The history of chess

PeterTurland · Post by **PeterTurland** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 7:47 pm

Hello,

I've come across something rather interesting, I was rereading this site after digging around I came across something that sort of made me go wha??? it was a game that is very odd I looked through the game thinking why did they not castle? Ran it through an engine and yes there were several instances where any normal chess players would have castled, it's possible the game was played even before castling was part of the rules.

Now it gets really weird, the whole game appears to be recorded in a poem written in the 15th century called scachsdamor this is given the added cache of being possibly the oldest game ever recorded.

John McKenna · Post by **John McKenna** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:06 am

I think Peter is trying to tell us that chess used to be a metaphor for love (and, boy, I bet some of those Medieval dames could play a good game). Whereas now chess is just another metaphor for selling things that arose when those 'Madmen' started trying to sell boring soap powder, etc.
Anyway, here's the new improved sanitary version:
Jwan,J-Au,Y 1984 Thessaloniki Womens' Ol.
1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd8 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.Bc4 Bg4 6.h3 Bxf3 7.Qxf3 c6... 32.Qxf7 1-0 it was mate in 1. (Both castled K-side!?)

Roger de Coverly · Post by **Roger de Coverly** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:15 am

John McKenna wrote: Anyway, here's the new improved sanitary version:

On move six, isn't there a choice between material advantage ( 6. Bxf7+) and positional advantage (6. Ne5)?

To explain the positional comment, 6. .. Bxd1 is met by 7. Bxf7 mate so 6 . .. Be6 may be necessary. The computer engine also suggest 6. .. Qd4 as a "least worse" idea, so that may go back to a material advantage.

Stewart Reuben · Post by **Stewart Reuben** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:14 am

The modern Law about castling was only finalised in the 19th century.
I have been asked, Why can't you castle out of check?
I have often wondered why we call it 'castling' but always refer to rooks.Krooking would seem more apt.

John Foley · Post by **John Foley** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:21 pm

Shouldn't this thread "The history of chess" be in the "Chess history" section or are these entirely separate concepts?

PeterTurland · Post by **PeterTurland** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:32 pm

I did not know there was a history of chess section, perhaps this thread can be transferred there?

IM Jack Rudd · Post by **IM Jack Rudd** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:38 pm

PeterTurland wrote:I did not know there was a history of chess section, perhaps this thread can be transferred there?

Done.

PeterTurland · Post by **PeterTurland** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 1:50 pm

Thanks Jack.

John McKenna · Post by **John McKenna** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:06 pm

And, thanks to Roger for sanitising the new product.

With respect to Stewart - a 1998 article on Chess Cafe had some things to say about the origins of (and a possible future for) 'krooking'.
www.chesscafe.com/text/kibitz31.txt

Geoff Chandler · Post by **Geoff Chandler** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:59 pm

Point of order Jack.

On the 3rd post in Roger clearly states:

"On move six, isn't there a choice between material advantage?"

That is a question.

So this thread (or that post) should be uncastled into the 'Chess Questions' section.

PeterTurland · Post by **PeterTurland** » Thu Sep 20, 2012 4:13 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote:Point of order Jack.

On the 3rd post in Roger clearly states:

"On move six, isn't there a choice between material advantage?"

That is a question.

So this thread (or that post) should be uncastled into the 'Chess Questions' section.

Dunno how relevant it is, but the poem seems to say, referring to the 6th move.

Fenollar
(Says that with the jump of the third he cannot take the King)

Because Kings, with invincible power,
Cannot extend themselves beyond their reason,
It is decreed that, by making the move possible,
They can never checkmate, or take;
Thus showing the world that in meting punishment or revenge
They must blend mercy with wrath,
And not overflow their understanding;
For, if they are great with their wings of potency,
Greater theyâ€™ll be by using clemency.

Matt Mackenzie · Post by **Matt Mackenzie** » Sat Sep 22, 2012 5:23 pm

The game Peter referenced at the top of this thread is fairly well known, and included in many anthologies as "de Castellvi - Vinoles" - played in Spain c 1485.

Though a widespread view is that it is a later "composed game"........

English Chess Forum

The history of chess

The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess

Re: The history of chess