigan,

by giving him his daughter in marriage, and thus for many years the

country remained in peace. But it appears that the lady always shared

in her father’s feuds, and looked with exulting contempt on her

father’s mutilated enemy. One day she was playing with her husband at

chess, and, towards the end of the game, Wigan, called away by some

important business, asked one of his knights to take his place at

the chess-board. The lady was the conqueror, and when she made her

last move, she said to the knight, “It is not to you, but to the son

of the mutilated that I say ‘mate.’” Wigan heard this sarcasm, and,

deeply offended, hurried to the residence of his father-in-law, took

him by surprise, and inflicted upon him the same mutilations which

had been experienced by Remelin. Then, returning home, he engaged in

another game with his wife, and, having gained it, threw the eyes and

other parts of which her father had been deprived on the chess-board,

exclaiming, “I say _mate_, to the daughter of the mutilated.” The story

goes on to say that the lady concealed her desire of vengeance, until

she found an opportunity of effecting the murder of her husband.

We need not be surprised if, among the turbulent barons of the middle

ages, the game of chess often gave rise to disputes and sanguinary

quarrels. The curious history of the Fitz-Warines, reduced to writing

certainly in the thirteenth century, gives the following account of

the origin of the feud between king John and Fulk Fitz-Warine, the

outlaw:--“Young Fulk,” we are told, “was bred with the four sons of

king Henry II., and was much beloved by them all except John; for

he used often to quarrel with John. It happened that John and Fulk

were sitting all alone in a chamber playing at chess; John took the

chess-board and struck Fulk a great blow. Fulk felt himself hurt,

raised his foot and struck John in the middle of the stomach, that

his head went against the wall, and he became all weak and fainted.

Fulk was in consternation; but he was glad that there was nobody in the

chamber but they two, and he rubbed John’s ears, who recovered from

his fainting-fit, and went to the king his father, and made a great

complaint. ‘Hold your tongue, wretch,’ said the king, ‘you are always

quarrelling. If Fulk did anything but good to you, it must have been

by your own desert;’ and he called his master, and made him beat him

finely and well for complaining.” Similar incidents recur continually

in the early romances I have just quoted as the “Chansons de Geste,”

which give us so vivid a picture of feudal times. A fatal quarrel of

this kind was the cause of the feud between Charlemagne and Ogier le

Danois. At one of the Easter festivals of the court of Charlemagne, the

emperor’s son, Charles, and Bauduin, the illegitimate son of Ogier,

went to play together. Bauduin and young Charles took a chess-board and

sat down to the game for pastime. “They have arranged their chess-men

on the board. The king’s son first moved his pawn, and young Bauduin

moved his _aufin_ (bishop) backwards. The king’s son thought to press

him very hard, and moves his knight upon the other _aufin_. The one

moved forward and the other backward so long, that young Bauduin said

‘mate’ to him in the corner:”--

_Il et Callos prisent un esquekier,_

_Au ju s’asisent por aus esbanier._

_S’ont lor esches assis sor le tabler._

_Li fix au roi traist son paon premier,_

_Bauduinés traist son aufin arier._

_Li fix au roi le volt forment coitier,_

_Sus l’autre aufin a trait son chevalier._

_Tant traist li uns avant et l’autre arier,_

_Bauduinés li dist mat en l’angler._

--Ogier de Danemarche, l. 3159.

The young prince was furious at his defeat, and, not content with

treating the son of Ogier with the most insulting language, he seized

the chess-board in his two hands, and struck him so violent a blow on

the forehead, that he split his head, and scattered his brains over

the floor. In a well-known illuminated manuscript of the fifteenth

century, in the British Museum (MS. Reg. 15 E. vi.), containing a copy

of the romance of “Ogier le Danois,” this scene is represented in an

illumination which is copied in our cut No. 139. Similar incidents are

rather common in these old romances. In that of “Parise la Duchesse,”

her young son, brought up as a foundling at the court of the king of

Hungary, becomes an object of jealousy to the old nobles. Four of the

sons of the latter conspire to murder him, and it is arranged that

they shall invite him to go and play at chess with them in a retired

cellar, and, having secretly provided themselves with knives, insult

him, in order to draw him into a quarrel, and then stab him to death.

“Hugues,” they said, “will you come with us to play at chess? you may

gain a hundred francs on the gilt chess-board, and at the same time you

will teach us chess and dice; for certainly you know the games much

better than any of us.” Hugues seems to have been conscious of the

frequency of quarrels arising from the game, for it was not until they

had promised him that they would not seek any cause of dispute, that

he accepted their invitation. They then led him into the cellar, and

sat down at the chess-board. “He began by playing with the son of duke

Granier; and each put down a hundred francs in coined money; but he had

soon vanquished and mated them all, that not one of them was able to

mate him:”--

_Au fil au duc Graner comença à juer;_

_Chascuns mist c. frans de deniers moniez;_

_Mais il les a trestoz et vancus et matez,_

_Que il n’i ot i. sol qui l’an poüft mater._

--Parise la Duchesse, p. 105.

Hugues, in kindness, offered to teach them better how to play, without

allowing them to risk their money, but they drew their knives upon him,

and insulted him in the most outrageous terms. He killed the foremost

of them with a blow of his fist, and seizing upon the chess-board for

a weapon, for he was unarmed, he “brained” the other three with it. We

learn from this anecdote that it was the custom in the middle ages to

play at chess for money.

[Illustration: _No. 139. A Quarrel at Chess._]

As I have already remarked, these romances picture to us the manners of

the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and not those of the Carlovingian

era. The period when the game of chess was first introduced into

western Europe can only be conjectured, for writers of all descriptions

were so much in the habit of employing the notions belonging to their

own time in relating the events of the past, that we can place no

dependence on anything which is not absolute contemporary evidence.

The chess-board and men so long preserved in the treasury of St.

Denis, and said to have belonged to Charlemagne, were, I think,

probably, not older than the eleventh century, and appear to have had

a Byzantine origin. If the game of chess had been known at the court

of Charlemagne, I cannot but think that we should have found some

distinct allusion to it. The earliest mention of this game that we

know is found in a letter from Damianus, cardinal bishop of Ostia,

to Alexander II., who was elected to the papacy in 1061, and enjoyed

it till 1073. Damianus tells the pope how he was travelling with a

bishop of Florence, when, “having arrived in the evening at a hostel,

I withdrew,” he says, “into the cell of a priest, while he remained

with the crowd of travellers in the spacious house. In the morning, I

was informed by my servant that the aforesaid bishop had been playing

at the game of chess; which information, like an arrow, pierced my

heart very acutely. At a convenient hour, I sent for him, and said in

a tone of severe reproof, ‘The hand is stretched out, the rod is ready

for the back of the offender.’ ‘Let the fault be proved,’ said he,

‘and penance shall not be refused.’ ‘Was it well,’ I rejoined, ‘was it

worthy of the character you bear, to spend the evening in the vanity of

chess-play (_in vanitate scachorum_), and defile the hands and tongue,

which ought to be the mediator between man and the Deity? Are you not

aware that, by the canonical law, bishops, who are dice-players, are

ordered to be deposed?’ He, however, making himself a shield of defence

from the difference in the names, said that dice was one thing, and

chess another; consequently that the canon only forbade dice, but

that it tacitly allowed chess. To which I replied, ‘Chess,’ I said,

‘is not named in the text, but the general term of dice comprehends

both the games. Wherefore, since dice are prohibited, and chess is

not expressly mentioned, it follows, without doubt, that both kinds

of play are included under one term, and equally condemned?’” This

occurred in Italy, and it is evident from it that the game of chess was

then well known there, though I think we have a right to conclude from

it, that it had not been long known. There appears to be little room

for doubting, that chess was, like so many other mediæval practices,

an oriental invention, that the Byzantine Greeks derived it from the

Saracens, and that from them it came by way of Italy to France.

The knowledge of the game of chess, however, seems to have been

brought more directly from the East by the Scandinavian navigators,

to whom such a means of passing time in their distant voyages, and

in their long nights at home, was most welcome, and who soon became

extraordinarily attached to it, and displayed their ingenuity in

elaborately carving chess-men in ivory (that is, in the ivory of

the walrus), which seem to have found an extensive market in other

countries. In the year 1831, a considerable number of these carved

ivory chess-men were found on the coast of the Isle of Lewis, probably

the result of some shipwreck in the twelfth century, for to that period

they belong. They formed part of at least seven sets, and had therefore

probably been the stock of a dealer. Some of them were obtained by

the British Museum, and a very learned and valuable paper on them was

communicated by sir Frederic Madden to the Society of Antiquaries,

and printed in the twenty-fourth volume of the _Archæologia_. Some of

the best of them, however, remained in private hands, and have more

recently passed into the rich museum of the late lord Londesborough.

We give here two groups of these curious chess-men, taken from the

collection of lord Londesborough, and from those in the British Museum

as engraved in the volume of the _Archæologia_ just referred to. The

first group, forming our cut No. 140, consists of a king (1), from the

collection of lord Londesborough, and a queen (2), bishop (3), and

knight (4), all from the _Archæologia_; and the second group (No. 141)

presents us with the warriors on foot, to which the Icelanders gave the

name of _hrokr_, and to which sir Frederic Madden gives the English

name of warders, one of them (5) from lord Londesborough’s collection,

the other (6) from the British Museum. The rest are pawns, all from the

latter collection; they are generally plain and octagonal, as in the

group to the right (7), but were sometimes ornamented, as in the case

of the other example (8).

[Illustration: _No. 140. Icelandic Chess-men of the Twelfth Century._]

It will be seen at once that in name and character these chess-men are

nearly identical with those in common use, although in costume they

are purely Scandinavian. The king sits in the position, with his sword

across his knee, and his hand ready to draw it, which is described as

characteristic of royalty in the old northern poetry. The queen holds

in her hand a drinking horn, in which at great festivals the lady of

the household, of whatever rank, was accustomed to serve out the ale or

mead to the guests. The bishops are some seated, and others standing,

but all distinguished by the mitre, crosier, and episcopal costume.

The knights are all on horseback, and are covered with characteristic

armour. The armed men on foot, just mentioned by the name of warders,

were peculiar to the Scandinavian set of chess-men, and supplied the

place of the rocks, or rooks, in the mediæval game, and of the modern

castle.

[Illustration: _No. 141. Icelandic Chess-men of the Twelfth Century._]

Several of the chess-men had indeed gone through more than one

modification in their progress from the East. The Arabs and Persians

admitted no female among the persons on their chess-board, and the

piece which we call the queen was with them the _pherz_ (vizier or

councillor). The oriental name, under the form _fers_, _ferz_, or

_ferce_, in Latin _ferzia_, was long preferred in the middle ages,

though certainly as early as the twelfth century the original character

of the piece had been changed for that of a queen, and the names _fers_

and queen became synonymous. It is hardly necessary to say that a

bishop would not be found on a Saracenic chess-board. This piece was

called by the Persians and Arabs _pil_ or _phil_, meaning an elephant,

under the form of which animal it was represented. This name was also

preserved in its transmission to the west, and with the Arab article

prefixed became _alfil_, or more commonly _alfin_, which was again

softened down into _aufin_, the usual name of the piece in the old

French and English writers. The character of the bishop must have

been adopted very early among the Christians, and it is found under

that character among the Northerns, and in England. Such, however,

was not the case everywhere. The Russians and Swedes have preserved

the original name of the elephant. In Italy and France this piece was

sometimes represented as an archer; and at an early period in the

latter country, from a supposed confusion of the Arabic _fil_ with

the French _fol_, it was sometimes called by the latter name, and

represented as a court jester. _Roc_, the name given by the Saracens to

the piece now called the castle, meant apparently a hero, or champion,

Persian _rokh_; the name was preserved in the middle ages, but the

piece seems to have been first represented under the character of

an elephant, and it was no doubt, from the tower which the elephant

carried on its back, that our modern form originated. The Icelanders

seem alone to have adopted the name in its original meaning, for with

them, as shown in cut No. 141, the _hrokr_ is represented as a warrior

on foot.

[Illustration: _No. 142. Chess-man of the Thirteenth Century._]

A few examples of carved chess-men have been found in different parts

of England, which show that these highly-ornamented pieces were in

use at all periods. One of these, represented in our cut No. 142, is

preserved in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, and, to judge by the

costume, belongs to the earlier part of the thirteenth century. Its

material is the tooth of the walrus (the northern ivory); it represents

a knight on both sides, one wielding a lance, the other a sword, the

intervening spaces being filled with foliage. Another knight, made of

real ivory, is represented in our cut No. 143, taken from an engraving

in the third volume of the _Archæological Journal_, where it is stated

to be in the possession of the Rev. J. Eagles, of Worcester. It belongs

to the reign of Edward III. Here the knight is on horseback, and

wears chain-mail and plate. The body of the horse is entirely covered

with chain-mail, over which housings are placed, and the head with

plate-armour.

[Illustration: _No. 143. Chess-man of the Fourteenth Century._]

All who are acquainted with the general character of mediæval carving

will suppose that these ornamental chess-men were of large dimensions,

and consequently rather clumsy for use. The largest of those found in

the Isle of Lewis, a king, is upwards of four inches in height, and

nearly seven inches in circumference. They were hence rather formidable

weapons in a strong hand, and we find them used as such in some of the

scenes of the early romances. According to one version of the death of

Bauduin, the illegitimate son of Ogier, the young prince Charles struck

him with the rook so violent a blow that he made his two eyes fly out:--

_Là le dona Callos le cop mortel_

_Si com juoit as eskés et as dés;_

_Là le feri d’un rok par tel fiertés,_

_Que andus les elx li fist du cief voler._

--Ogier de Danemarche, l. 90.

A rather rude illumination is one of the manuscripts, of which M.

Barrois has given a fac-simile in his edition of this romance,

representing Charles striking his opponent with the rook. According

to another version of the story, the young prince, using the rook as

a missile, threw it at him. An incident in the romance of the “Quatre

Fils d’Aymon,” where the agents of Regnault go to arrest the duke

Richard of Normandy, and find him playing at chess, is thus told

quaintly in the English version, printed by Copeland:--“When duke

Richarde saw that these sergeauntes had him thus by the arm, and helde

in his hande a lady of ivery, wherewith he would have given a mate to

Yonnet, he withdrew his arme, and gave to one of the sergeauntes such a

stroke with it into the forehead, that he made him tumble over and over

at his feete; and than he tooke a rooke, and smote another withall upon

his head, that he all to-brost it to the brayne.”

[Illustration: _No. 144. An Early Chess-board and Chess-men._]

The chess-boards were naturally large, and were sometimes made of

the precious metals, and of other rich materials. In one romance,

the chess-board and men are made of crystal; in another, that of

“Alexander,” the men are made of sapphires and topazes. A chess-board,

preserved in the museum of the Hôtel de Cluny, at Paris, and said to

have been the one given by the old man of the mountains (the sheikh of

the Hassassins) to St. Louis, is made of rock-crystal, and mounted in

silver gilt. In the romances, however, the chess-board is sometimes

spoken of as made of _ormier_, or elm. In fact, when the game of

chess came into extensive use, it became necessary not only to make

the chess-board and men of less expensive materials and smaller, but

to give to the latter simple conventional forms, instead of making

them elaborate sculptures. The foundation for this latter practice

had already been laid by the Arabs, whose tenets, contrary to those

of the Persians, proscribed all images of living beings. The mediæval

conventional form of the rook, a figure with a bi-parted head, somewhat

approaching to the heraldic form of the fleur-de-lis, appears to

have been taken directly from the Arabs. The knight was represented

by a small upright column, the upper part of it bent to one side,

and is supposed to have been meant for a rude representation of the

horse’s head. The aufin, or bishop, had the same form as the knight,

except that the bent end was cleft, probably as an indication of the

episcopal mitre. The accompanying figure of a chess-board (No. 144),

taken from a manuscript of the earlier part of the fourteenth century

(MS. Cotton. Cleopat. B. ix.), but no doubt copied from one of the

latter part of the thirteenth century, when the Anglo-Norman metrical

treatise on chess which it illustrates was composed, gives all the

conventional forms of chess-men used at that time. The piece at the

left-hand extremity of the lower row is evidently a king. The other

king is seen in the centre of the upper row. Immediately to the left of

the latter is the queen, and the two figures below the king and queen

are knights, while those to the left of the queen and white knight are

rooks. Those in the right-hand corner, at top and bottom, are aufins,

or bishops. The pawns on this chess-board bear a striking resemblance

to those found in the Isle of Lewis. The same forms, with very slight

variations, present themselves in the scenes of chess-playing as

depicted in the illuminated manuscripts. Thus, in a manuscript of

the French prose romance of “Meliadus,” in the British Museum (MS.

Addit. No. 12,228, fol. 23, v^o), written between the years 1330 and

1350, we have an interesting sketch (given in our cut No. 145) of two

kings engaged in this game. The rooks and the bishops are distinctly

represented, but the others are less easily recognised, in consequence

of the imperfect drawing. Our next cut (No. 146) is taken from the

well-known manuscript of the poetry of the German Minnesingers, made

for Rudiger von Manesse, early in the fourteenth century, and now

preserved in the National Library in Paris, and represents the prince

poet, Otto of Brandenburg, playing at chess with a lady. We have

here the same conventional forms of chess-men, a circumstance which

shows that the same types prevailed in England, France, and Germany.

Another group, in which a king is introduced playing at chess, forms

the subject of our cut No. 147, and is taken from a manuscript of the

thirteenth century, in the Harleian collection in the British Museum

(No. 1275), consisting of a numerous series of illustrations of the

Bible history, executed evidently in England. It will be seen that the

character of chess as a royal game is sustained throughout.

[Illustration: _No. 145. A Royal Game at Chess._]

[Illustration: _No. 146. A Game at Chess in the Fourteenth Century._]

[Illustration: _No. 147. A King at Chess._]

In this century the game of chess had become extremely popular among

the feudal aristocracy--including under that head all who could aspire

to knighthood. Already, in the twelfth century, directions for the

game had been composed in Latin verse, which seems to show that, in

spite of the zeal of men like cardinal Damianus, it was popular among

the clergy. Towards the latter end of the thirteenth century, a French

dominican friar, Jacques de Cessoles, made the game the subject of

a moral work, entitled _Moralitas de Scaccario_, which became very

popular in later times, was published in a French version by Jean

de Vignay, and translated from this French version into English, by

Caxton, in his “Boke of Chesse,” so celebrated among bibliographers.

To the age of Jacques de Cessoles belongs an Anglo-Norman metrical

treatise on chess, of which several copies are preserved in manuscript

(the one I have used is in MS. Reg. 13 A. xviii. fol. 161, v^o), and

which presents us with the first collection of games. These games are

distinguished by quaint names, like those given to the old dances; such

as _de propre confusion_ (one’s own confusion), _ky perde, sey sauve_

(the loser wins), _ky est larges, est sages_ (he that is liberal is

wise), _meschief fet hom penser_ (misfortune makes a man reflect), _la

chace de ferce et de chivaler_ (the chace of the queen and the knight),

_de dames et de damyceles_ (ladies and damsels), _la batalie de rokes_

(the battle of the rooks), and the like.

It is quite unnecessary to attempt to point out the numerous allusions

to the game of chess during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries,

when it continued to be extremely popular. Chaucer, in one of his

minor poems, the “Boke of the Duchesse,” introduces himself in a dream

as playing at chess with Fortune, and speaks of false moves, as though

dishonest tricks were sometimes practised in the game. He tells us,--

_At chesse with me she gan to pleye,_

_With hir fals draughtes_ (moves) _dyvers

_She staale on me, and toke my fers_ (queen);

_And whanne I saugh my fers awaye,_

_Allas! I kouthe no lenger playe,_

_But seyde, “Farewel, swete! ywys,_

_And farewel al that ever ther ys!”_

_Therwith Fortune seyde, “Chek here!”_

_And “mate” in the myd poynt of the chekkere_ (chess-board),

_With a powne_ (pawn) _errante, allas!_

_Ful craftier to pleye she was_

_Than Athalus, that made the game_

_First of the chesse, so was hys name._

--ROBERT BELL’S Chaucer, vol. vi. p. 157.

With the breaking up of feudalism, the game of chess seems to have gone

to a great extent out of practice, and made way for a comparatively

new game,--that of cards, which now became very popular. When Caxton

printed his “Boke of Chesse” in 1474, he sought only to publish a

moral treatise, and not to furnish his countrymen with a book of

instructions in the game. The cut of the chess-player given in this

book, copied in our cut No. 148, shows some modifications in the forms

of the chess-men. The knight, the rook, and the pawn, have preserved

their old forms; but we are led to suppose, by the number of pieces

with the bi-partite head, that the bishop had assumed a shape nearly

resembling that of the rook. We have just seen Chaucer alluding to one

of the legends relating to the origin of this game. Caxton, after Jean

de Vignay and Jacques de Cessoles, gives us a strange story how it was

invented under Evylmerodach, king of Babylon, by a philosopher, “whyche

was named in Caldee Exerses, or in Greke Philemetor.”

[Illustration: _No. 148. Chess in the Fifteenth Century._]

[Illustration: _No. 149. An Italian Chess-board._]

Meanwhile, the game of chess had continued to flourish in Italy, where

it appears to have experienced improvements, and where certainly the

forms of the men were considerably modified. An Italian version of the

work of Jacques de Cessoles was printed at Florence in 1493, under the

title of _Libro de Giuocho delli Scacchi_, among the engravings to

which, as in most of the editions of that work, there is a picture of

a group of chess-players, who are here seated at a round table. The

chess-board is represented in our cut, No. 149, and it will be seen at

a glance that the chess-men present a far greater resemblance to those

used at the present day than those given in the older illuminations.

Within a few years of the date of this book, a Portuguese, named

Damiano, who was perhaps residing in Italy, as his work seems to have

appeared there first, drew up a book of directions for chess with a

set of eighty-eight games, which display considerable ingenuity. An

edition of this book was published at Rome as early as 1524, and

perhaps this was not the first. The figures of the chess-men are given

in this treatise; that of the king is vase-shaped, not unlike our

modern chess-king, but with two crowns; the queen is similar in shape,

but has one crown; the _delfino_ (bishop) differs from them in being

smaller, and having no crown; the _cavallo_ (knight) has the form of

a horse’s head; the _rocho_, as it is still called, is in the form of

a tower, like our modern castle; and the _pedona_ (pawn) resembles a

cone, with a knob at the apex. In England, the game of chess seems

not to have been much in vogue during the sixteenth century; it is, I

believe, only alluded to once in Shakespeare, in a well-known scene

in the Tempest, which may have been taken from a foreign story, to

which he owed his plot. The name of the game had been corrupted into

_chests_ or _cheasts_. The game of chess was expressly discouraged by

our “Solomon,” James I., as “overwise and philosophicke a folly.” An

attempt to bring it into more notice appears to have been made early

in the reign of Elizabeth, under the patronage of lord Robert Dudley,

afterwards the celebrated earl of Leicester, who displayed on many

occasions a taste for refinements of this sort. Instructions were again

sought from Italy through France; for there was printed and published

in London, in the year 1562, a little volume dedicated to lord Robert

Dudley, under the title of “The Pleasaunt and wittie Playe of the

Cheasts reniewed, with Instructions both to Learn it Easily and to

Play it Well; lately translated out of Italian into French, and now

set forth in Englishe by James Rowbotham.” Rowbotham gives us some

remarks of his own on the character of the game, and on the different

forms of the chess-men, which are not uninteresting. He says:--“As

for the fashion of the pieces, that is according to the fantasie of

the workman, which maketh them after this manner. Some make them lyke

men, whereof the kynge is the highest, and the queene (whiche some

name amasone or ladye) is the next, bothe two crowned. The bishoppes

some name alphins, some fooles, and some name them princes, lyke as

also they are next unto the kinge and the queene, other some cal them

archers, and thei are fashioned accordinge to the wyll of the workeman.

The knights some call horsemen, and thei are men on horse backe. The

rookes some cal elephantes, cariyng towres upon their backes, and men

within the towres. The paunes some cal fote men, as they are souldiours

on fote, cariyng some of them pykes, other some harquebushes, other

some halbards, and other some the javelyn and target. Other makers of

cheastmen make them of other fashions; but the use thereof wyll cause

perfect knowledge.” “Our Englishe cheastmen,” he adds, “are commonly

made nothing like unto these foresayde fashions: to wit, the kynge is

made the highest or longest; the queene is longest nexte unto him; the

bishoppe is made with a sharpe toppe, and cloven in the middest not

muche unlyke to a bishop’s myter; the knight hath his top cut asloope,

as thoughe beynge dubbed knight; the rooke is made lykest to the kynge

and the queene, but that he is not so long; the paunes be made the

smalest and least of all, and thereby they may best be knowen.”

At an early period the German tribes, as known to the Romans, were

notoriously addicted to gambling. We are informed by Tacitus that

a German in his time would risk not only his property, but his own

personal liberty, on a throw of the dice; and if he lost, he submitted

patiently, as a point of honour, to be bound by his opponent, and

carried to the market to be sold into slavery. The Anglo-Saxons appear

to have shared largely in this passion, and their habits of gambling

are alluded to in different writers. A well-known writer of the first

half of the twelfth century, Ordericus Vitalis, tells us that in his

time even the prelates of the church were in the habit of playing at

dice. A still more celebrated writer, John of Salisbury, who lived a

little later in the same century, speaks of dice-playing as being then

extremely prevalent, and enumerates no less than ten different games,

which he names in Latin, as follows:--_tessera_, _calculus_, _tabula_

(tables), _urio vel Dardana pugna_ (Troy fight), _tricolus_, _senio_

(sice), _monarchus_, _orbiculi_, _taliorchus_, and _vulpes_ (the game

of fox).--“De Nugis Curialium,” lib. i. c. 5. The sort of estimation in

which the game was then held is curiously illustrated by an anecdote in

the Carlovingian romance of “Parise la Duchesse,” where the king of the

Hungarians wishes to contrive some means of telling the real character

(aristocratic or plebeian) of his foundling, young Hugues, not then

known to be the son of the duchess Parise. A party of robbers (which

appears not to have been a specially disreputable avocation among the

Hungarians of the romance) are employed, first to seduce the youth to

“the chess and the dice,” and afterwards to lead him against his will

to a thieving expedition, the object of which was to rob the treasury

of the king, his godfather. They made a great hole in the wall, and

thrust Hugues through it. The youth beheld the heaps of gold and silver

with astonishment, but, resolved to touch none of the wealth he saw

around him, his eyes fell upon a coffer on which lay three dice, “made

and pointed in fine ivory”--

_Garde for i. escrin, si a veu iij. dez,_

_Qui sont de fin yvoire et fait et pointuré._

--Parise la Duchesse, p. 94.

Hugues seized the three dice, thrust them into his bosom, and,

returning through the breach in the wall, told the robbers that he had

carried away “the worth of four cities.” When the robbers heard his

explanation, they at once concluded, from the taste he had displayed

on this occasion, that he was of gentle blood, and the king formed the

same opinion on the result of this trial.

During the period of which we are now speaking--the twelfth and

thirteenth centuries--the use of dice had spread itself from the

highest to the very lowest class of the population. In its simpler

form, that of the game of hazard, in which the chance of each player

rested on the mere throw of the dice, it was the common game of the

low frequenters of the taverns,--that class which lived upon the vices

of society, and which was hardly looked upon as belonging to society

itself. The practice and results of gambling are frequently referred

to in the popular writers of the later middle ages. People could no

longer stake their personal liberty on the throw, but they played for

everything they had--even for the clothes they carried upon them, on

which the tavern-keepers, who seem to have acted also as pawnbrokers,

readily lent small sums of money. We often read of men who got into the

taverner’s hands, playing as well as drinking themselves naked; and in

a well-known manuscript of the beginning of the fourteenth century (MS.

Reg. 2 B. vii. fol. 167 v^o) we find an illumination which represents

this process very literally (cut No. 150). One, who is evidently the

more aged of the two players, is already perfectly naked, whilst the

other is reduced to his shirt. The illuminator appears to have intended

to represent them as playing against each other till neither had

anything left, like the two celebrated cats of Kilkenny, who ate one

another up until nothing remained but their tails.

[Illustration: _No. 150. Mediæval Gamblers._]

[Illustration: _No. 151. A Dice-Player._]

A burlesque parody on the church service, written in Latin, perhaps

as early as the thirteenth century, and printed in the “_Reliquiæ

Antiquæ_,” gives us rather a curious picture of tavern manners at

that early period. The document is profane,--much more so than any of

the parodies for which Hone was prosecuted; but it is only a moderate

example of the general laxness in this respect which prevailed, even

among the clergy, in what have been called “the ages of faith.” This is

entitled “The Mass of the Drunkards,” and contains a running allusion

to the throwing of the three dice, and to the loss of clothing which

followed; but it is full of Latin puns on the words of the church

service, and the greater part of it would not bear a translation.

It will have been already remarked that, in all these anecdotes and

stories, the ordinary number of the dice is three. This appears to have

been the number used in most of the common games. In our cut No. 151,

taken from the illumination in a copy of Jean de Vignay’s translation

of Jacobus de Cessolis (MS. Reg. 19 C. xi.), the dice-player appears

to hold but two dice in his hand; but this is to be laid solely to

the charge of the draughtsman’s want of skill, as the text tells us

distinctly that he has three. We learn also from the text, that in the

jug he holds in his right hand he carries his money, a late example of

the use of earthen vessels for this purpose. Two dice were, however,

sometimes used, especially in the game of hazard, which appears to

have been the great gambling game of the middle ages. Chaucer, in the

“Pardoneres Tale,” describes the hazardours as playing with two dice.

But in the curious scene in the “Towneley Mysteries” (p. 241), a work

apparently contemporary with Chaucer, the tormentors, or executioners,

are introduced throwing for Christ’s unseamed garment with three dice;

the winner throws fifteen points, which could only be thrown with that

number of dice.

[Illustration: _No. 152. Ornamental Dice._]

It would not seem easy to give much ornamentation to the form of dice

without destroying their utility, yet this has been attempted at

various times, and not only in a very grotesque but in a similar manner

at very distant periods. This was done by giving the die the form of a

man, so doubled up, that when thrown he fell in different positions,

so as to show the points uppermost, like an ordinary die. The smaller

example represented in our cut No. 152 is Roman, and made of silver,

and several Roman dice of the same form are known. It is singular that

the same idea should have presented itself at a much later period,

and, as far as we can judge, without any room for supposing that it

was by imitation. Our second example, which is larger than the other,

and carved in box-wood, is of German work, and apparently as old as

the beginning of the sixteenth century. Both are now in the fine and

extensive collection of the late lord Londesborough.

[Illustration: _No. 153. A Party at Tables._]

The simple throwing of the dice was rather an excitement than an

amusement; and at an early period people sought the latter by a

combination of the dice-throwing with some other system of movements

or calculations. In this way, no doubt, originated the different

games enumerated by John of Salisbury, the most popular of which was

that of tables (_tabula_ or _tabulæ_). This game was in use among

the Romans, and was in all probability borrowed from them by the

Anglo-Saxons, among whom it was in great favour, and who called the

game _tæfel_ (evidently a mere adoption of the Latin name), and the

dice _teoselas_ and _tæfel-stanas_. The former evidently represents

the Latin _tessellæ_, little cubes; and the latter seems to show

that the Anglo-Saxon dice were usually made of stones. At a later

period, the game of _tables_, used nearly always in the plural, is

continually mentioned along with chess, as the two most fashionable and

aristocratic games in use. An early and richly illuminated manuscript

in the British Museum--perhaps of the beginning of the fourteenth

century (MS. Harl. No. 1257)--furnishes us with the figures of players

at tables represented in our cut No. 153. The table, or board, with

bars or points, is here clearly delineated, and we see that the players

use both dice and men, or pieces--the latter round discs, like our

modern draughtsmen. In another manuscript, belonging to a rather later

period of the fourteenth century (MS. Reg. 13 A. xviii. fol. 157, v^o),

we have a diagram which shows the board as composed of two tables,

represented in our cut No. 154. It was probably this construction which

caused the name to be used in the plural; and as the Anglo-Saxons

always used the name in the singular, as is the case also with John

of Salisbury in the twelfth century, while the plural is always used

by the writers of a later date, we seem justified in concluding that

the board used by the Anglo-Saxons and Anglo-Normans consisted of one

table, like that represented in our cut No. 153, and that this was

afterwards superseded by the double board. It is hardly necessary to

point out to our readers that these two pictures of the boards show

us clearly that the mediæval game of tables was identical with our

modern backgammon, or rather, we should perhaps say, that the game of

backgammon, as now played, is one of the games played on the tables.

[Illustration: _No. 154. A Table-Board (Backgammon) of the Fourteenth

Century._]

In the manuscript last quoted (MS. Reg. 13 A. xviii.) the figure of

the board is given to illustrate a very curious treatise on the game

of tables, written in Latin, in the fourteenth, or even perhaps in the

thirteenth, century. The writer begins by informing us, that “there

are many games at tables with dice, of which the first is the long

game, and is the game of the English, and it is common, and played as

follows” (_multi sunt ludi ad tabulas cum taxillis, quorum primus est

longus ludus, et est ludus Anglicorum, et est communis, et est talis

naturæ_), meaning, I presume, that it was the game usually played in

England. From the directions given for playing it, this game seems to

have had a close general resemblance to backgammon. The writer of the

treatise says that it was played with three dice, or with two dice, in

which latter case they counted six at each throw for the third dice.

In some of the other games described here, two dice only were used. We

learn from this treatise the English terms for two modes of winning

at the “long game” of tables--the one being called “lympoldyng,” the

other “lurchyng;” and a person losing by the former was said to be

“lympolded.” The writer of this tract gives directions for playing at

several other games of tables, and names some of them--such as “paume

carie,” the Lombard’s game (_ludus Lombardorum_), the “imperial,” the

“provincial,” “baralie,” and “faylys.”

This game continued long to exist in England under its old name of

_tables_. Thus Shakespeare:--

_This is the ape of form, monsieur the nice,_

_That, when he plays at_ tables, _chides the dice_.

--Love’s Labour’s Lost, Act v. Sc. 2.

The game appears at this time to have been a favourite one in the

taverns and ordinaries. Thus, in a satirical tract in verse, printed in

1600, we are told of--

_An honest vicker, and a kind consort,_

_That to the alehouse friendly would resort,_

_To have a game at_ tables _now and than,_

_Or drinke his pot as soone as any man_.

--Letting of Humours Blood, 1600.

And one of the most popular of the satirical writers of that period,

Dekker, in his “Lanthorne and Candle-Light,” printed in 1620, says,

punningly,--“And knowing that your most selected gallants are the

onelye _table-men_ that are plaid withal at ordinaries, into an

ordinarye did he most gentleman-like convay himselfe in state.” We

learn from another tract of the same author, the “Gul’s Hornbooke,”

that the table-men at this time were usually painted.

We hardly perceive how the name of tables disappeared. It seems

probable that at this time the game of tables meant simply what we now

call backgammon, a word the oldest mention of which, so far as I have

been able to discover, occurs in Howell’s “Familiar Letters,” first

printed in 1646. It is there written _baggamon_. In the “Compleat

Gamester,” 1674, backgammon and ticktack occur as two distinct games at

what would have formerly been called tables; and another similar game

was called Irish. Curiously enough, in the earlier part of the last

century the game of backgammon was most celebrated as a favourite game

among country parsons.

Another game existing in the middle ages, but much more rarely alluded

to, was called _dames_, or ladies, and has still preserved that name

in French. In English, it was changed for that of _draughts_, derived

no doubt from the circumstance of _drawing_ the men from one square to

another. Our cut No. 155, taken from a manuscript in the British Museum

of the beginning of the fourteenth century, known commonly as Queen

Mary’s Psalter (MS. Reg. 2 B. vii.), represents a lady and gentleman

playing at dames, or draughts, differing only from the character of the

game at the present day in the circumstance that the draughtsmen are

evidently square.

[Illustration: _No. 155. A Game at Draughts._]

[Illustration: _No. 156. Cards in the Fourteenth Century._]

The mediæval games were gradually superseded by a new contrivance,

that of playing-cards, which were introduced into Western Europe in

the course of the fourteenth century. It has been suggested that the

idea of playing-cards was taken from chess--in fact, that they are the

game of chess transferred to paper, and without a board, and they are

generally understood to have been derived from the East. Cards, while

they possessed some of the characteristics of chess, presented the same

mixture of chance and skill which distinguished the game of tables. An

Italian writer, probably of the latter part of the fifteenth century,

named Cavelluzzo, author of a history of Viterbo, states that “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_.” Cards are

still in Spanish called _naipes_, which is said to be derived from the

Arabic: but they were certainly known in the west of Europe before the

date given by Cavelluzzo. Our cut No. 156 is taken from a very fine

manuscript of the romance of “Meliadus,” in the British Museum (MS.

Addit. 12,228, fol. 313, v^o), which was written apparently in the

south of France between the years 1330 and 1350; it represents a royal

party playing at cards, which was therefore considered at that time as

the amusement of the highest classes of society. They are, however,

first distinctly alluded to in history in the year 1393. In that year

Charles VI. of France was labouring under a visitation of insanity; and

we find in the accounts of his treasurer, Charles Poupart, an entry to

the following effect:--“Given to Jacquemin Gringonneur, painter, for

three packs of cards, gilt and diversly coloured, and ornamented with

several devices, to deliver to the lord the king for his amusement,

fifty-six sols of Paris.” It is clear from this entry that the game of

cards was then tolerably well known in France, and that it was by no

means new, though it was evidently not a common game, and the cards

had to be made by a painter--that is, as I suppose, an illuminator of

manuscripts. We find as yet no allusion to them in England: and it is

remarkable that neither Chaucer, nor any of the numerous writers of his

and the following age, ever speak of them. An illuminated manuscript

of apparently the earlier part of the fifteenth century, perhaps of

Flemish workmanship (it contains a copy of Raoul de Presle’s French

translation of St. Augustine’s “Civitas Dei”), presents us with another

card-party, which we give in our cut No. 157. Three persons are here

engaged in the game, two of whom are ladies. After the date at which

three packs of cards were made for the amusement of the lunatic king,

the game of cards seems soon to have become common in France; for less

than four years later--on the 22nd of January, 1397--the provost of

Paris considered it necessary to publish an edict, forbidding working

people to play at tennis, bowls, dice, _cards_, or ninepins, on working

days. By one of the acts of the synod of Langres, in 1404, the clergy

were expressly forbidden to play at cards. These had now made their

way into Germany, and had become so popular there, that early in the

fifteenth century card-making had become a regular trade.

[Illustration: _No. 157. Cards in the Fifteenth Century._]

In England, in the third year of the reign of Edward IV. (1463), the

importation of playing-cards, probably from Germany, was forbidden,

among other things, by act of parliament; and as that act is understood

to have been called for by the English manufacturers, who suffered

by the foreign trade, it can hardly be doubted that cards were then

manufactured in England on a rather extensive scale. Cards had then,

indeed, evidently become very popular in England; and only twenty

years afterwards they are spoken of as the common Christmas game, for

Margery Paston wrote as follows to her husband, John Paston, on the

24th of December in 1483:--“Please it you to weet (know) 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 the chess, and _cards_--such

disports she gave her folks leave to play, and none other.... 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 (_gentlemen’s houses_) there as she had been.”

From this time the mention of cards becomes frequent. They formed the

common amusement in the courts of England and Scotland under the reigns

of Henry VII. and James IV.; and it is recorded that when the latter

monarch paid his first visit to his affianced bride, the young princess

Margaret of England, “he founde the quene playing at the cardes.”

It must not be forgotten that it is partly to the use of playing cards

that we owe the invention which has been justly regarded as one of the

greatest benefits granted to mankind. The first cards, as we have seen,

were painted with the hand. They were subsequently made more rapidly

by a process called stencilling--that is, by cutting the rude forms

through a piece of pasteboard, parchment, or thin metal, which, placed

on the cardboard intended to receive the impression, was brushed

over with ink or colour, which passed through the cut out lines, and

imparted the figure to the material beneath. A further improvement was

made by cutting the figures on blocks of wood, and literally printing

them on the cards. These card-blocks are supposed to have given the

first idea of wood-engraving. When people saw the effects of cutting

the figures of the cards upon blocks, they began to cut figures of

saints on blocks in the same manner, and then applied the method to

other subjects, cutting in like manner the few words of necessary

explanation. This practice further expanded itself into what are called

block-books, consisting of pictorial subjects, with copious explanatory

text. Some one at length hit upon the idea of cutting the pages of

a regular book on so many blocks of wood, and taking impressions on

paper or vellum, instead of writing the manuscript; and this plan was

soon further improved by cutting letters or words on separate pieces

of wood, and setting them up together to form pages. The wood was

subsequently superseded by metal. And thus originated the noble art of

PRINTING.

A History of Domestic Manners and Sentiments in England During the Middle Ages · 第 10 / 23 章