Whist
card game
Whist is a classic English trick-taking card game that was widely played in the 18th and 19th centuries. Although the rules are simple, there is scope for strategic play.
History
In 1674, The Complete Gamester described the game Ruff and Honours as the most popular descendant of Triumph played in England during the 17th century. Whist is described as a simpler, more staid version of Ruff and Honours with the twos removed and a 10 point game. In the 18th century, Whist, played with a 52-card pack, superseded Ruff and Honours. The game takes its name from the 17th-century word whist (or wist) meaning quiet, silent, attentive, which is the root of the modern wistful.
Whist was first played seriously by gentlemen in the Crown Coffee House in Bedford Row, London, around 1728, according to Daines Barrington. Edmond Hoyle, thought to be a member of this group, began to tutor wealthy young gentlemen in the game and published A Short Treatise on the Game of Whist in 1742. It became the standard text and rules for the game for the next hundred years. Short Whist, played with a rubber of two 5-point games in Britain, and a game of 7 points in American Whist grew in popularity.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Whist” as card game. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as card game. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 8, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q767979. The Library of Congress control number is sh85146448. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1674, 1728 and 1742.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Whist”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Whist primary sources, Whist archive and Whist research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Whist”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Whist” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.