The Proto-historiography of Playing Cards: Early Hypotheses and Beliefs About the Origins of Cards and Card Games in Europe.

EPILOGUE: THE BEGINNINGS OF REAL HISTORIOGRAPHY

In 1694, the prolific polyglot Thomas Hyde (1636-1703) announced, in the preface to his foundational study of the history of Chess and other boardgames De ludis orientalibus libri II (Oxford, 1694), that he had also planned an Appendicem, alio tempore (Deo dante) edendum; in quo erit Historia Chartiludii…. [an Appendix, to be published (God granting) at another time, in which will be the History of the Game of Cards…]. What the sedentary librarian who had mastered - beyond the pedestrian Latin, Greek and Hebrew - Turkish, Arabic, Persian, Syriac, some Malay and even Chinese, could have told us of his discoveries and insights on Oriental playing cards is unknown, however, because if Hyde kept his notes for this project, they have since been lost to us. With Samuel Weller Singer in 1816, we may surely lament that “[h]ad the work which the learned Hyde projected on this subject come down to us, it would no doubt have set the question [of the oriental origin of cards] at rest, and thrown much light on the kind of Cards in use, and on the games played with them among the oriental nations.”1; and, we might add, it might have settled the question two centuries earlier than it was.2

The historical study of playing cards began shortly afterwards however, but from within a purely European perspective, with the publication of a chapter in Father Claude-François Ménestrier’s (1631-1705) Bibliothèque curieuse et instructive de divers Ouvrages Anciens & Modernes, de Littérature & des Arts (Trevoux, 1704), vol. II, pp. 168-195. Ménestrier used the primary sources he could find, and, arguing from both positive and negative evidence (absence-of-evidence) – that is, historical methodology - he came within 30 years of what historians of playing cards still today consider the date when they appeared in Europe. Although Ménestrier concluded that 1392 was the year that cards were invented, it must be remembered that he had no desire to look beyond Europe. But, as Thierry Depaulis notes in his article Brève histoire des cartes à jouer3, as a date for their appearance in Europe, in the intervening 300 years of historiography we have barely improved on his date:

Le père Ménestrier, le premier d'entre eux [les historiens], ébauchait en 1704 les grandes lignes : les cartes à jouer ne sont pas attestées en Europe avant la fin du XIVe siècle. Depuis lors, on n'a guère fait de progrès spectaculaire. Là où le savant jésuite s'appuyait sur un compte - aujourd'hui disparu - de l'hôtel de Charles VI évoquant en 1392 l'achat de trois jeux de cartes à Jacquemin Gringonneur, nous pouvons avancer sans risque la date d'apparition des cartes d'une vingtaine d'années. Il est couramment admis aujourd'hui, en effet, que celle-ci se situe autour de 1370.

[Father Ménestrier, the first among the historians, sketched the outlines in 1704: playing cards are not attested in Europe before the end of the 14th century. Since then, we have hardly made spectacular progress. From the point where the erudite Jesuit relied on an account (today lost) from the household of Charles VI, which mentioned the purchase of three packs of cards from Jacquemin Gringonneur in 1392, we can safely push back the date of the appearance of cards only about twenty years. Indeed the consensus today is that this happened around 1370.]4

1 Samuel Weller Singer, Researches into the History of Playing Cards (London, 1816), p. 10.2 With the article of William Henry Wilkinson, “Chinese Origin of Playing Cards” The American Anthropologist, Volume VIII (January 1895), pp. 61-78. Although his theory of direct transmission from China to Europe is now believed to be hypothetically unlikely and historically unnecessary (along with his theory of the origin of the Tarot trumps as a conceptual imitation of Chinese domino terms), he was the first to make a sustained argument for the Chinese origin of the standard pack of 52 cards, and unwittingly also provided a base for the hypothetical diffusion of Chinese playing cards to Persia and India, as well as the Near East, from which the Mamluk form of the pack, currently taken to be the immediate ancestor of the Latin-suited cards of Italy and Spain, was adapted. 3 At the website of the Association des Collectioneurs de Cartes et Tarots (L’ACCART) http://as.de.trefle.free.fr/Histoire_Cartes.htm

It should also be mentioned that Père Ménestrier’s theory that Jacquemin Gringonneur invented playing cards for king Charles VI gave rise to one of the earliest and most enduring erudite legends (at least in France). But that, and many others, are a different story.

It took over 50 years for substantial advances to be made on Ménestrier’s work on the history of playing cards. This task was undertaken by the Abbé Jean-Baptiste Bullet (1699-1775), in Recherches historiques sur les cartes à jouer (Lyon, J. Deville, 1757), which was the first monograph exclusively devoted to the history of playing cards. Although it was printed in a small edition, such was its erudition that it continued to influence subsequent authors into the 19th century.  

PROLOGUE: THE PROTO-HISTORIANS

Even though the scientific study of the history of playing cards really got underway only in the second half of the 18th century, some of the earliest accounts of playing cards also express interest in their origins, whether this interest is explicit or only implied. These accounts were rarely systematic in their interest or methodology, and usually had reasons other than historical for offering their accounts of the invention or the age of card games. Therefore their brief accounts may be considered the “proto-historiography” of playing cards, while some of these stories are so widespread and obscure as to be worthy of the title “legendary”.

The following accounts are from what I have found in my study of the history of playing cards. I cannot claim it is an exhaustive list, but it is representative of all of the main themes in the proto-historiographical period. They may be divided roughly into three overlapping classes: authors who propose a date of invention or appearance, which indirectly attests to the author’s historical interest; authors who directly pose the question of when and/or by whom cards were invented; and mythmakers (or storytellers), chiefly preachers and philosophers, who without hesitation and without any pretension to historical precision ascribe the invention of cards to the Devil or a demon, and assume great antiquity for them.

These three classes are useful to keep in mind since authors within a class are likely to have been influenced by another author in the same class. For instance, all of the moralizers and preachers will have been ultimately influenced by Bernardino of Siena, either directly or removed a few times. However, the classes are not strictly exclusive, and since they are proto-historiographical, there is no overall evolution in their opinions (which distinguishes this collection from the later, real, historians), although there are what might be called accretions; therefore, I will list the proto-historians of playing cards chronologically rather than thematically – with broad headings. Unless otherwise noted, all translations are my own. AN IMPORTANT PRELUDE

With the possible exception of our first author, John of Rheinfelden (it is hard to tell because so little of his text has been published) in 1377, one source that all the moralists drew on, directly or indirectly, perfectly or imperfectly, is a Latin sermon, De aleatoribus (“On Gamblers” (or “Dice-players”)), written in the late second or early third century, by an author who was universally believed, until the 19th century, to be St. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage (died 258). Although his authorship is now excluded, the antiquity of the sermon is unquestioned. For our purposes, Pseudo-Cyprian’s contribution to the proto-historiographical corpus is that he attributed the invention of alea – games of chance – to an unnamed genius working under the inspiration of the Devil, and he alluded to an idolatrous ritual, instituted by the inventor, that had to be performed before playing these games. In the 15th and subsequent centuries, some moralists were to take Ps.-Cyprian’s description to expressly

4 Depaulis’ own research now suggests a date between 1360-1365. See “L’apparition de la xylographie et l’arrivée des cartes à jouer en Europe”, Nouvelles de l’estampe nos. 185-186 (Déc. 2002-Fév. 2003) pp. 7-19, esp. p. 17.

describe playing cards. Because Ps.-Cyprian’s work provides the background for so many of the moralist proto-historians, the passage is worth quoting in full.5

Unde haec sacrilegia meditatio, unde hoc crimen, auctorum testimonio comprobamus. Cum enim quidam studio litterarum bene eruditus, multum meditando hoc malum et tam perniciosum studium adinvenit, instinctu solius Zabuli qui eum artibus suis repleverat; hanc ergo artem ostendit quam et colendam sculpturis cum sua imagine fabricavit. Statuit itaque imaginem suam cum nominis sui subscriptione, suggerente sibi amico, qui ut hanc artem excogitaret in pectore subjecit. Sic ergo se in imagine speciosa demonstrans, alto quodam loco condidit; et in sinus suos hanc aleae tabulam gestans, ut quasi ipse lusor et adinventor huius malitiae appareret, cuius nomen a Dei servis nominari non deberet (sic enim in nomine turpis est, quomodo in factis iniquus) et quisque Dei servus aleae tabulam amplectitur, auctoris nomine vocaretur. Ille enim cum se in statunculis et simulacris formaret, aliud crimen adinvenit, quo se ab imitatoribus suis colendum, et sibi sacrificandum instituit ; ita ut qui vellet studio eius adhaerere, non ante manum in tabulam porrigeret, nisi auctori huius prius sacrificasset. Inde factum est, ut olim qui homo fuerat, et facinoris admissionis adulter, post mortem, a profanis et errantibus sub fictitio nomine Dei, talis coli meruerit.

[We can prove where this sacrilegious activity, this crime, comes from, by the testimony of other authors. This is that someone, well studied in letters, after much thought, invented this so evil and pernicious study only by the instinct of the Devil, who had filled him with his arts; therefore he revealed this art and showed it in a work of sculpture, fashioning it in his own image so that he might be venerated. And in this way he established his image with his name written below, on the suggestion of his friend, who, so that he should devise this art, laid it out in his heart. Thus therefore showing himself in a beautiful image, he set it up in a high place, and also by displaying the games board in the folds of his clothing, so as to appear as if he himself were both the player and the inventor of these wicked things; whose name ought not to be uttered by the servants of God (since there is disgrace in the name, even as there is in fact iniquity) lest any servant of God, playing at the games board, be called by the name of the inventor. Now when he made himself into little figures and likenesses, he invented yet another evil, that in order to make himself adored by his imitators, he instituted that he should be sacrificed to; so that whoever might want to join in his invention, could not put his hand to the game board, unless he had first sacrificed to its author. Thus it happened, that he who had been a man, an impure one in the admission of crime, after death merited to be honoured so greatly by the profane and wayward under the false name of a God.]

THE MORALISTS BEGIN…

The first writer to wonder about the origin of cards is also one of the earliest witnesses to playing cards in Europe, John of Rheinfelden (c. 1340-?), a Dominican monk (actually born and active in Freiburg im Breisgau). Writing in 1377, he answers his own implicit question about their origin –

Hinc est quod quidam ludus qui ludus cartarum appellatur hoc anno ad nos pervenit scilicet anno domini MCCClxxvii, in quo ludo status mundi nunc modernis temporibus optime describitur et figuratur. Quo tempore autem factus sit, per quem et ubi penitus ignoro6

5 Migne, Patrologia Latina, vol. IV, cols. 832B-833A; Migne’s edition differs in a few significant respects from the most recent critical text of the De Aleatoribus by Chiara Nucci (Pseudo Cipriano. Il gioco dei dadi (Biblioteca Patristica 4; Edizioni Dehoniane Bologna, 2006, pp. 96-99)), but Migne’s edition is based on the same text known and used by all of our proto-historians.6 Tractatus de moribus et disciplina humane conuersacionis, British Library, London, ms. Egerton 2419 (dated 1472), f.1v (for a facsimile of this page see Stuart Kaplan, Encyclopedia of Tarot (1978), p. 25). The Swedish scholar Arne Jönsson has been preparing a critical edition of the four known ms.; he has written on his work with the text in “Der Ludus cartularum moralisatus des Johannes von Rheinfelden” in Detlef Hoffmann, Schweizer Spielkarten I (Schaffhausen, 1998), pp. 135-147; and “Card-playing as a Mirror of Society. On Johannes of Rheinfelden’s Ludus cartularum moralisatus”, in Olle Ferm and Volker Honemann, eds., Chess and Allegory in the Middle Ages: A collection of Essays (Stockholm, 2005), pp. 359-373.

[Hence it is that a certain game, called the game of cards, has come to us in this year, being the year of our Lord 1377. In this game the state of the world now in modern times is best described and depicted. But at what time it was invented, by whom and where, I am completely ignorant.]

Brother John’s type of broadminded fascination and innocence with playing cards may have lasted several decades among intellectuals, but civic authorities quickly realized that yet another means of all the social ills associated with gambling had arrived, and restrictions and penalties on card-playing were imposed from the 1370s onward in various European cities; these statutes constitute most of our earliest witnesses to the spread of playing cards.

In 1432, another moralizer of the card pack, the Dominican Meister Ingold (1380-1440/1450)7, states in passing that the game had come to Germany in the year 1300. His little book Das Guldin Spil (The Golden Game)8 is a moralization on seven common games or recreations, each one related to one of the seven deadly sins (siben haubttodsünd). The fourth game, playing cards, is related to the sin of lust or unchastity (unkeusch). In the middle of his introductory remarks, a homily on Balaam’s attempt to incite lust for foreign women in the Israelites9, he writes: [U]nd als ich gelessen han, so ist es komen in tüsche land des ersten do man zalt von Cristus geburt tusend drühundert jar… (…and as I have read, they have come into Germany for the first time in the year one thousand three hundred from Christ’s birth…). It is interesting that he says he read this information, but modern history knows no other source for this date than Ingold himself. Thus, in the face of all the evidence pointing to a date after 1360 for playing cards in Europe, historians today see no reason to take Ingold’s isolated and uncorroborated testimony seriously.

TAROT MAKES AN APPEARANCE

In 1449 Jacopo Antonio Marcello (1398-1464/5), provveditore of the Venetian army near Milan, could tell us that the late Duke of Milan, Filippo Maria Visconti (1392-1447) invented a “new kind” of Triumph cards, but did not apparently think to ask who invented the “old” (presumably standard) kind (and he would probably have been a very helpful witness):

[C]ognoui illustrissimum illum mediolani Principem nouum quoddam & exquisitum triumphorum genus, ut erat omnium, qui unquam fuerunt in omnium maximarum rerum Inuentione acutissimus excogitasse.10

[I had learned that the most illustrious Prince of Milan had devised a certain new and exquisite kind of triumphs, as it was in every way, which were at the time among the keenest of all inventions.]

THE MORALISTS CONTINUE, AND THE DEVIL APPEARS…

Meanwhile, some moralists and popular preachers were sure they knew, at least, who invented playing cards (and all games) – the Devil himself. For instance, Franciscan preacher St. James of the Marches (1391-1476) wrote:

7Meister Ingold has been identified as Ingold Wild by Gabriel Löhr in his article “Uber die Heimat einiger deutscher Prediger und Mystiker aus dem Dominikanerorden”, Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur (ZfdA) 82 (1948/50) pp. 173-178, cited in Rupprick, Hans et al. eds., Die deutsche Literatur vom späten Mittelalter bis zum Barock, pt. I (C.H. Beck, 1994), p. 3028 Text edited by Edward Schröder, Das Goldene Spiel von Meister Ingold (Strassburg, 1882); quote on pp. 61-62.9 Numbers xxxi:16. Ingold claims to be alluding to chapter xxv, which speaks of Baalphegor rather than Balaam, but the quote he uses actually comes from a medieval synopsis of the Bible, Peter Comestor’s Historia Scholastica Theologiae Disciplinae for Numbers chapter xxv: … Balaam … consilium dedit eis, ut virgines, quarum specie illudi posset castitas, circa tentoria Israel cum exeniis venalibus mitterent…10 Bibliothèque nationale, ms. lat. 8745A, f. 2r.

[Ad considerationem de] quis invenit, dico secundum Thomam… et Chrisostomum, quod dyabolus invenit ludum… [dixit] ‘Et carte erunt ymagines ad altare.11

[[As to the question of] who invented gaming, I say, according to Thomas … and Chrysostom, that the Devil invented gaming, … [and said] “and cards shall be the images on the altar.”]

St. James of the Marches was echoing the sentiments of his older contemporary and fellow Franciscan Bernardino of Siena (1380-1444), who created the scenario of the “Diabolic Liturgy”12, a mythical scenario set some time in Hell, in which the Devil comes up with an idea to parody Christian worship by inventing games (attested in his sermons as early as 1424).

An anonymous Franciscan added the game of Tarot to the list of the Devil’s accomplishments sometime in the second half of the 15th century, which also happens to contain the earliest extant list of Tarot trumps. After describing the games of dice and regular Latin-suited cards, which he also describes as invented by the Devil (i.e. the standard strict-Franciscan view of the time), he comes to Tarot, ludus triumphorum:

De tertio ludorum genere, scilicet triumphorum. Non est res in hoc mundo quod pertineat ad ludum tantum Deo odibilis sicut ludus triumphorum. Apparet enim in eis omnis turpitudo Christiane fidei ut patebit per ipsos discurrendo. Nam dicuntur triumphi, sic, ut creditur, a dyabolo inventore intitulati, quia in nullo alio ludo ita triumphat cum animarum perditione, sic in isto. In quo non solum Deus, angeli, planete, et virtutes cardinales vituperose ponuntur et nominantur, verum et luminaria mundi, scilicet Papa et Imperator, compelluntur, quod absurdum est, cum maximo dedecore Christianorum, in ludum intrare. Sunt enim 21 triumphi qui 21 gradus alterius scale in profundum inferi mittentis.13

[Concerning the third kind of game, that is, triumphs. There is nothing in the world pertaining to games so odious to God as this game of triumphs. Indeed, there appears in them every disgrace to the Christian faith, as is clearly seen by running through them. They are called triumphs – so titled, it is believed, by their inventor the devil - because in no other game does he so triumph with the soul’s perdition, as in this one. In which not only are God, the angels, planets, and the cardinal virtues disparagingly placed and named, but the true lights of the world, that is the Pope and Emperor, are compelled, which is absurd, and the greatest disgrace of Christians, to enter into the game. In fact the 21 triumphs are the 21 steps of a ladder casting one into the depths of hell.]

A SMALL STEP TOWARDS REAL HISTORY, AND ERUDITE MYTHS

In 1506 Raffaele Maffei Volterrano (1455-1522) implies that he thinks playing cards are a recent invention: Chartarum vero & sortium & divinationis ludi priscis additi sunt ab avaris ac perditis inventi [To the ancient games have been added those of cards and of lots and of divination, invented by covetous and dissolute men]14. Volteranno had real historical sense, and this comment shows that he had found no evidence for card games in antiquity, just like Alciato in 1543 (see further).

11 From the edition of Renato Lioi, Sermones dominicales / S. Iacobus de Marchia (Ancona, 1978-1982, vol. I, pp. 190-205. The section of his sermon dealing with dice games and the “diabolic liturgy” is quoted in extenso by Thierry Depaulis in the Appendix to “Early Italian Lists of Tarot Trumps”, The Playing Card vol. 36 no. 1 (July-Sept. 2007), pp. 48-50. 12 As applied to Bernardino’s story, I believe that the term “diabolic liturgy” was coined by Alessandra Rizzi, Ludus/ludere: Giocare in Italia alla fine del medio evo (Fondazione Benetton, 1995) p. 26; see for a thorough discussion pp. 34-38. 13 Robert Steele, “A notice of the ludus triumphorum and some early Italian card games : with some remarks on the origin of the game of cards”, Archaeologia, or Miscellaneous tracts relating to antiquity (Society of Antiquaries of London ; vol. LVII (1900) = Second series vol. VII (1900) , pp. 185-200.

14 Commentaria Urbana (Rome, 1506), l. XXIX (f. 421v); cited and translated by Michael Dummett in The Game of Tarot (London, Duckworth, 1980), p. 389r, note 2.

In 1526 Francesco Berni (1497-1536) had no answer to his implied question of who invented cards:

Qualunque fusse colui che trovò il gioco delle carte, benché il nome suo o per invidia di tempo o per altrui stracuratezza sia oscuro, merita per certo laude grandissima e d’aver non ultimo luogo in fra i lodati di cosí fatta professione.15

[Whoever it may have been who invented the game of cards, whether his name is obscured by the jealousy of time or through the carelessness of others, he certainly deserves the highest praise, and not to hold the last place among those honoured having such a profession.]

Pietro Aretino (1492-1556) ascribes the invention of playing cards to Palamedes, at the siege of Troy, in his dialogue Le carte parlanti (1543):

PADOVANO: Or da che io posso starmi, vostra mercé, senza lavorare, i mesi non che i giorni, pregovi, per lo studio da me posto in abellirvi come donne novelle, che vi piaccia contarmi di donde cavate l'origine, se non la oppenion mia ritornerà a credersi che lucifero vi abbia generate per impadronirsi de l'ossa e de la polvere di tutto il sesso mascolino e feminino. 

CARTE: Poi che la tua richiesta è mossa dal desiderio de le cose oneste, diciamoti che Palamede ne lo assedio di Troia ci trovò.

PADOVANO: Non essendo il caso vostro di Belzabù, non poteva derivare se non da un greco, ch'è tanto quanto vi avesse fatto lo inferno proprio, anzi qualche cosa peggio; greci ah? greci eh?

CARTE: Cotal duce fu il nostro inventore non senza gran cagione.16

[Padovano: Now, since I can stay at your mercy, without working, for months as well as days, I pray you, by the study I set up to make you appear as attractive new women, to tell me, if you please, fromwhence is drawn your origin; if not, my opinion will return to believing that Lucifer generated you to seize the bones and dust of all the masculine and feminine sex. Cards: Because your request is moved from the desire for honest things, we declare to you that Palamedes found us during the siege of Troy. Padovano: Being that you are not from Baalzebub, you could only be derived from a Greek, which as if you had been made by hell itself, or even something worse; a Greek ah? Greek eh? Cards: Not without great subtlety was such a leader our inventor.]17

In 1544, Andrea Alciato (1492-1550) indicates that he did some research on the question of the antiquity of card games:

Interrogatus saepissime sui, an veteres lusum chartarum haberent, quo transigere tempora otiosi maxime tolent. Respondi, nusquam me hoc legisse: habuisse quidem alios lusus, quos Jul. Pollux lib. IX recenset: hunc verò, quod equidem sciam, nemo prodidit.18

15 Commento al Capitolo della Primiera (electronic edtion of Danilo Romei, at the “Nuovo Rinascimento” website (http://www.nuovorinascimento.org/n-rinasc/testi/pdf/berni/primiera.pdf (accessed October 30, 2009)), p. 6; reproduces exactly the printed edition of Ezio Chiorboli, Francesco Berni, Poesie e prose (Olschki, 1934), pp. 203-264. 16 Le carte parlanti (Sellerio, 1992), pp. 42-43.17 With thanks to Marco Ponzi of Milan for correcting the errors of my translation.18 Πάρεργον Juris libri VII posteriores (Lyon, Sebastian Gryphus, 1554), l. VIII c. xvi (pp.72-73).

[One often wonders whether the ancients had playing cards, with which they would pass a great deal of idle time. In response, I must say that I have never read of them. They certainly had other games, which Julius Pollux enumerates in Book 919. Therefore, as far as I know, nobody had yet made them.] He does however offer a Greek etymology for the game Tarochorum, suggesting he imagined it was invented in classical times. In his list of the trumps, he also gives classicizing names to the Pope and Popess (Sacerdos and Flaminica respectively), increasing my suspicion that he viewed it at least as a late-antique invention.

In 1546 Thomas Langley (?-1581), canon of Winchester, translated into English20 Polydore Vergil’s (1470-1555) account of the invention of some games in his renowned De inventoribus rerum (Venice, 1499) to include cards (fol. 51v): dice, tables, tennys, and cardes were found of the Lidians a people of Asia, and begonne nor for any lucre or pleasure but for a common wealth. Also (fol. 52): There be some that refer the finding of the cardes and chesse to the noble Palamedes. Polydore’s original text reads: Aleae vero thessararumque ludum & pilae caeteraque lusoria animi relaxandi gratia inventa preterque talaria, Lydi populi, teste Herod. li.i. omnium primi excogitaverunt (Lib. II, chap. xiii). For the second part about Palamedes I have not found an equivalent in Polydore’s original.

IMAGINATIVE MORALISTS

Both of the authors of Discorsi on the game of Tarocchi in the 16th century have great praise for the inventor of the game, although neither names him. Francesco Piscina (c. 1540-?), who wrote a Discorso...sopra l’ordine delle figure de Tarocchi (Mondovì, 1565; rpt. Bologna, 1995) considers the inventor to have been a “good Catholic.”

… considerando adunque il giudizioso Autore di questo giuoco di quanto momento sia il buon' ordine,... per il che evidentemente non solo ha dimonstrato esser Buono e fedel seguace della Catholica e Cristiana fede, ma etiamdio molto esperto & eccellente dei costumi della vita Civile, Poscia che di ventidoe figure che ha posto & eletto non vi ne sia pur una che ben donderata non apporti seco grandissima e profondissima considerazione & che non sii degna d' essere benissimo osservata,... (Discorso, pp. 6, 7)

[So the wise Author of this game considered the importance of good order… In this way he proved to be not only a Good and loyal follower of the Catholic and Christian faith, but also a true expert and excellent in the customs of civil life: because in the twenty-two figures he has placed and chosen, there is none that, being pondered with attention, does not bring with itself the greatest and deepest meaning & that is not worthy to be examined in detail. (Translation Marco Ponzi)]

The anonymous author of the undated Discorso perché fosse trovato il giuoco e particolarmente quello del Tarocco dove si dichiara appieno il significato di tutte le figure di esso giuoco (around 1565) numbers the game among the ancient games:

Tre furono i giuochi degli antichi principali per spasso e trattenimento giocati e posti in uso, lo scacco, la palla et il tarocco, nello scacco si mostra l'acutezza dell' ingegno e quasi insegna l'arte militare, nella palla la forza e agilità del corpo, nel tarocco la vita attiva e contemplativa. (Biblioteca Universitaria (Bologna), ms. 1072, vol. XIIF, f. 90r)

19 Julius Pollux, Ονομαστικον (Onomasticon); Pollux wrote this compendious thesaurus, arranged by subject matter, in Naucratis, Egypt, in the late second century. Book IX contains a list of games, among which cards, of course, are not mentioned. There were at least three editions to which Alciato could have referred by the time he wrote the Parergon Juris (Editio princeps Aldus Manutius, Venice, 1502; later editions include Florence, 1520 and Basel, 1536).20 An Abridgement of the notable Woorke of Polidore Vergile, conteignyng the deuisers and fyrst fynders out as well of Artes, Ministeries, Feactes, & Civill Ordinaunces, as of Rites and Ceremonies commoly vsed in the Churche (London, Richard Grafton, 1546)

[There were three principle games of the ancients, played and practiced for recreation and entertainment: Chess, ball-playing and tarocco. In Chess is demonstrated the sharpness of the mind, and it almost teaches the art of war; in ball-playing the strength and agility of the body, and in tarocco the active and contemplative life.]

The anonymous author goes on to add (fol. 92v) that Tarot was the first card game:

Fù il tarocco il primo gioco che di carte si trovasse, sotto quattro Re institutito secondo che a quattro fini universali si indirizzano le volontà ed azioni humane...

[Tarot was the first card game to be invented, instituted under four Kings, because human action and will tend to four universal ends... (trans. Marco Ponzi)]

THE DEVIL ABIDES

In 1566, the prominent Calvinist theologian Lambert Daneau (1530-1595) translated Pseudo-Cyprian’s De aleatoribus,21 including cards among the inventions of the Devil, and saying that Tarot cards were the first kind of cards. Daneau expanded on Pseudo-Cyprian’s description of the ritual in a note, which resulted in an invention that influenced several later writers to take the ritual as if it were part of Ps.-Cyprian’s own work. In addition to a rather free approach to the translation of the text (compare Daneau’s translation to the Important Prelude above), Daneau also added a note, which he appears to have invented (perhaps from watching the behaviour of gamblers):

Or il n’y a point de doute, que premierment il a été inventé & apporté par quelque home qui avoit quelque peu estudié aux lettres : lequel apres y avoir long temps resvé et pensé, par l’instinct du diable trouva ce mauvais jeu & pernicieux plaisir. Et estoit l’inventeur bien plein & appris aux arts du diable. Mais ce pendant il le trouva & l’enseigna aux autres : & pour le rendre plus recreatif, il le bastit & forgea en peinture de son image. Car il y fit mettre sa portraiture, son nom au dessous : & comme il appert par la figure de ces cartes, il eut encores quelque ami qui luy aida à trouver une partie de cest art, & luy conseilla se faire peindre dedans, pour rendre son nom immortel… Or il trouva encores un autre mals apres s’estre fait peindre : & pour se faire toujours d’autant plus admirable entre ses imitateurs & joueurs, il ordonna qu’on luy sacrifieroit & feroit honneur : tellement que quiconque aujourd’huy veut jouer, n’ose mettre la main ni à la carte ni à dé, que premierement il n’ait sacrifié & fait* hommage à l’autheur. Ainsi est advenu, que celuy qui anciennement & à la vérité n’a esté que pur homme, & encores malheureux & coupable d’une telle meschanceté, est toutefois aujourd’huy apres sa mort adoré & feint avoir esté Dieu pour l’honneur que luy font ces joueurs pouvres gens & abusez.

*[Note de Daneau] C’est hommage & sacrifice consistoit à baiser le dé ou la carte, ou à espandre du vin en l’honneur de ceste peinture ou bailler quelque argent en la coquille, comme l’on fait aujourd’huy à l’imitation des idolatres, & change lon seulement le nom, imitant le faict.22

21 Deux Traittez de S. C. Cyprian... l'un contre les jeux et joueurs de cartes et de dez, l'autre par lequel il monstre que l'homme chrestien ne doit voir ni assister à aucuns jeux de battelage ni aux spectacles publics... (La Rochelle, 1566). Another French translation of Ps.-Cyprian was made in 1574 by Jacques Tigeou, which, according to the title, attributes the mention of playing cards to him: Deux traittez contre les basteleurs, joueurs de farces, pippeurs de detz & de cartes (Paris, Nicolas Chesneau, 1574): cited by Luc Racaut, “Nicolas Chesneau, Catholic Printer in Paris During the French Wars of Religion”, The Historical Journal, 52,1 ((2009), pp. 23-41), p. 38 note 92.

22 Quoted by Ernest Coumet, « Les jeux de hasard sont-ils une invention du diable ? », Mathématiques et sciences humaines, n° 6, Printemps 1964, pp. 23-24 ; [put on line February 10 2006. URL : http://archive.numdam.org/ARCHIVE/MSH/MSH_1964__6_/MSH_1964__6__23_0/MSH_1964__6__23_0.pdf . (Consulted 28 octobre 2009)].

[Now there is not a single doubt, that firstly it was invented and brought forth by some man who was somewhat studied in letters: who after having dreamed and thought about it for a long time, by the instinct of the Devil discovered this evil game and this pernicious pleasure. And he was fully the inventor, and learned in the arts of the Devil. However, he discovered it and taught it to others: and to render it more recreative, he made and formed it into a painting of his own image. For he placed his portrait thereupon, his name below: and as it appears by the figure of these cards, he had still some friend who helped him to discover some part of this art, and advised him in making their painting, to render his name immortal... Now he discovered still another evil after being painted: and to make himself ever more admirable among his imitators and players, he decreed that one should sacrifice and do honor to him: so that someone today wanting to play dares touch neither card nor die, if he has not first sacrificed and paid homage* to the author. Thus is come to pass, that he who formerly and in truth had been only simply a man, yet unfortunate and guilty of such wickedness, is however today after his death worshipped and held to have been God on account of the honor that these players, poor and abused people, pay to him.

*(Daneau’s note: ) This homage and sacrifice consisted in kissing the die or card, or in pouring out some wine in honour of this painting or putting some money on the plate, as it is done today in the imitation of idolaters, in changing only the name, but imitating the deed.]

Quoting Daneau’s Deux traittez of 1566, Thierry Depaulis mentions that Daneau also states (exactly contemporary to the same assertion in the Anonymous Discorso (see above)) that Tarot was the first kind of cards: les premieres cartes estoyent figurées comme sont celles du tarot [the first cards were figured as are those of the tarot].23

The Puritan preacher John Northbrooke of Bristol (fl. 1567-1589) wrote a dialogue titled A Treatise Against Dicing, Dauncing, Plays And Interludes in 1577, in which he repeats Daneau’s assertion that Ps.-Cyprian included cards in his work, and that they were the invention of the Devil:

[Age speaks to Youth]: I say with that good father, Saint Cyprian, the playe at Cardes is an invention of the Deuill, which he founde out that he might the easier bring in Ydolatrie amongst men. For the Kings and Coate cardes that we use nowe were in olde time the ymages of Idols and false Gods: which since they that would seeme Christians have changed into Charlemane, Launcelot, Hector, and such like names, because they woulde not seeme to imitate their ydolatrie herein, and yet maintaine the playe it self, the very inuention of Satan, the Deuill, and would disguise this mischief under the cloake of such gaye names.24

23 Thierry Depaulis, “The First Golden Age of the Tarot in France”, in Randall E. Auxier, Lewis Edwin Hahn, eds., The Philosophy of Michael Dummett (Chicago, Open Court, 2007), p. 904.24 Edition of 1843 by the Shakespeare Society, London, pp. 142-143. Northbrooke also mentions Polydore Vergil’s attribution of dice to the Lydians, although under the eponymous character “Lydi”, but goes on to dismiss this attribution in favour of the Devil (op. cit. 116-117):

Youth. I praye you, who was the first deuisour of dyce playing? It appeareth that it hath bene of a long continuance.Age. There are diuerse opinions hereof. Some saye that it was one Attalus; others suppose it was one Brulla. Polydore Virgill sayeth, that one Lydi deuised this among the Lydians, a people of Asia, of great loue and policie, what time a great famine was among them, that, by passing away the time with this play, they bare out their hunger the better, and their vittailes endured also the longer, &c. Others saye that one Palamedes, being (in an armie of the Greekes against the Troianes) ydle, inuented this dyceplay to pass the time away, and also to saue vittails, &c. But certainly those that write of the inuention of things, haue good cause to suppose Lucifer, the prince of deuilles, to be the first inuentor thereof, and hell (no doubte) was the place where it was firste founded. For what better alectiue coulde Satan deuise, to allure and bring men pleasantly into damnable seruitude, than to purpose to them a forme of play (which is his principall treasurie) wherein the more part of sinne and wickednesse is contained, and all goodnesse, vertue, honestie, and godlinesse, cleane confounded.

The academic and cleric Tommaso Garzoni (1549-1589), writing in 1585, says or implies, based on Volterrano’s account (see above) that Tarocchi are of recent invention:

Alcuni altri son giuochi da tauerne, come la mora, le piastrelle, le chiaui, e le carti, ò communi, ò Tarocchi, di nuoua inuentione, secondo il Volteranno.

[Some others are tavern games, such as mora, quoits, keys and cards, either ordinary ones, or tarocchi, recently invented according to Volteranno.]25

The Puritan current of thought which attributed cards (and all games) to diabolical invention, grew through the 16th century. By the end of the century, French philosopher and courtier Pierre de la Primaudaye (1546-1620) would name the devil who invented cards “Mercury” (no doubt alluding to the classical equation of Thoth with Hermes-Mercury, and hence to Plato’s Phaedrus), and would incorporate Daneau’s invented “Note” into the description as it were Cyprian himself:

Et Sainct Cyprien, a escrit un Traité expres, pour monstrer combien les Chrestiens doivent avoir en abomination les ieux de sort & de hazard, là où il dit entre autres choses, Que tels ieux sont laqs &inventions du Diable, qu'il a forgees pour tousiours mettre l'idolatrie en plus grand usage & recommandation entre les hommes. Remarquant sur ce propos, que Mercure, Dieu des Payens, qu'on tient avoit esté inventeur du ieu de cartes, s'y fit peindre & ordona que pour l'entree de ce passe temps, on lui sacrifieroit en baisant la carte, ou espandant du vin à l'honneur de sa peinture. Or lesChrestiens recevans ceste corruption des Idolatres, y ont seulement changé les Images, en mettant celle d'un Roy, d'une Royne, & d'un valet, en lieu de celles des Idoles Payennes. Parquoi aussi nouspouvons dire, que iouer à de tels ieux, c'est prendre plaisir aux œuvres du Diable, & refreschir & confermer l'ancienne Idolatrie en quelque maniere au lieu d'en abolir du tout la memoire.26

[Saint Cyprian wrote a Treatise expressly to show how Christians ought to hold lot-games and games of chance in abhorrence, where he says among other things that such games are traps and inventions of the Devil, which he has made in order to put idolatry always in greater usage and recommendation among men. It is noteworthy on this subject that Mercury, God of the Pagans, who is held to have been the inventor of the pack of cards, had himself painted on them and ordained that for the entry into this pastime, one should sacrifice to him by kissing the card, or pouring out some wine to the honor of his painting. When the Christians received this corruption of idolaters, they only changed the images, in putting those of a King, a Queen and a Valet in place of those of the pagan idols. For this reason we can say that to play such games is to take pleasure in the works of the Devil, and to revive and confirm the ancient idolatry in some manner, instead of abolishing the entire memory of it.]

SPANISH ERUDITION27

25 Tomaso Garzoni, La Piazza Universale di Tutte le Professioni del Mondo, e nobili et ignobili (Venice, 1586, p 574), chap. 69. Cited and translated by Michael Dummett, The Game of Tarot, p. 389, note 2. Garzoni is clearly relying on Citolini, La tipocosmia (Venice, 1561), who writes: Alcuni altri sono giuochi da taverne; e sono la morra, le piastrelle, le chiavi, e poi le carte, o communi, o terrocchi; (thanks to Thierry Depaulis for this quote). Garzoni adds the statement “of recent invention, according to Volteranno”. Dummett, loc. cit., also notes that, based on Garzoni’s authority, several subsequent authors attribute the statement directly to Volteranno, although no mention of tarocchi has ever been found in any of his works. 26 Pierre de la Primaudaye, La Philosophie chrestienne de l'Academie françoise (Paris, Pierre & Jaques Chouët, 1599), p. 163.27 A very thorough and thoughtful discussion of these Spanish legends and erudite speculations, and very much more, can be found in several works of Jean-Pierre Etienvre, particularly Vilhan et Nicolas Pepin: Les origines legendaries de la carte à jouer en Espagne (Mélanges de la Casa de Velazquez, t. XVI (1980), pp. 203-235) ; Figures du Jeu ((=Bibliothèque de la Casa de Velazquez 4) Madrid, 1987), particularly pp. 15-53; and Márgenes literarios del juego (London, Tamesis, 1990), passim. I can only allude to a few of the subjects he has treated in much greater breadth and depth.

Sometime in the 16th century, from Spanish folklore there emerged a figure to whom the invention of cards was attributed. The name and figure of Vilhán or Bilham/Bilhan makes its first appearance in Spanish sources in 1593:

BILHAM: llaman en españa a el juego de los naypes28

[BILHAM : Spanish term for the game/pack of cards]

“Bilham” is, however, better known as “Vilhán”, and more often as a personage than as the game itself. His status as a folkloric figure of Andalusia already in the last decades of the 16 th century is clear in the next occurrence of his name in 1596 29:

Cosa recebida es que el primer inventor de los naipes se llamó Vilhán, pues se dice por tradiciòn y no hay opinion en contrario, y asi dijo “que fue nombre fatal y prodigioso, que significa vil hambre en el que pierde, pues la pasa por causa vil, y en el que gana, por la insaciable que le queda de ganar más”.

[Common opinion has it that the first inventor of cards is named Vilhán, so it is said by tradition and there is no contrary opinion, and thus it is said “that it was the fatal and mighty name, which means vile hunger in the one who loses, since it happens for a vile reason, and in he who wins, because of the quenchless desire that remains to win more.”]

In 1603, Francisco de Luque Faxardo (or Fajardo) recounted at length a kind of canonical form of the legend of Vilhán (he also writes that Plato attributed the invention of cards to Theuth30, the first I know to make the connection explicit):

Llegándonos, pues, a la más vulgar y apócrifa, que llaman los tahures « Vida de Vilhán », os la diré brevísimamente, por ser tan usada representación en casas de tablaje, con que por ciertas cartas sacadas da la baraja, celebra aquesta gente el contento y regocijo de sus ganancias, por remate de juego, fingiendo haber sido Vilhán natural de Madrid; jugado su hacienda, caminado a Sevilla con deseo de verla, haber aprendido en la villa Orgaz oficio de albañil para su remedio; de donde, en memoria deste hecho, edificó en ella una famosa chimenea. Entrando después desto, por discurso de su perdición, a ser mozo de posadas, en una de Sierra Morena, donde tuvo siniestros sucesos, que le compelieron a que en Peñaflor viniese a servir de atizador de lámparas; de donde, como hubiese pasado a Sevilla, después de haberse hecho espadero, murió quemado por moneda falsa, acabando su mala vida con infamia.31

[Here we arrive to the most vulgar and apocryphal story, the one the card sharks call ‘life of Vilhán’, which I will refer to you quickly since it is so popular in all gambling houses, in which by taking a few cards from the deck, these people rejoice at their winnings. Vilhán fooled everybody by telling them he came from Madrid, after losing his estate, he walked to Seville hoping to take a glance at city. In order to make a living he learned the craft of bricklaying at the village of Ordáz. To commemorate such event, he built a famous chimney there. He then became, by his own admission, a waiter at a tavern, the one at Sierra Morena, in which he endured several sinister events that forced him to 28 From the dictionary of Arabic terms compiled by Diego de Guadix (d. 1615), Primera parte de una Recopilacion de algunos nombres arabigos, que los arabes (en España, Francia e Italia) pusieron a algunas ciudades…; ms. cited by Etienvre, Vilhan et Nicolas Pepin (see previous note), p. 217 and note 2. In 1980, Etienvre lamented that the manuscript had never yet been published, echoing the sentiments of an author 100 years earlier; the book is now completely published as Diccionario de Arabismos. Recopilación de algunos nombres arábigos (Universidad de Jaén, 2007). 29 Juan Rufo, Las seiscientas apotegmas (edition of A. Blecua, Madrid, 1972, pp. 54-55), quoted by Etienvre, loc. cit. 30 Fiel desengaño contra la ociosidad y los juegos (Madrid, Miguel Serrano de Vargas, 1603, fol. 33v-34r; edition of Martin de Riquer (Madrid, 1955), p. 93.) 31 Ibid. f. 37; ed. of Riquer, p. 99.

become a lamp-stoker. Here, as if he would have gone to Seville, after becoming a swordsmith, he died burned for fake coins, putting an end to his life in an infamous way. (translation Enrique Enriquez)]

Faxardo goes on to derives the name Vilhan from the Hebrew Balaam (Numbers xxii-xxiv)32, implying (like Meister Ingold nearly two centuries earlier), a primordial connection of playing cards with deception, perversion of good morals, and idolatry.

Miguel Cervantes (1547-1616), among others, would allude to Vilhán as a figure of speech in his popular story Rinconete y Cortadillo, in the collection of Novelas Ejemplares (1613).33 In the second part of Don Quixote (1615), Cervantes also parodies the erudition and methodology of those who would try to discover the origin of playing cards. The pedantic “cousin” speaks to Don Quixote after hearing the marvelous tale of Durandarte in the Cave of Montesinos:

Yo, señor don Quijote de la Mancha, doy por bien empleadísima la jornada que con vuestra merced he hecho, porque en ella he granjeado cuatro cosas… La tercera, entender la antigüedad de los naipes, que, por lo menos, ya se usaban en tiempo del emperador Carlomagno, según puede colegirse de las palabras que vuesa merced dice que dijo Durandarte, cuando al cabo de aquel grande espacio que estuvo hablando con él Montesinos, él despertó diciendo: «Paciencia y barajar». Y esta razón y modo de hablar no la pudo aprender encantado, sino cuando no lo estaba, en Francia y en tiempo del referido emperador Carlomagno. Y esta averiguación me viene pintiparada para el otro libro que voy componiendo, que es Suplemento de Virgilio Polidoro, en la invención de las antigüedades; y creo que en el suyo no se acordó de poner la de los naipes, como la pondré yo ahora, que será de mucha importancia, y más alegando autor tan grave y tan verdadero como es el señor Durandarte.34

[I, Sir Don Quixote of La Mancha, consider this day to have been exceedingly well spent in your grace’s presence because I have benefitted from it in four ways... third, in learning of the antiquity of playing cards, which were used at least as long ago as the time of the Emperor Charlemagne, a fact that may be inferred from the words that you say Durandarte spoke when, at the conclusion of the lengthy conversation between him and Montesinos, he awoke and said, “Be patient and shuffle the cards” (paciencia y barajar). Now this expression and manner of speaking he cannot have learned except while in France – before falling under a spell – in the days of the above-mentioned Charlemagne. This finding is just the thing for that other book I am compiling called A Supplement to Polydore Virgil, on the Inventions of Antiquity. I believe that in his book Polydore Virgil forgot to include the invention of playing cards, which I shall now include because of their great importance, especially when I can cite an authority as serious and trustworthy as Sir Durandarte.]35

The Jesuit Pedro de Guzman (1560-1620) suggested in 1614 that Vilhan comes from the demon Bahal (probably Ba’al), “which is he whom St. Cyprian did not want to name.” He goes on to say that the number of cards in a pack of naipes, 48, is the “age of Mohammed” (aetatem mahometicam), implying a Saracen, and hence diabolical, connection.36 Guzman’s discussion of playing cards and games is

32 Ibid. f. 38; ed. of Riquer, pp. 99-100.33 Rinconete describes in two different places how he is adept in the ciencia vilhanesca and the floreo de Vilhán (the “science of Vilhán” and the “flourish of Vilhán”), both of which mean card-sharping.34 Don Quijote de la Mancha, II, 24 (Quoted in J.-P. Etienvre, “Paciencia y barajar : Cervantes, los naipes y la burla”, in Anales de Literatura Española, no. 4 (1985), pp. 131-152, from the edition of Rodríquez Marín, Atlas, 1947-1949, vol. V, pp. 193-194).35 Translation of James H. Montgomery, Don Quixote (Hackett, 2009), p. 546.

virtually a summa of both the legendary and erudite mythology that had grown up around cards by the early 17th century:

Los naypes son otro libro, aunque desenquadernado, adonde los ociosos tambien estudian. Esta es su Biblia, donde se sacan sus figuras, y puntos, y no de oración.(…) Haze Herodoto à los Lydos inuentores tambien de los naypes, como de otros juegos. Platon (in Phedro) dize, lo que diximos arriba, que el inuentor fue un Demonio llamado Theuth, de donde se deue de deriuar el nombre de Thaur. San Cypriano lib. de aleatoribus dize, que un hombre ingenioso, y letrado, despues de larga consideracion, inuentò este juego, y no le quiere nombrar, y que se hizo pintar entre las demas cartas, y no dexaua jugar à ninguno, si primera no adoraua su imagen ; y de aqui fue despues de muerto honrado de los jugadores, y tendido por Dios, è inuocado en sus juegos. Cierto ella parece inuencion propria del demonio, y salida del infierno, y los nombres de que los Tahures usan, tambien parecen sacados de allà, como son Sages, Daincares, Viuandores, Colmeros, Fulleros, Myrones, templones Villan, que es como el Patron y author deste juego, y à mi parecer y al de otro, que escriuio un libro entero desto, Villan deue de ser Bahal, que es el que S. Cypriano no quiso nombrar al numero de 48 que es el mismo de los naypes, llaman aetatem Mahometicam, porque otro tanto viuio Mahoma. Las figuras de los naypes tienen no se que rastro de Idolos, y de idolatria, y por la que tiene della, es prohibido a los Moros este juego en su Alcoran, solo juegan el ajedrez A quella mesa, ò altar, que ponian los otros à la fortuna, aplica S. Anton. à la mesa de los jugadores, que es como el altar de sus idolos, y cierto viene esto bien à estos juegos de fortuna. Y no salta quien al Rey de espadas aplica el idolo de Marte guerrero, y furioso, causa de homicidios por causa deste juego ; y assi dixo bien el que dixo que estas cartas eran las de Urias, que llevan la muerte consigo assi la del alma, como la del cuerpo. (…) El Rey de oros es el Idolo de Pluton, dios del oro y riquezas, y assi el y ellas estan debaxo de la tierra, y cerca del infierno. El Rey de bastos es el Idolo de Saturno anciano y viejo, y arrimado à un baston. El de copas es el Idolo de Baco.37

[Playing cards are another book (beside dice), although with detached pages, in which the idle also study. It is their Bible, where they take out figures, and points, and not prayer (…) Herodotus makes the Lydians also the inventors of playing cards, like other games. Plato (in the Phaedrus) says, as we said above, that the inventor was a Demon named Theuth, to which is owed the derivation of the name Thaur (thence Tahur). St. Cyprian in the De aleatoribus says that an ingenious and lettered man, after long consideration, invented this game, but he did not want to name him, and that he had himself painted among the cards, and did not let anyone play, if they first did not worship his image; and from thence, after his death, he was honoured by the players, and taken for a God, being invoked in his games. Certainly it seems to be the proper invention of the devil, and comes from Hell, and the names that the Gamblers use also seem taken from down there, such as are Sages, Vivandores, Colmeros, Fulleros, Myrones, templones, Villan, who is like the Patron and author of this game, and to me it seems confirmed by another, who wrote an entire book about it, that Villan comes from Bahal, which is he whom St. Cyprian did not want to name. The number 48, which is the same as (the number of) naipes, is called the age of Mohammed, because so much was the life of Mohammed. The figures on the playing cards are nothing but the traces of Idols, and of idolatry, and because they have this, this game is forbidden to Moors in their Koran, and they only play at draughts. To this table, or altar, which the others place to fortune, St. Antonino applies the table of the players, which is like an altar for his idols, and it is certainly well applied to these games of chance. And it is not known who applied the King of Swords to the idol of Mars, the furious warrior, the cause of murders because of this game; and thus I say well when I say that these cards were those of Urias, who brought the death of the soul, and of the body, thus with him. (…) The King of Coins is the Idol of Pluto, god of gold and riches, and so he and they are under the earth, and near Hell. The King of Batons is the Idol of Saturn, ancient and old, and is armed with a baton. The King of Cups is the Idol of Bacchus.]

36 Bienes de el honesto trabaio y daños de la ociosidad (Blessings of honest work and detriments of idleness) (Madrid, 1614), p. 398.37 Ibid., pp. 397-399. He goes on to show from Bible exegesis in Hebrew and Latin how the words for playing also contain the semantic range of idolatry, suicide and taking.

In 1611, Sebastian de Covarrubias (1539-1613) appears to have created the name “Nicolao Pepin” as the inventor of naipes in his monumental lexicon, Tesoro de la lengua castellana o española.

NAIPES, libro desenquadernado en que se lee communmente en todos estados, que pudiera estar en el catalogo de los reprovados. Dixeronse naipes de la cifra primera que tuvieron; en la qual se encerrava el nombre del inventor. Eran una N.y P. y de alli les pareciô llamarlos los naipes: pero las dichas letras dezian Nicolao Pepin. Tamarid38 piensa ser Arabigo, y lo mesmo el Brocense39.

[Naipes: A book whose pages are all detached, which is commonly read in all provinces and ought to be in the banned books catalogue. They were called Naipes because of the letters in the first page, which contained the name of its inventor. Those were an N and a P, and that is why it seemed natural to call them naipes [NOTE: as in Nenná y Pé-s]; but in truth these letters corresponded with Nicolao Pepin. Tamarid thinks the word comes from the Arabic and so does the Brocense. (translation Enrique Enriquez)]

ERUDITE MYTHS CONTINUE, AND BOLOGNA GETS SOME STORIES

Like Langley in the 16th century, English translators of Latin books in the 17th century continued to take the term “alea” to imply “cards”, at least when paired with another game term like “tessera” or the generic “ludus”. For instance, in the 1651 translation of Henry Cornelius Agrippa’s (1486-1535) De Occulta Philosophia libri tres, the translator “J.F.” (perhaps John French (1616-1657) or James Freake) writes “that devil Theutus who taught cards and dice” to render Agrippa’s phrase Theutus ille daemon, qui ludos et aleam docuit from Book III, chap. 18.40

On a portrait of Francesco Fibbia in the Palazzo Fibbia (formerly Palazzo Felicini-Calzolari), Bologna, there is an inscription, probably from the late 17th century, which ascribes the invention of Bolognese Tarocchino to him:

Francesco Antelminelli Castracani Fibbia, principe di Pisa, Monte Giori, e Pietrasanta, e signore di Fusecchio... ebbe per moglie Francesca, filia di Giovanni Bentivogli. Inventore del gioco del Tarocchino in Bologna dalli XVI Riformatori della città ebbe per privilegio di riporre l’arma Fibbia nella Regina di Bastoni e qeulla della di lui moglie nella Regina di Denari. Nato l’anno 1360 morto l’anno 1419.41

[Francesco Antelminelli Castracani Fibbia, Prince of Pisa, Montegiori and Pietra Santa, and lord of Fusecchio... He married Francesca, daughter of Giovanni Bentivogli. Inventor of the game Tarocchino in Bologna, he had from the [XVI] Reformatories the privilege of placing the Fibbia arms on the

38 Francisco Lopez Tamarid, Compendio de algunos vocablos arábigos introduzidos en lengua castellana en alguna manera corruptos (Granada, Antonio de Nebrija,1585); judging from the entry for Naipes in Tamarid’s Compendio, in the edition of Gregorio Mayans y Siscar, Origenes de la lengua española (Madrid, 1873), p. 209, Tamarid does not offer an etymology.39 “El Brocense”, Francisco Sanchez de las Brozas, 1523 – 1600 (I have not been able to find the reference Covarrubias is referring to).40 Agrippa’s original text reads:Tertio ordine sunt vasa iniquitatis, quae et vasa irae dicuntur; hi sunt inventores malorum omniumque malarum artium, qualis apud Platonem Theutus ille daemon, qui ludos et aleam docuit; ex ipsis enim omne scelus, malitia et deformitas procedit,... (De Occulta Philosophia libri tres, critical edition of Vittoria Perrone Compagni, Brill, 1992, p. 453, ll. 4-7); J.F.’s translation: “In the third order are the vessels of iniquity, which are also called the vessels of wrath; these are the inventors of evil things and of all wicked arts, as in Plato, that devill Theutus who taught cards and dice; for all wickedness, malice and deformity proceedeth from these;…” (Three Books of Occult Philosophy (London, 1651), p. 398.41 Transcription of Girolamo Zorli, Il Tarocchino Bolognese (Bologna, Forni, 1992), pp. 27-28. The inscription can be read, with a magnifying glass, where the painting is reproduced in full: Dummett, The Game of Tarot, plate 11; Zorli op. cit., cover picture; it can be read clearly in a larger and lighter reproduction in Andrea Vitali and Terry Zanetti, Il Tarocchino di Bologna (Bologna, Martina, 2005), p. 61. For further discussion and amplification, see the three mentioned works at pp. 66-67, 27-29, and 60-64, respectively.

Queen of Batons and those of his wife on the Queen of Coins. Born in the year 1360, he died in the year 1419.]42

In 1680, Friedrich Ernst Lehmann (sometimes spelled Lehmen) published De variis ludendi generibus (On the different kinds of games), which probably contained an account of the invention of cards. I get this impression from notices in Singer and Willshire that discuss Lehmann’s unique interpretation of German suit-signs as spelling out the word “SARG”, which means “coffin.” Willshire also says that Lehmann mentions that Tarot is “always symbolic”. I have not been able to see this book. (Singer, p. 54 and note 2; Willshire, pp. 47-48).

In 1698, Martin Lister (1638-1712), an English naturalist and physician, wrote that the oldest playing cards in Roger de Gaignières’ (1642-1715) vast collection of prints, paintings and antiquities were 300 years old (these are the so-called “Charles VI” Tarots):

I waited upon the Abbot Droine to visit Monsieur Guanieres, at his lodgings in the Hostel de Guise…One Toy I took notice of, which was a Collection of Playing Cards for 300 Years. The oldest were three times bigger, than what are now used, extreamly well limned and illuminated with gilt Borders, and the Pastboard thick and firm; but there was not a compleat Set of them.43

Lister must have received this dating from de Gaignières himself. How did he come to this date? The clothing of many of the figures, where it can be dated, isn’t typical of the era of Charles VI. Perhaps de Gaignières was in correspondence with Ménestrier, and the connection of Poupart’s brief account with these cards was already made by the two men. Alternately, we may take Longuerue’s assertion (see below, 1754) that de Gaignières’ cards were “born in Italy in the fourteenth century” as another piece of information from de Gaignières himself, indicating that he recognized the Italian style of the cards and roughly dated them to the late fourteenth century (and thus in contradiction to Ménestrier, who believed that Tarot was invented in Germany).

As late as 1709, Bénédict Pictet (1655-1724), a Calvinist pastor in Geneva, reiterated Primaudaye’s erudite myth that Cyprian attributed the invention of cards to the pagan god Mercury, presenting it as Cyprian’s thought although disagreeing with it:

Le jeu donc en soy même est indifferent ; ainsi il me paroit que ce que St. Cyprien dit dans un Traité qu’il a fait sur cette Matiere est fort outré ; Il dit, que c’est Mercure le Dieu des Payens, qui a inventé le jeu de Cartes, qu’il s’y fit peindre, & qu’il ordonna qu’a l’entrée du jeu on lui sacrifieroit ; que ce sacrifice consistoit à baiser la carte ou le dé, ou à répandre du vin à l’honneur de cette peinture. Que les Chrétiens n’ont fait que changer les images ; qu’au lieu de Mercure, ils ont mis l’image d’un Roi &c. Que donc jouër aux cartes ou aux dez, c’est prendre plaisir aux œuvres du Diable, inventées à nôtre ruïne, & renouveller cette idolatrie ancienne ; Que le Diable est present quand on jouë, & qu’il est caché pour nous surprendre, & que nous ayant surpris il triomphe de nous.44

[Games are therefore indifferent in themselves; therefore it seems to me that what St. Cyprian says in a Treatise that he wrote on this Subject is strongly exaggerated; He says, that it is Mercury, the Pagan God, who invented the game of Cards, that he had himself painted there, and that he commanded that at the beginning of the game one sacrificed to him; that this sacrifice consisted of kissing the card or die, or of pouring out wine to the honour of this picture. That Christians had only changed the images; that, in place of Mercury, they had put the image of a King etc.. That therefore to play cards or dice is to take pleasure in the works of the Devil, invented for our ruin, and to renew this ancient idolatry; That the Devil is present when playing, and that he is laying in wait to surprise us, and that in our surprise he triumphs over us.]

42 Translation Dummett, op. cit., p. 66. Dummett’s translation mistakenly reads “XIV Riformatori”, I have corrected this to XVI in square brackets. 43 A Journey To Paris In The Year 1698 (London, Jacob Tonson, 1699 (3rd ed.)), pp. 95-96.44 La morale chrétienne, ou l’art de bien vivre (Geneva, 1709), vol. VI, p. 233 (bk. VII, chap. xvii).

In 1736, Giuseppe Maria Buini (c. 1680-1739), in his L’dsgrazi d’Bertuldin dalla Zena (Bologna, 1736) p. 98, provided copious annotations to his poem (based on the legendary subject most famously portrayed in Giulo Cesare Croce’s Le sottilissime astuzie di Bertoldo, (1706)). Commenting on Canto I, v. 32, he gives an origin-story for the game of Tarocchino:

Di Stanta ~ Specie di gioco presso noi usitata, che si fá con le carte dei Tarrochini, gioco inventato dalla studiosa mente dei Bolognesi, del quale Gregor. Toles. Syntag. Jur. lib 30.cap.4.num.11. scrisse, trovarvisi dentro semi di buon fine, e di scelta erudizone, e il Ginerbelti ne scrisse la Storia, ed origine facendo vedere, che i Tarrocchini non sono altro, se non se la tragica faccenda de’ Geremei Guelfi, e Lambertazzi Ghibellini, cosi il Valdemuse da Prusilio ne distese la varia fortuna. 

[Stanta – A kind of game played among us [in Bologna], which uses the Tarocchini cards, agame invented by the studious mind of the Bolognese, of which [Pierre] Gregoire writes, in the Syntagma Juris lib. 30 cap. 4 num. 11, that one can find [in the game] some grains of a good purposeand of particular erudition, and Ginerbelti wrote its history, showing its origin: that the Tarocchini are nothing else but the tragic deeds of the Geremei Guelfs and the Lambertazzi Ghibellines, ofwhom Valdemuse da Prusilio recounts the different fortunes.]45

In 1738, Beneton de Peyrins (? – 1752) came up with his own theory as to the origin of playing cards and tarots. His ideas are idiosyncratic; he cites neither of his predecessors Ménestrier and Daniel, nor any previous author on playing cards, and his ideas appear to have influenced no subsequent author on the subject; so that, although he is writing within the period of scientific historiography of playing cards, he deserves to be counted as one of the proto-historians. He appears to have been the first to recognize an oriental origin (since we are in ignorance of Hyde’s opinion), but his sense of the chronology is obviously wildly mistaken:

Ces cartes portaient autrefois empreints sur elles les portraits de toutes les divinités reconnues dans le paganisme, de manière qu’on aurait pu appeler le premier des jeux qui s’est joué avec des cartes, le jeu des dieux… On a vu ci-dessus que tous jeux de hasard s’exprimaient par le terme générique d’alea ; et quiconque voudrait présentement exprimer en latin les jeux qui s’opèrent par le moyen des cartes, ne le pouvant faire que par ceux de folium lusorium aleatorium, cela pourra commencer à persuader que l’usage de ces cartes est plus ancien qu’on ne le croit, et qu’elles peuvent même aller d’antiquité d’origine avec les dés et les osselets employés aux autres jeux appelés lusorium aleatorium. Pour moi, mon sentiment est que les cartes ont été connues sur le déclin de l’empire de Rome, que ce furent les conquêtes poussées bien avant dans les Indes, que firent que les cartes inventées par les Chinois furent apportées dans la Syrie et dans l’Egypte, où l’on en faisait avec du papier de ce dernier pays, composé de la plante papyrus ; et bien que ce que j’avance ne puisse être appuyé par des passages d’auteurs de ces temps-là, on pourrait attribuer ce silence au peu d’écrivains qui ont paru dans le déclin de l’empire romain, et au bouleversement même de cet empire, qui fit perdre la connaissance de beaucoup de nouvelles découvertes qui existaient lors de ce bouleversement… Les Asiatiques, qui les premiers connurent les cartes, les distinguaient, ainsi que nous faisons encore, en simple ou blanches, et en figurées ; sur celles-ci paraissaient les portraits de

45 Part of this was quoted in Italian by Samuel Weller Singer in 1816 (Researches into the History of Playing Cards (London, 1816, p. 29 note 1), which is where I was alerted to it. I have not been able to identify the historian (?) “il Ginerbelti”. The Geremei and Lambertazzi families quarreled in the late 13th century in Bologna and its environs, and obviously have no connection to playing cards. I also can’t find “Valdemuse”, although Prusilio is mentioned as a location in Bologna in connection with a play performed there. This play is titled Chi non ha, non è, o sia l’abiezione miserevole del Povero, by an unknown author, stated to have been performed in the “amentià del Prusilio” in the autumn of 1714 (references: Alessandro Machiavelli, Serie cronologica de’ drammi recitati su de’ pubblici teatri di Bologna dall’anno de nostra salute 1600 sino al corrente 1727 (Bologna, Soci Filpatri, 1737), p. 68; Leone Allacci, Drammaturgia di Lione Allacci, accresciuta e continuata fino all’anno MDCCLV (Venice, Pasquali, 1755) col. 183; Corrado Ricci, I teatri di Bologna nel secoli XVII e XVIII (Bologna, 1888), pp. 282, 312.

leurs dieux et de leurs héros, et sur les blanches, ne paraissaient que les caractères hiéroglyphiques, qui servaient autrefois d’écriture. Ce sont ces mêmes caractères qui se remarquent encore sur nos cartes blanches d’à présent : les Chinois ont, en hiéroglyphes propres à exprimer leurs pensées, des figures de cœurs, de piques, de carreaux, et des fleurs à peu près semblables aux trèfles. L’altération que le temps aurait pu apporter dans ces figures est peu de chose. Les Romains conservèrent ces cartes blanches dans leurs mêmes figures, et aux figurées ils en joignirent d’autres chargées de portraits de quelques-uns de leurs principaux dieux, empereurs et impératrices, faisant paraître ceux-ci sur des chars de triomphe, d’où sont venus les termes de triomphe, d’impériale et de vole, usités en jouant aux cartes pour la dénomination de deux anciens jeux, et pour exprimer la victoire complète que l’on peut remporter avec ces cartes, en imitation de ces victoires totales qui soumettaient une nation entière aux Romains, et faisaient mériter le triomphe au général qui les remportait…. Il ne faut pas douter que les Sarrasins et les Grecs du Bas-Empire n’aient connu les jeux des cartes, mais ils s’y exerçaient moins qu’à ceux des échecs et des dés…46

[In the past these cards bore on them the portraits of all the divinities recognized in paganism, so that one could call the earliest of the games to be played with cards, the game of the gods;… It has been seen above that all games of chance are expressed the generic term alea; and presently whoever would like to express in Latin the games that operate by means of cards, can only do so by those of folium lusorium aleatorium, which may open the door to the suspicion that the use of these cards is more ancient than hitherto believed, and that they could even have the same antiquity of origin of the dice and knuckle-bones used in other games called lusorium aleatorium. As for me, my sentiment is that cards were known during the decline of the Roman empire, that it was the conquests that had pushed well before into India, which allowed the cards invented by the Chinese to be carried into Syria and Egypt, where they were made with the paper of this latter country, consisting of the plant papyrus; and although that which I am advancing cannot be supported by passages of authors of this time, this silence can be attributed to the paucity of writers who appear in the decline of the Roman empire, and even to the disruption of this empire, which caused the knowledge of many new discoveries which existed during this disruption to be lost… The Asiatics, who were the first to know cards, distinguished them, in the way we still do, between simple or plain, and figures; on the figures there appeared the pictures of their gods and their heroes, and on the plain, there only appeared hieroglyphic characters, which served in the past as writing. These are the same characters which still mark our plain cards up to the present: the Chinese had, in hieroglyphs proper to express their thoughts, figures of hearts, pikes, tiles and flowers somewhat similar to clovers. The changes that time would bring to these figures is just a little. The Romans preserved these plain cards in their own figures, and to the court cards they joined others bearing portraits of some of their principal gods, emperors and empresses, making them appear in triumphal chariots, from which come the terms triomphe, imperial and vole, in common use in playing cards as the names of two ancient games, and to express the complete victory that one can achieve with these cards, in imitation of these total victories that submitted an entire nation to the Romans, and made the general who achieved them deserve the triumph.It must not be doubted that the Saracens and Greeks of the Late Empire knew card games, but they used them less than Chess and dice…]

Charles de Brosses (1709-1777), writing from Rome in 1739-40, is the earliest witness I have found to the legend, sometimes met, that Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475-1564) invented the game of Minchiate:

Ce jeu [Minchiate] a été inventé à Sienne, par Michel-Ange, à ce qu’on prétend, pour apprendre aux enfants à supputer de toutes sortes de manières :en effet, c’est une arithmétique perpétuelle. Il faut

46 Dissertation sur l’origine des jeux de hasard (published originally in the Mercure of September, 1738; it was reprinted by Leber in Collection des meilleurs dissertations, notices et traités particuliers relatifs a l'histoire de France (Paris 1838) tome X, pp. 201-219), pp. 215-218.

que ce jeu ne se soit mis en vogue à Rome qu’au temps du pape Innocent X, Panfili ; car le pape des minchiate ressemble comme deux gouttes d’eau au portrait de ce grand pontife.47

[This game (Minchiate) was invented in Siena, by Michelangelo, it is supposed, in order to teach children to calculate in every kind of way; indeed, it is a perpetual arithmetic. This game could not have been in fashion in Rome until the time of Pope Innnocent X,Panfili; for the Pope of the Minchiate is the spitting image of this great pontiff.]

In 1753, the Abbé Louis Legendre (1655-1733; anciently spelled “le Gendre”) maintained the Lydian theory in his influential Les moeurs et coutumes des françois (Paris, 1753, p. 169):

Les Grecs inventerent les Echecs & les Dez, pour se desennuier au siège de Troyes ; les Lidiens, pour charmer la faim pendant une extrême disette, inventerent les Cartes & la Paume, ils joüoient un jour & mangeoient l’autre ; comme naturellement les hommes fuïent le travail, & n’aiment qu’à se divertir, ces jeux devinrent si communs, qu’on fut contraint de le défendre, & d’armer contre ces passe-tems, toute l’autorité des Loix.

[The Greeks invented Chess and Dice, to alleviate boredom during the siege of Troy; the Lydians, in order to be distracted from hunger during an extreme famine, invented Cards and Tennis; they played on one day, and ate on the other. Since men naturally shun work, and love only to amuse themselves, these games became so common that it was necessary to forbid them, and to arm all the authority of the Law against these pastimes.]

Legendre’s apparently passing assertion (in the long tradition of the erudite myth that alea included cards) may have been the inspiration for Bullet’s investigation into the history of cards, since in his Recherches Bullet opens his study with an incisive and fatal critique of Legendre’s statement. As an aside, I believe that the attribution of different ludi to the Lydians is based on an erudite etymology connecting the two words, but so far I have not been able to trace the development of this idea.

In 1754, the Abbé de Longuerue (1652-1733) wrote of seeing de Gaignières’ collection, and stated categorically that C’est en Italie que cette belle invention a pris naissance dans le quatorzième siècle [This lovely invention was born in Italy in the fourteenth century]48. As noted above for 1698, de Gaignières’ English visitor Martin Lister gave a similar age to these cards, suggesting that there was a common source for this opinion in de Gaignières himself.

TWO BOLOGNESE

In 1769, Father Giuseppe Maria Pedini compiled manuscripts which included a collection from around 1746. One of the texts dates to the late 16th century, and describes how to play Bolognese Tarocchino. The editor begins with the historical context:

Lettor cortese – Eccoui il modo, col quale giocauano à Tarochino li nostri Maggiori che per passare l’hore oziose uirtuosamente l’inuentarono.49

[Courteous reader - here is the manner in which our forefathers played Tarocchino, that they invented to pass idle hours virtuously.]

47 L’Italie il y a cent ans, ou Lettres écrites d’Italie à quelques amis en 1739 et 1740 ; par Charles de Brosses (1st edition (posthumous), M. R. Colomb, ed, Paris, 1836), p. 209 (Lettre XLIV, to Madame Cortois de Quincey; De Brosses’ description of the game of Minchiate occupies pp. 207-210).48 Longueruana ou recueil de pensées, de discours et de conversations, de feu M. Louis du Four de Longuerue (Berlin 1754) pp. 83-84 (another Berlin printing of the same year has it on pp. 107-108).49 Transcription byLorenzo Cuppi of Bologna, Biblioteca dell’Archiginnasio, ms. Gozz. 140, 40v-55r, at the card games website of Girolamo Zorli, TreTre - http://www.tretre.it/menu/accademia-del-tre/testi-e-studi/tarocchi-a-bologna-nel-cinquecento.html (accessed October 28, 2009).

In the introductory paragraph of his book on playing Bolognese Tarocchino (1754), Ferdinando Pisarri (presumed author) wrote something similar to Pedini’s manuscript:

Questo Giuoco è antichissimo talmente, che non si ha cognizione nè dell’Inventore, nè del tempo, in cui fu ritrovato; ben è vero però, ch’egli è particolare della Città di Bologna, e fu inventato per passare l’ore nojose con qualche divertimento.50

[This game is so very old, that neither the Inventor, nor the era when it was invented, is known; it is certainly true, however, that it is particular to the City of Bologna, and was invented to pass idle hours with some kind of amusement.]

SUMMARY

The obscurity of playing cards in documentary sources, along with their physically ephemeral nature, gave rise to numerous streams of invention and legend to account for them. Not all of these accounts are gratuitous or deliberate inventions. Some, like the Spanish Vilhan, are genuine legends, whose author cannot be discovered. Others are erudite mistakes, such as that based on the naïve error of taking the terms alea or ludus in ancient sources to have included playing cards (strikingly demonstrated in the thought of Beneton de Peyrins, and implicit in many before him).

By far the most culturally important legendary invention story is that of diabolical origin, inextricably linked with religious moralizing about the evils of gambling. By including cards in the term alea, and linking it with the idolatrous ritual alluded to in pseudo-Cyprian’s De aleatoribus, sixteenth century moralists, particularly Protestants, created a potent legend around playing cards that persists within some religious groups today. The groundwork was laid for them by fifteenth century Franciscan and Dominican preaching.

But the diabolical legend has no historical specificity, however spurious: it is sheer hysteria. At the other extreme, we have coolly calculated inventions, such as Covarrubias’ “Nicolas Pepin”.

PROPOSED INVENTORS

The proto-historiographical list of attributed inventors or places of invention of playing cards is as follows:

Unknown (John of Rheinfelden, Meister Ingold, Francesco Berni, Francesco Piscina, Anonymous)The Devil (a host of preachers and moralists)Dissolute and covetous men (Volteranno)Palamedes (Aretino, Langley)Vilhan/Bilhan (Spanish legend of 16th century)Baal/Balaam (Ingold (suggests a connection), Faxardo, Guzman)Mercury (Primaudaye, Pictet)Nicolas Pepin (Covarrubias)Theut (“J.F.” (translator of Agrippa), Faxardo)Francesco Fibbia (for Tarocchino)Lydi, Lydians (Langley, Legendre)Asia/China (Beneton de Peyrins)Bologna (for Tarocchino)Romans (Beneton de Peyrins (for Tarot))Florence (for Minchiate)Michelangelo (for Minchiate (in Siena))

50 Istruzioni necessarie per chi volesse imparare il giuoco dilettevole delli Tarocchini di Bologna (Bologna, Fernando Pisarri, 1754), p. 5.

AUTHORS OR SOURCES OF THEORIES MENTIONED IN THE TEXT

Agrippa, CorneliusAlciato, AndreaAllaci, LeoneAnonymous (Discorso)Aquinas, ThomasAretino, PietroBernardino of SienaBerni, FrancescoBrosses, Charles deBrozas, Francisco Sanchez de las (“el Brocense”)Buini, Giuseppe MariaBullet, Jean-BaptisteBuonarroti, MichelangeloCervantes, Miguel deChrysostom, John Covarrubias, Sebastian deCroce, Giulio Cesare(Pseudo-) CyprianDaneau, LambertDepaulis, ThierryEtienvre, Jean-PierreFaxardo (Fajardo), Francisco de LuqueFibbia, FrancescoFreake, JamesFrench, JohnGaignières, Roger deGarzoni, TomasoGinerbeltiGrégoire, PierreGuadix, Diego deGuzman, Pedro deHyde, Thomas Ingold, MeisterJames of the MarchesLangley, ThomasLehmann, Friedrich ErnstLegendre, LouisLister, MartinLonguerue, Louis du Four deMachiavelli, AlessandroMarcello, Jacopo AntonioMénestrier, Claude-François Northbrooke, JohnPedini, Giuseppe MariaPeyrins, Etienne-Claude Beneton de Morange dePictet, BénédictPisarri, FerdinandoPiscina, FrancescoPolydore VergilPrimaudaye, Pierre de laRheinfelden, John ofRicci, CorradoSinger, Samuel Weller

Tamarid, Francisco LopezVisconti, Filippo MariaVolterrano, Raffaele MaffeiWillshire, William Hughes