813 



CHESS. 



CHESS. 



the ' Illustrated London News,' and collected in a pamphlet for private 

 circulation, has settled the matter in favour of India, adopting the 

 conclusion of Dr. Hyde and Sir William Jones, that " Chess was 

 invented in India, and thence introduced into Persia and other Asiatic 

 regions during the 6th century of our era." The origin of the game is 

 altogether lost, but it seems to have existed for several thousand years 

 before the 6th century of our era. The ancient Hindu game is 

 called " Chaturanga," a term compounded of the two Sanscrit words 

 chatur "four," and anya a "member" or " component part." The 

 term " shatranj," used by the Persians, Arabs, and Turks, is a cor- 

 ruption of the word chaturanga. The board consisted then, as it does 

 now, of sixty-four squares, but the game was played by four persons, 

 each having a king, a rook, a knight, and a bishop (the last being repre- 

 sented by a ship), together with four pawns. The two opposite players 

 were allied against the other two, and the moves were decided by the 

 turn of an oblong die, having four faces, marked with the numbers 2.3, 

 4, and 5. The pieces were arranged for play as in the following 

 diagram, in which the green and the black are allied against the red 



Diagram 1. 



and the yellow. The rook represents the elephant, and the bishop in 

 the corner the ship. The king, rook, knight, and pawns, had the same 

 moves and powers as at present, only the pawn could move but one 

 square at starting. The bishop moved diagonally to any third square, 

 pausing over the square next him, which he did not command or 

 attack, and hig move was not restrained by any piece in the inter- 

 mediate square. Another peculiarity was, that not one of the four 

 bishops could attack any of the squares on which the three others were 

 allowed to move. The throwing of the die determined which piece 

 was to be moved. Should the number five turn up, the king or one 

 of the pawns must move ; if four, the elephant ; if three, the horse or 

 knight ; and if two, the ship. The object of each player (the green, 

 for example, or, as we should call him in modern chess, the white) 

 was in the first place to convey the two centre pawns to the oppo- 

 site end of the board, in order that they might be promoted to the 

 rank of knight or rook, which would nearly double the strength of 

 the player. Another great object was to convey the king, by a 

 series of careful moves, to the square of his ally, the black king. 

 This would give white the command of the allied forces, with a 

 great increase of power. In the mean time, white took every safe 

 opportunity of damaging or exterminating^ the hostile forces, and 

 having gained his ally's throne and the command of his forces, the 

 main point then was to capture the hostile kings, and gain the 

 "chaturaji," which was equivalent to our checkmate. For minor 

 points and matters of detail, we must refer to Dr. Forbes's papers ; but 

 we may say a few words respecting the mode by which the ancient 

 chaturanga probably became gradually changed into the shatranj or 

 mediaeval game. In the former, it was a great point with each of the 

 four players to gain possession of his ally's throne, since by that means 

 fie had the undivided command of the allied forces. Hence it must 

 often have happened that, after some twenty or thirty moves, the 

 content remained to be concluded between two players only, a circum- 

 stance which was in itself sufficient to have given rise to the mediaeval 

 game. There is also evidence that the chaturanga was frequently 

 played by one person only on each side ; and as the law and religion of 

 the ancient Hindus strictly prohibited gaming, the use of the die must 

 linve been discontinued at a very early age, whereby the game became 

 one of skill and strategy alone. In arranging the allied forces on one 

 side of the board, certain alterations were made. The elephant or 

 rook, and the ship or bishop, were made to change places, whereby the 

 lii.'hup gained more freedom of action. But the most important change 

 was to reduce one of the allied kings to a subordinate situation, called 

 in the Sanscrit " mantri," and in the Persian " farzin," both of which 

 mean monitor or councillor. Thus, by a slight alteration in form, and 

 none in principle, we have the men arranged as in modern chess. 

 This is the game of shatranj, which was introduced into Persia about 



the 6th century, and continued to be played in Asia and Europe for 

 nearly 1000 years. The powers of the pieces continued the same as in 

 the chaturanga, and some of their names were preserved in a corrupted 

 form. Thus, the piece next the king is still called in Sanscrit " hasti," 

 and in the Persian " fil " or " phil," which the Western nations con- 

 verted into " bishop," " fool," " leaper," " alfin," &c. Again, the piece 

 which retains the power of the original elephant, when stationed in 

 the corner, has the ancient name of the ship or chariot ; in Sanscrit 

 "roka" or "ratha," and in Persian "rukh," whence our "rook." 

 Among the Hindus the term " ship " was changed into " war-chariot," 

 the latter having the same importance on diy land as the ship in 

 water. So the Persians changed the word " roka " into " rukh," which 

 means a hero or warrior, and also a swift and fierce species of camel. 

 From the Persians the game passed on to the Arabs, in whose language 

 the word " rukh " meant the celebrated fabulous bird. So also the 

 words " scacchi," " echecs," " chess," &c., are not derived from chatu- 

 ranga, as commonly supposed, but from the Persian " shah " or " king," 

 which is in use to this day among the Arabs and Persians in the same 

 sense as our word " check." So also, when warning the king of danger, 

 we, instead of saying " check," often use the word " king," as do the 

 French " au roi ; " while the Germans, with greater exactness, say 

 " schach." 



The board on which the chaturanga was played had its squares all 

 of the same colour, nor does any change in this respect appear to have 

 been made when the game was modified into the shatranj. The arrange- 

 ment of the pieces in the shatranj was exactly as in modern chess. The 

 king, rook, and knight moved precisely as they do now ; the farzin, or 

 what we now call the queen, moved only one square diagonally ; the fil, 

 which we call bishop, moved two squares diagonally, attacking and 

 commanding only the square next to him but one, and he had no 

 power over the intermediate square. When a pawn reached the 

 opposite extremity of the board, it obtained the rank of farzin only, 

 and not that of any other piece ; the pawns could only advance one 

 step at the first move, and this restriction, together with the very 

 limited range of the queen and bishop, required some ten or twenty moves 

 to be made on either side before the actual fight could be said to have 

 begun. Hence, in order to save time and to prevent useless exchanges, 

 it was agreed that the first player should make a number of moves all 

 at once, without however crossing the middle line of the board ; after 

 which, the adversary was entitled to play up at once an equal number 

 of counter moves, keeping however to his own half of the board. The 

 Arabs called these preliminary moves "Ta'biyat," which signifies " the 

 drawing up of troops in battle array." When Mr. Lewis visited the 

 celebrated village of Strobeck, near Halberstadt, he found traces of the 

 mediieval game among the villagers. The pieces having been placed 

 as usual, each party was obliged to play his king's rook's pawn, 

 queen's rook's pawn, and queen's pawn two squares, and the queen to 

 her third square. After this the other pawns could move but one 

 square at a time. The introduction of chess into this village arose 

 from the founding of prizes by a dignitary of the cathedral of Halber- 

 stadt, who was exiled to Strobeck towards the end of the 15th century. 

 His idea was, that by encouraging a game which draws so largely on 

 the mental powers, the villagers would not be attracted by games of 

 chance, nor injured by the vices which usually accompany them. We 

 cannot but think that the example of the good bishop might be 

 adopted in our own day with success. 



The transition from the medieval into the common game of the 

 present day took place about A.D. 1500, and it consisted first, in extend- 

 ing the power of the bishop, so as to allow him to command the whole 

 diagonal instead of every third square as formerly ; secondly, in con- 

 ferring on the queen the enormous power of the rook and bishop com- 

 bined ; and lastly, in allowing the pawns to advance at the first move 

 either one or two steps. To these improvements may be added that 

 of castling the king, either according to the Italian method, or as now 

 practised. The reasons for these important changes have been 

 variously stated : we have no space for them here, but they are con- 

 cisely given in Mr. Tomlinson's work. In times of chivalry a game 

 intended to illustrate the art and science of war would be sure to 

 receive favour, and hence chess was thought necessary to complete the 

 education of a gentleman. Italy and Spain became celebrated not only 

 for their players, but also for writers on the game. 



The work of Cesolis, already referred to, contained no rules for 

 playing the game. This defect was remedied in the treatises of 

 Vicent and Lucena, published probably about 1495, and more com- 

 pletely in the work of Damiano, a Portuguese, in 1512. This work 

 was written in Spanish and Italian ; it contains a few openings, but 

 the greater part of the volume consists of a collection of chess 

 problems, many of which are still regarded as classic. In 1561, Kuy 

 Lopez published in Spanish the ' Book of the Liberal Invention and 

 Art of the Game of Chess.' The author was an ecclesiastic, and for 

 some time enjoyed the reputation of being the best player in Europe ; 

 but he underwent the fate of most champions in being deposed after a 

 brief reign. His conqueror was one Leonardo, a Calabrian, whose 

 youthful appearance obtained for him the pseudonym of II Puttino, or 

 "the boy." Leonardo's history is romantic. After having gone 

 through a two years' training preparatory to his contest with Ruy 

 Lopez, he set out for Madrid, but learning that his brother had been 

 taken by the corsairs, he determined to ransom him, and actually won 



