Brother John's Tractatus de Moribus

It seems useful to post some observations about Brother John’s Tractatus, along with what translated passages are readily available. Like the two 16th-century Italian essays describing the Tarot trump cards as moral allegory, such contemporaneous interpretations may be of little value to Tarot cultists. The “countercultural-religionists” and “esoteric universalists” who impose their personal spiritual beliefs onto playing-cards, as well as those who use Tarot as projective inkblots for free association, will find such substantive foundations to be of small interest. Nonetheless, factual findings represent historical reality, regardless whether it appeals to modern cultists. For example, if one were interested in the historical significance of the Queens in European playing cards, this topic was specifically addressed by Brother John.

The Tractatus, as we now have it, goes on to express, and give grounds for, a preference for the 60-card form, and, later, to include a whole short section on the excellence of the number 60, as well as another on the Queen (the treatise as a whole being an essay in moralizing based on the playing-card pack).
(Michael Dummett, The Game of Tarot, p.12.)

Playing cards were probably introduced into Europe around the year 1375, and a variety of records exist documenting them from 1377 and after. One of the earliest of these records of playing cards in Europe, “the celebrated treatise Tractatus de moribus et disciplina humanae conversationis, written in Basle in 1377 by a Dominican friar by the name of John (usually known, probably wrongly, as John of Rheinfelden), gives an actual description of the pack as known to its author, though not of any of the games played with it.”

From this we learn that the structure of the pack was essentially what it is now. There were four suits, each with its own suit-sign; each suit consisted of 13 cards, divided into ten numeral cards and three court cards. The numeral cards were distinguished, just as now, by the number of repetitions of the suit-sign. The court cards consisted of a seated King and a higher and lower Marshal, each holding his suit-sign in his hand. (This last detail tallies with the practice in many of the earliest surviving packs, and in some of the later ones). The two Marshals were distinguished by the fact that the higher one held his suit-sign aloft, while the lower one held it hanging down from his hand: these were, evidently, then, the Swiss or German Ober and Unter. Brother John unfortunately does not indicate what suit-signs were used.… The evidence thus strongly suggests that there was no long period of evolution at the end of which the playing-card pack as we know it emerged. (The Game of Tarot, p.11.)

The information about the nature of the decks used, recorded so soon after the introduction of playing cards into Europe, is extremely valuable. Brother John (Johannes Teutonicus) states explicitly that cards were introduced to his area in that same year. Other accounts from other areas, dating from 1377 in Florence to 1384 in Valencia, also note that cards were a newly introduced game. There are, however, unsettled questions about the dating of Brother John’s account. The earliest surviving copy of the Tractatus dates from 1429, and in addition to describing the 52-card deck described above, it also describes a number of variant decks: “one in which all the Kings are replaced by Queens; one in which two of the suits have Kings and the other two Queens; one with five suits [65 cards]; another with six [78 cards]; and finally one with four suits, but with five court cards in each suit (King, Queen, the two Marshals and a Maid), making 60 cards in all.” Although similar diversity is documented from the fifteenth century, Dummett concludes that it is not believable “that such a range of variations on the original form should have developed within a year or two of the introduction or invention of the playing-card pack.” Dummett discusses some researchers who contend that this suggests that playing cards had actually been introduced to Europe substantially earlier, while others maintain that the variant decks were a later interpolation into the original 1377 text.

According to trionfi.com, Arne Jönssen, (Latinist, author of St. Bridget’s Revelations To The Pope), is preparing a critical edition of the Tractatus. Jönssen affirms the date of 1377, noting three elements of the text support the early dating. First, obviously, the text gives the date as 1377. Second, “Ludevicus” is mentioned as the King of Hungary, indicating Ludvig the Great, who reigned until 1382. Third, Brother John writes of another event (something to do with the 100 Year War) which happened around that date. His opinion regarding which sections might be later interpolations is not mentioned. Jönssen reports that the pip cards were associated with various occupations, including baker, miller, butcher, physician, farmer, and others, totalling nearly 40 occupations. This aspect of Brother John’s Tractatus is not reported in the other sources I have read. It is strongly reminiscent of the fifteenth-century Hofämterspiel deck. Other details are reported, including a discussion of suit-signs and some aspects of game play and scoring. This seems to contradict other accounts, so Jönssen’s study promises to be informative, but there is no indication of when it might be published.

The following description is from the Catalogue of Additions to the Manuscripts in the British Museum in the Years 1876-1881.

Eg. 2,419. "TRACTATUS de moribus et disciplina humane conuersacionis": moralizations on the Game of Cards, in three parts, by "Frater Johannes [of Reinfelden, near Basel?] in ordine predicatorum minimus, nacione Theutonicus." In his preface he says: "Hinc est quod quidam ludus, qui ludus cartarum appellatur, hoc anno ad nos peruenit, scilicet anno domini m.ccc.lxxvii. In quo ludo status mundi nunc modernis temporibus optime describitur et figuratur. Quo tempore autem factus sit, per quern et vbi penitus ignoro"; and he continues "In quo quidem tractatu intendo facere tria: primo, ludum cartularum in se describere, quo ad materiam et modum ludendi; secundo, ipsum ludum ad mores trahere seu nobilibus dare nomina viuendi; et tercio, ipsos populares instruere seu eos informare de modo virtuose operandi." The number and figures of the cards are noticed only in part i., chap, i., but nothing is said of the ways of playing; the remainder of the work being given to moralizing. The date 1377 again occurs on f. 10 b, col. ii. (For an account of the volume by Mr. E. A. Bond see the Athenaeum, 19 Jan. 1878.) Paper; ff. 96. In double columns, with blank spaces left at the end of the chapters for drawings of the cards. A colophon gives the date of this transcript, "Anno domini incarnacionis lxxij. [1472] tunc temporis regnauit pestilencia, etc.'' Small Folio.

The following excerpts were translated by Timothy Betts (Tarot and the Millennium, 1998, pp.87-89.) Note that Brother John’s stated purpose is the same as that of the anonymous Discorso of Explaining the Tarot, teaching morals via playing cards, and both use the parallel with Chess.

♠ Hence it is that a certain game, called the game of cards, has come to us in this year, viz the year of our Lord 1377. In which game the state of the world as it is, is excellently described and figured. But at what time it was invented, where, and by whom, I am entirely ignorant. But this I say, that it is of advantage to noblemen and other persons of leisure; they may do no worse[sic], especially if they practice it courteously and without money...
♠ Wherefore I, brother John, the least in the Order of Preachers [Dominicans], a German by birth, sitting as it happened, abstractedly at table, revolving in my mind one way and another the present state of the world, there suddenly occurred to me the game of cards; and I began to think how it might be likened to this state of the world. And it seemed to me very possible that it a likeness to the world.
♠ Therefore, trusting in the Lord, I determined to compile a treatise on the subject, and began it on the following day, hoping by God's aid to complete it. And should persons find some passage in it not easy to understand, but obscure and difficult, let them get out of their boat at Burgheim and enter it again at Rinveld [i.e., skip it], and proceed reading the treatise as before, until they come to the end of it...
♠ The subject of this treatise may be compared with the game of chess, for in both there are kings, queens, and chief nobles, and common people, so that both games may be treated in a moral sense.
♠ And in this treatise I propose to do three things: first to describe the game of cards itself, as to the matter and mode of playing it; second, to moralize the game, or teach noblemen the rule of life; and third, to instruct the people themselves, or inform them of the way of laboring virtuously. Wherefore it seemed to me the present treatise ought to be entitled Of Morals and Everyday Ethical Instruction (De Moribus et Disciplina Humane Conversationis).
♠ The first part will have six chapters. In the first will be the stated subject of the game and styles of play. In the second, it will be shown that in this game there is a moral action of virtues and vices. In the third it will be suggested that it is of service for mental relief and rest to the tired. In the fourth it will be shown that it is useful for idle persons, and may be a comfort to them. In the fifth will be treated the state of the world, as respect to morals. In the sixth will be demonstrated the divisors of the number sixty, and the properties of numbers.

♠ In the game which men call the game of cards, they paint the cards in different manners, and they play with them in one way and another. The common form, as it first came to us, is thus: Four kings are depicted on four cards, each of whom sits on a royal throne. And each one holds a certain sign in his hand, of which signs some are reputed good and others signify evil. Under the kings are two marschalli, the first of whom holds the sign upwards in his hand, in the same manner as the king; but the other holds the same sign downward in his hand.
♠ After this are another ten cards, outwardly of the same size and shape; on the first of which, the aforesaid king's sign is placed once [Ace]; on the second, twice [Deuce]; and so on for the others, up to and including the tenth card. So each king becomes the thirteenth, and there are altogether fifty-two cards.
♠ There are others who play in the same manner with queens, and with as many cards as has been already said for kings. There are also others who arrange the cards, so that there are two kings with their marschalli and other cards, and two queens with theirs in the same manner. Again, some take five, other six kings, each with his marschalli and other cards, according to as it pleases them, and thus the game is varied in form by many.
♠ Also there are some who make the game with four kings, eight marschalli and the other common cards, and add besides four queens with four attendants; so that... the number of cards will then be sixty. This manner of distributing the cards and this number pleases me most, for three reasons: first, because of its greater authority; second, because of its royal fitness; and third, because of its more becoming courteousness.

The following excerpts were translated by Edward Augustus Bond in his 1878 notice of the acquisition of the manuscript by the British Museum. They largely overlap the previous translation, which may have been based on Bond’s. The entire article by Bond is reproduced at the end of Tarot and the Dance of Death.

Hence it is that a certain game, called the game of cards [ludus cartarum], has come to us in this year, viz. the year of our Lord M.CCC.LXXVIJ. In which game the state of the world, as it now is, is excellently described and figured. But at what time it was invented, where, and by whom, I am entirely ignorant. But this I say, that it is of advantage to noblemen and other persons of leisure that they may do no worse, especially if they practise it courteously and without money.

Wherefore I, brother John, the least in the order of Preachers, a German by birth, sitting, as it happened, abstractedly at table, revolving in my mind one way and another the present state of the world, suddenly occurred to me the game of card?, and I began to think how it might be closely likened to the state of the world. And it seemed to me very possible, and that it had a likeness to the world. Therefore, trusting in the Lord, I determined to compile a treatise on the subject, and began it on the following day, hoping by God's aid to complete it. And should persons find some passage in it not easy to understand, but obscure and difficult, let them get out of their boat at Burgheim and enter it again at Rinveld, and proceed, reading this treatise, as before, until they come to the end of it. For the said passage is dangerous to boat passengers, so that many get out and, at the other end, return into the boat and proceed onwards as before. But the subject of this treatise may be compared with the game of chess, for in both there are kings, queens, and chief nobles, and common people, so that both games may be treated in a moral sense.

And in this treatise I propose to do three things: first, to describe the game of cards in itself, as to the matter and mode of playing it; second, to moralize the game, or teach noblemen the rule of life; and third, to instruct the people themselves, or inform them of the way of labouring virtuously. Wherefore it seemed to me that the present treatise ought to be entitled 'De Moribus et Disciplina Humane Conversationis.' For the first part will have six chapters. In the first will be stated the subject of the game and the diversity of instruments. In the second will be set forth that in this game there is a moral action of virtues and vices. In the third it will be suggested that it is of service for mental relief and rest to the tired. In the fourth it will be shown that it is useful for idle persons, and may be a comfort to them. In the fifth will be treated the state of the world, as it is, in respect to morals. In the sixth will be demonstrated the aliquot parts of the number sixty, and the properties of numbers.

In the game which men call the game of cards they paint the cards in different manners, and they play with them in one way and another. For the common form and as it first came to us is thus, viz. four kings are depicted on four cards, each of whom sits on a royal throne. And each one holds a certain sign in his hand, of which signs some are reputed good, but others signify evil. Under which kings are two ' marschalli,' the first of whom holds the sign upwards in his hand, in the same manner as the king ; but the other holds the same sign downwards in his hand. After this are other ten cards, outwardly of the same size and shape, on the first of which the aforesaid king's sign is placed once; on the second twice; and so on with the others up to the tenth card inclusive. And so each king becomes the thirteenth, and there will be altogether fifty-two cards. Then there are others who in the same manner play, or make the game, of queens, and with as many cards as has been already said of the kings. There are also others who so dispose the cards or the game that there are two kings, with their ' marschalli' and other cards, and two queens with theirs in the same manner. Again, some take five, others six kings, each with his 'marschalli' and his other cards, according as it pleases them, and thus the game is varied in form by many. Also, there are some who make the game with four kings and eight ' marschalli' and the other common cards, and add besides four queens with four attendants, so that each of those four kings, with all the family of the whole kingdom, speaking of the chief persons, is there, and the number of the cards will then be sixty. And this manner of making the cards and in this number the most pleases me, and for three reasons: first, because of its greater authority; second, because of its royal fitness; third, because of its more becoming courteousness. First, I say, because of its greater authority, for we have its express figure in Holy Scripture, Daniel iii.; and again in that statue which King Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, saw in his dream, and which Daniel interpreted to him, the which statue had a golden head, a silver breast, a brazen belly, and legs of iron.