Site review - Chess Variants
Mark Weeks
bookmarks, is for Chess Variants by Hans Bodlaender. The site is at
address...
...What does this site have to do with chess history? The introductory
paragraph offers a reason -- 'It is generally assumed that chess
originated in India, 5-7 centuries after the birth of Christ. At that
time, the game was not as we know it. During the course of history, many
variants of the game were tried. Some were discarded immediately, some
had for some time an enthusiastic following and then died out, while
others stayed, and replaced the game as it formerly was known.'
The introduction also links to a page on Chaturanga, where we learn that
'Scientists generally assume that Chaturanga, played in India, in or
before the 7th century after Christ, is the oldest known form of chess.'
To tie everything together, there is an additional link to 'chess as we
know it' (or 'the FIDE variant'), which is a directory of the most
important sites related to chess.
In case you're not familiar with the main theory about the evolution of
Chaturanga to modern chess, I've scanned the illustration from the
inside cover of Davidson's 'Short History of Chess' and loaded it onto
the Web at address...
http://Mark_Weeks.tripod.com/Dav-covr/dav-covr.htm
...under the title 'The March of Chess'. This is an interesting map
showing the spread of Chaturanga and giving the names of the game in
many local languages. To compensate in some small way for the copyright
infringement, my new page has a link to used copies of the book through
BookFinder.com. Another good one page overview is at...
http://www.unm.edu/~babakmeh/shatrange.html
...Although Chaturanga is barely mentioned, the evolution of chess from
India to the European countries is outlined. Another site of general
interest is...
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/james.masters/TraditionalGames/index.htm
...The page on 'The Chess Family' is another one page overview of the
most important variants. The Bodlaender site has far more material. As
much as I'd like to cover everything in this review, this is not
possible. I'll concentrate on the aspects which are the most relevant to
chess history. The [Main index file] suggests two other pages:-
- Historic chess variants - Chaturanga, Shatranj, and other chess
variants from ancient times.
- Oriental chess variants - Xiangqi, Shogi, other oriental chess
variants.
Linked first on the page of [Historic Chess Variants] is Chaturanga. The
page gives the opening setup, including a diagram of the board & pieces,
the moves of the pieces, and the object of the game. Listed second is an
imaginary game ('pure speculation') called Proto-Chaturanga. The page is
authored by Jean-Louis Cazaux and has a link to his site at
http://www.chez.com/cazaux, which is worth a visit. Listed third is
Shatranj. Again we find the rules of the game, including the opening
setup, the moves of the pieces, and other rules.
The page [Oriental chess variants] mainly covers Xiangqi (Chinese Chess)
and Shogi (Japanese Chess), with a few pages on other oriental chess
variants. The page on Xiangqi offers many links to external sources as
well as information on the rules of the game. The page on Shogi is
similar.
The link [On the Chess Variant Pages] offers much information about the
construction of the site and the people behind it. There is a list of
over 250 contributors, showing the great interest in this specialist
subject of chess variants. The page on editors lists 11 names, most of
whom are described as contributing editors. The editors in chief are
Hans Bodlaender, the founder of the site, and David Howe.
In addition to the main index, there are site indices by date of
addition [What's New?] and by alphabetical order. There is also a search
function which makes it easy to find the relevant pages on a specific
topic. If you're confused by the many variants, the [Recognized Chess
Variants] page lists the variants considered most important by the
experts. All of these functions make the site easy to navigate. Do you
need some offline resources on the subject of variants? There is an
extensive bibliography on the [Books and journals] page.
I decided to investigate a small question which occurred to me while
browsing through the material. My scanned page from Davidson shows
Chaturanga in the 7th century, the Persian game Chatrang in the 8th
century, and the Arab game Shatranj in the 9th century. This places
Chatrang before Shatranj, but Bodlaender doesn't mention Chatrang in any
site index. What does the site have to say about Chatrang?
There is no reference in the [Alphabetical index] under the letter 'C',
but the site's WebGlimpse Search finds '4 matches in 3 files' for
chatrang. The first match is an email article from July 1999 which
mentions that 'Ouk Chatrang is apparently the traditional Cambodian
game' -- that's east of India, but Persia is to the west, so scratch
that. The second match is a page [Proto-Xiang-Qi] which says, 'Chess
origin is still a riddle. Many think the first form was Chaturanga,
Indian name, or Chatrang, Persian name...' The third match is a page
[Proto-Chaturanga], which uses exactly the same phrase in its
introduction. This means that Chaturanga and Chatrang are exactly the
same game. What do other pages on the Web say about this?
I searched for 'chatrang' on SurfWax, my favorite metasearch engine, at
http://www.surfwax.com/. I quickly discovered that this is an excellent
way to find various pages outlining the history of chess in different
languages! Not wanting to sail too far from shore, I only looked at
pages in English. Some of the more interesting pages that I found are
listed here...
[Ancient India's Contribution to - Sports and Games]
http://www.hindubooks.org/sudheer_birodkar/india_contribution/sports.htm
l
This reference quotes the Encyclopedia Britannica which quotes William
Jones from the 18th century, and concludes that 'chess, under the
Sanskrit name Chaturanga was exported from India into Persia in the 6th
century of our era; that by a natural corruption, the old Persians
changed the name into chatrang; but when their country was soon
afterwards taken possession of by the Arabs, who had neither the initial
nor the final letter of the word in their alphabet, they altered it
further into Shatranj, which name found its way presently into modern
Persian and ultimately into the dialects of India.' India -> Persia ->
Arabia -> Persia -> India.
[Explanation of Chess and arrangement of Vin-Artakhshir]
http://www.avesta.org/pahlavi/chatrang.htm
This reference gives a detailed description of Chatrang. I'd like to
compare this to the description of Chaturanga and Shatranj on
Bodlaender's site, but this will have to wait for another day.
[SOME FACTS TO THINK ABOUT]
http://www.netcologne.de/~nc-jostenge/calvo.htm
This page, written by the eminent chess historian Ricardo Calvo, starts
with 'Fact 1: Indian literature has no early mentions of chess but
Persian literature does', so we know immediately where he is going with
his argument. The article goes on to state 'Fact 3 : The Arabs
introduced chess in India after taking Shatrang from Persia.' This
completely upsets the applecart -- according to Calvo, Chatrang preceded
Chaturanga. By the way, I reviewed the entire site in 'Chess History on
the Web (2000 no.2)'. Administered by Gerhard Josten, it's the best
introduction on the Web to the various theories about the origin of
chess.
[A dialog between Gerhard Josten & Jan Newton]
http://www.goddesschess.com/dialog/challenge.html
This is a series of articles which aren't really relevant to my
question, but I'd like to pursue it at a later date, so I'm including
the reference.
[A Quick Look At Wargames by Anton Coetzee[
http://www.iwar.org.uk/military/resources/wargames.htm
'Chatrang: A board game that was played in Persia in the 7th century.
This game is precisely the same as the Indian Chaturanga board game, the
only difference being the Persian name.' This supports Bodlaender's
position, but the author's references are not given.
...Calvo muddies the waters. If chess went from Persia to India via the
Arabs, the Persian and Indian variants would probably not be the same.
Considering the great number of chess variants that we find today, would
the situation in the 7th through 9th centuries have been different?
Wherever there is an inventive mind with a knowledge of chess, there may
be a new variant. Sorting this out and determining who came first with
what is a daunting task. Different pieces, moves, boards, & rules of
engagement; for two players or for four; with dice or without -- which
came first? It's unlikely that we'll ever know.
One thing that might help is a Web based, hypertext, side by side
comparison of the precursors and cousins of chess. This would compare
the board, the names & symbols of the pieces, the initial setup, the
moves of the pieces including pawn promotion & castling, the handling of
stalemate, and the object of the game. All of this would be referenced
back to original sources. This might help to eliminate some of the more
extravagant claims about the origin & early history of the game. Who
wants to be the H.J.R. Murray of the 21st century?
Bye for now,
Mark Weeks
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.