CHESMAYNE
Chatrang
Persian: one of the early versions of chess
derived from the Sanskrit word ‘Chaturanga’. The Arabic word ‘Shatranj’ was used after
the 7th century conquest of
Let us compare here the Chatrang, ancestor of the European Chess,
and the Xiangqi, the
Chinese Chess.
COMMON CHARACTERS
In both games, one can
find…….
- A first row of Soldiers.
- A leader, Shah or General, at the center.
- A second , Vizier or Advisor, at his
sides.
- A pair of Chariots at the
aisles.
- A Horse beside each
Chariot.
- An Elephant or Minister beside the
Horses.
In both games, the goal is to capture the opposing KI.
Despite these similarities,
they are noticeable differences which have to be discussed now.
Board
Comparison…….
|
|
|
|
8 x 8 squares/cells |
9 x 10 intersections |
|
Plain colour |
Plain colour |
|
Sometimes, few squares/cells are
crosscut |
Important markings: a central river,
a 3 x 3 Palace at each side, points to mark the position of Soldiers
and Cannons
|
|
The MPs/mps played on the
intersections |
The board in
I plan to make a dedicated
page about ‘Ashtapada’ later on.
Even if we don’t know exactly what kind of game was played on the
Ashatapada board before 600 AD, it is certain that it was popular. Murray thought that is was
similar to several spiral
race games played in India on different board sizes (5 x 5, 7 x 7, 9 x 9), but there is no direct
evidence. The adoption of the 8 x 8
board was probably due to this popularity.
Concerning “war games”, following
In China, the most
popular games before the appearance of Chess were ‘Weiqi’ and ‘Liubo’. Weiqi was adopted by the Japanese under the
name of ‘Go’ and it is under
this name that it became one of the most strategic games in the
World. Liubo is an extinct game and it
remains very mysterious.
I plan to make a dedicated
page about ‘Liubo’ later on.
Weiqi is played on intersections, and it is
possible that this fact influenced the ancient Chinese to play their
Chess.
Liubo used a heavily marked board and it is possible that this indicates
a relation with Xiangqi. For instance, there is a central square on the Liubo
board. Is it a mere coincidence that
there is a river in the
center of the Xiangqi board? And, the
few that we know from Liubo have more to tell us. Check here in the near future!
Set
Comparison…….
|
|
|
|
16 MPs/mps |
|
|
8 Soldiers |
5 Soldiers |
|
1 General
and 2 Counsellors
|
|
|
4 pairs of
major pieces: Elephant (or Minister), Horse, Cannon, Chariot |
The number of pieces is identical in both games which is a strong
indication of a kinship. However, there
is no equilibrium between major
and minor (Soldiers)
pieces in the eastern variety.
Moreover, there are 5 and not 4 categories of major pieces in Xiangqi: the Cannon has no equivalent in western chess.
Piece by
piece comparison…….
|
|
|
|
The
King: 1 cell/step all 8 directions |
The
General: 1 cell/step, 4 orthogonal directions, within the Palace |
|
The
Vizier: 1 cell/step, 4 diagonal directions |
The
Counsellor: 1 cell/step, 4 diagonal directions, within the Palace |
|
The
Elephant: 2 cells/steps, 4 diagonal directions, can leap |
The
Minister or Elephant: 2 cells/steps, 4 diagonal directions, can
not leap, within its side of the board |
|
The
Horse: 1 cell/step straight followed by 1 diagonal, can leap |
The
Horse: 1 cell/step straight followed by 1 diagonal, can not leap |
|
|
The
Cannons: moves and captures othogonally. Moves like a Charriot,
captures by leaping over a 3rd piece. |
|
The
Chariot: slides all along lines and columns |
The
Chariot: slides all along lines and columns |
|
The
Soldier: moves 1 cell/step forward, captures 1 cell/step
diagonally forward, promotes to Vizier on last row |
The
Soldier: moves and captures 1 cell/step forward within its side of the board,
moves and captures 1 cell/step forward or beside when beyond the river |
The KI, or its
equivalent [GE],
has less mobility in the
Chinese form. This is also true for the Advisor/Vizier, the Ministers/Elephants and the Horses. The eastern Chess then looks like a blockade
game where the pieces are besieging a confined KI. It is completely different in the western chess
where the KI is unbound and really leads the operations on the
battlefield.
The PAs (Soldiers - FSs) are similar
because they go 1 step ahead but their capture mode and their promotion are very
different. That makes the biggest
difference in the structure of the two games.
In the eastern Chess, with their increase of power when they cross the river - they have a very
active role in besieging the fortress/palace. The western chess looks more like a subtle mix
between a war game and a race game - within
the battle, the PAs are racing to the last row to get to their promotion as an
officer [MP].
The use of carved pieces have been chosen in Central Asia and India
where China preferred the use of tokens bearing the name of the piece with an
ideogram. (Although carved pieces have also been used in
Old Islamic
Chessmen – Historical - religious and artistic considerations about their shape and
design.
By: Gianfelice Ferlito
Introduction
In this paper I shall dispute the theory that the old Islamic chessmen
made from the 7th to the 13th century in abstract and
stylized shapes were designed on account of the Muslim prohibition of
image. This theory attributes the
prohibition some time directly and wrongly to the Kur’an, but more often to
Muslim habits and their traditions. This
idea has generally been accepted by many chess scholars.
(1)
I shall try to clarify the complex problem of the Islamic attitude
towards representation of images as it was felt between the 7th to
the 13th century. I then shall
deal with testimonies of lslamic figures in art during the first half of the 8th
century. Among which I shall mention
those found at Qusayr ‘Amrah and at Khirbat al-Majfar in the Jordanian
desert.
I shall examine also other Islamic testimonies from Dar al Islam in
which artists have depicted
animals and men in a very realistic way for treasured gifts. Usually these were beautifully carved pieces
in ivory, works of ceramics and of metallurgy.
All these testimonies will prove that depiction of images in Islam was
not considered sacrilegious for secular palaces and for secular objects. The
Islamic prohibition against images was observed only for holy places, such as
mosques or for holy books, like the Kur’an or for the Prophets or for Allah. Theoretically, therefore, Islamic chessmen as
secular objects could have been by Muslim craftsmen in a representational way
as many other secular objects. But they
were not. This was a free choice.
From Chatrang men to Shatranj men
No one yet knows for certain how, when and where the game of chess was invented or developed from
other tabula games. Certainly the Arabs,
during their conquest of the
Many scholars often shorten the full title in “Chatrang Namak” or
“Matigan i chatrang” or “Vicarisn i chatrang”.
From that early document, it is related that such a game was devised by
a group of several wise men
of
In the Pahlavi document there is no mention of the style and design of
the chessmen, but the pieces are described by what they represent:
“Two supreme
rulers: resemble KIs (shah), selected corps to right and to left are in the
shape of chariots, [ROs] (raxv), a commander in chief is a tent (parzen), the
commander of the rearguard is an elephant, [EL] (pil), the commander of the
calvary is a horse, [KT] (asp), and the foot-soldiers (piyada), [FSs] represent
the infantry”.
(2)
Knowing that the Indian sculptures and paintings of the period were
inclined towards realistic styles, many chess scholars assumed that those
Indian pieces are also “pictorials, with naturalistic figures representing the names of the
pieces”.
(3)
But Indian chessmen of that period were, however, never found.
The famous carved ivory piece representing a KI on top of an elephant and dated
9th-10th century is certainly an Arabic work after an
Indian model as the kufic inscription testifies (“min ‘amal Yusuf al-Bahili”)
but “it is difficult to accept it as a chess pieces”.
(4)
It is quite probable that Persian Chatrang-men were realistically carved
in wood, bone, ivory, precious and semiprecious stones.
Fortunately for our knowledge of the history of chessmen, the former
(5)
Excavations in Afrosiab under the leadership of Professor Bukariov in
1977 uncovered seven ivory carved sculptures which left……. “no doubt as to the
playing purpose of the figures”.
(6)
These sculptures correspond to the roles of the Chatrang-men as
described in the old text “Vicarisn”.
According to Dr. Thomas Hyde (1636-1703), in his “De ludis Orientalibus”
(1694) in the middle on the 7th century the design of Chatrang men
was probably realistic, depicting therefore their roles. He reported an illuminating anecdote, which
has been related by a preacher of the Mosque at
Evidently Caliph ‘Ali was not acquainted with Chatrang, though some of
his subjects were already playing it.
Was ‘Ali concerned that these were small idols? From this story Dr. Hyde and many others
after him thought that the chessmen at the time of ‘Ali were representational
and pictorially carved. During the
centuries of lslamic dominance, the game of Chatrang was disseminated in all
territories of Dar al Islam which consisted of two main sectors: the West,
known as “al’ Maghrib”, and the East, generally referred to as “al
Masriq”. The first comprised the
northern coast of Africa east of
By a linguistic process of Arabization the game became known in Dar al Islam as
Shatranj and it seems that it was always played with Islamic pieces as we call
them today.
Through commercial and diplomatic contacts the game was introduced,
probably during the 8th century, directly into Al-Andalus and
The name of the game, by a process of natural adaptation to the different
languages, became Zatrikion in Bysanzium, Ajedrez in
The word “scaci”or “scachi” (plural) indicated the game of chess
itself. The Persian word ‘mat’ was
adopted with the usual terminàtion of “us” and became in Latin ‘mattus’, i.e.
mate. With great probability in the
last part of the 7th century the chessmen started to be carved by
Muslim craftsmen in abstract and geometrical shapes. Shapes which vaguely suggested the original
roles they had in Chaturanga and in Chatrang.
On Islamic attitude towards the
representation of images
In the book, “The formation of Islamic art”, Professor Oleg Grabar says: “Much has been
written about Islamic attitudes toward the arts. Encyclopedia or general works on the history
of arts simply assert that, for a variety of reasons, which are rarely
explored, Islam was theologically opposed to the representation of living
beings. While it is fairly well known
by now that the Koran contains no prohibition of such representations, the
undeniable denunciation of artists and of representations found in many
traditions about the life of the Prophet are taken as genuine expressions of an
original Muslim attitude”.
(7)
In the Kur’an there are only few passages dealing explicitly with
representations of idols, images, statues and sculptures. And none of these passages are clearly
stating any prohibition for making artistic figural representations of men or
animals. The first passage usually
quoted is in Surah 5, “The Table”, ayat 90-93.
“O
believers, wine, maysir sacrifical stones (ansab) and devining arrows are
abominations devised by Satan. Avoid
them. Perhaps you may prosper”. According to the chess scholar Prof. Duncan
Forbes (17981868): “Now, all the eminent Musalman commentators on this passage say that -
by the term images - the Prophet alluded to “the game of Chess”, and that the
interdict applied not to the game itself, in which chance had no part, but to
the little carved figures or images of men, horses, elephants etc. Then used on the board as imported from
(8)
In the first place it should be noted that historically Surah 5 was
“transmitted” to Muhammad around 631-632.
Most probably Chatrang was played in
(9)
The passage in Surah 5 is a clear prohibition to Muslims for the
adoration of any kind of religious idol.
But the Kuranic condemnation is not indiscriminately directed at all
statues and images, if these do not have any religious reference. Certainly
Moses was more explicit when he delivered to the Israelite people the famous
‘Decalogue’ on
”Do not have
any other idol beside Me (Yahweh). You
will not make any idol or any image of anything which is high in the sky nor
low on the ground nor in the water below the ground”.
(10)
Again the prohibition was intended for idols but Moses forbade
literarally any images and this fact had a negative influence on graven images
in Jewish art forever. In Surah 34, “
(11)
The shari’ah considered therefore all images, created by the hand of an
artist, poor imitations when they were depicting any living creature having a
soul (nafs) or a breath (ruh). The
artist, copying living models, could have been regarded as “guilty of trying
to usurp the creative activity of God”.
(12)
Imitations of trees, flowers, leaves were however allowed by the
ulema. To a non Muslim like me, it is
very difficult to imagine a more creative activity than these geometrical and
floral creations, arabesques and decorations in which human fantasy has no
limit.
Muslims, from the beginning of their Islam (submission to Allah), have shown a
love for liberating themselves from classic forms of a world which they
conquered and probably despised. They
re-employed forms already in use by inventing new geometrical compositions,
figuring out proportional measurements in completely abstract forms and
simplifying without ambiguity of meaning.
They expressed perfectly this tendency in the astonishing care they took
with their unique calligraphy.
Calligraphy for the Muslims was considered to be a gift of Allah as
stated in the first Surah revealed by Archangel Gabriel to Muhammad, Surah 96,
“Clots of blood”, ayah 2: “Your Lord is the Most Bountiful One, who by the pen taught man what he
did not know”. The early coarse
Arabic “Jazm” script, derived from Nebatean forms of letters, was gradually and
elegantly transformed into geomctrical graphic styles. The Kufic script emerged as the sole script
for copying the Kur’an. Calligraphy in
Islam became a science, an art which permeated the general taste of the
artistic Islamic societies, leading to ideals of geometrical perfection and
beauty. “Arab calligraphy reflected their genius and
attracted their best artistic talents”.
(13)
In my view the Islamic chessmen, made in elegant abstract forms,
were expression of such taste and style.
They were made in “abstract” design and form because they were primarily
responding to the geometrical taste of the Muslims as well as responding to the
expectations of an ‘Ideal Beauty’ already expressed in their calligraphy.
Secondly this abstract design was adopted worldwide because the chessmen of
this shape were easy to handle, well balanced for moving on the board, easy to
store, convenient to carry even on a camel and resistant to bad handling. At last but not least they are easy to make
and therefore reasonably priced. Another
reason for not accepting the conventional idea expressed by so many chess
scholars about the genesis of abstract Islamic chessmen (ie. evasion from a
supposed prohibition of images), is that so far we have not found any realistic
and pictorial Muslim chess set defying such supposed prohibition. Instead we have found many Islamic works of
art, during the same centuries, defying that supposed prohibition. And so one may wonder why such defiance was
never tried for chessmen.
The answer is that the Islamic design for chessmen was not dictated by
religious restraints on images but by a deliberate choice of a popular
propensity for simplification of shapes into abstract and geometrical forms
already well reflected in their calligraphy. The letter represented a
figurative path to ‘Ideal Beauty’ and to Allah.
Muslim chess players considered their abstract chessmen beautiful in
their simplified shapes and extremely functional to handle, with a low centre
of gravity for maintaining equilibrium on the board, with a minimal
differentiation of shapes thus enabling them to concentrate on the game without
distractions of decorative and ornamental carvings. These deliberate and free
modifications of shapes from pictorial pre-Islamic Chatrang-men (Indian,
Persian), into abstract-geometrical Shatranj-men lasted for many centuries and
not only in Dar al-Islam but even in
Old Islamic Chessmen – Historical -
religious and artistic considerations about their shape and design.
Second part
By: Gianfelice Ferlito
Some examples of realistic images in
Islamic artistic works…….
Human and animal images in Islamic art were not as rare as we will
see. We must distinguish Islamic
religious art, destined to Holy Mosques, Holy Books (Kur’an), Sacred Places,
from secular art with objects ordered by the rich of the time for personal
amusement, pleasure, display and grandeur.
Chessmen belonged from the very beginning to the category of goods and
tools made for amusement and pleasure.
We have many examples of lslamic defiance of the prohibition of images
in secular society. Among them, I cite
the realistic figurations found in Qusayr Amrah (Red Casle), east of
(14)
In this castle the interior is completely covered with wall paintings:
on the west we see an image of a Caliph seated on a throne with two attendants
at his side, above is a herd of wild asses and below acrobats and a
semi-nude girl emerging from a bathing pool.
On the south wall six figures identified as the ‘Kings of the World’
including those of Bysanzium, Persia, Abyssinia, Spain (the Visigote ruler
Roderic) are shown offering submittance to the Islamic lord, the Caliph.
(15)
Another astonishing testimony is that of Khirbat al Mafjar at
(16)
Fig.
1
From 8th century, we have an Iranian silver
dish (fig. 2) with repoussé figures, to-day at the British Museum we see a
prince taking his ease in the open air with a lady and his attendant.
Fig. 2
From
Al Andalus we have:
- an ivory pixies (fig. 3/4/5)
…….which was made around 968 in
The
Fig.
6
-The
Fig.
7
Fig.8 
Fig.9
The
Fig.
10
The Monzon lion, a bronze of
the Almohad period (12\13th century), is to-day at the Louvre. (fig.11).
Fig.
11
Examples of realistic
Islamic cast bronzes were frequently found in Khurasan. These include a bird (fig.12).
Fig.
12
…….and an elephant (fig. 13).
Fig.
13
The first is dated 10/11th century, the second 11\12th
century.
A large number of animals on birds in the round were made in eastern
Another cast bronze with realistic figures is a jug from Jazira (
Fig.
14
From
Fig.
15
…….and the second at the Islamic Museum in
Fig.
16
Notes:
1) Here in chronological order, a few
statements on Islamic chessmen by some chess scholars:
H. J. Murray
“The Sunnite Muslim sees a
prohibition of carved chess-pieces which actually reproduce the King elephants,
horses etc., in the prohibition of images.
Persian commentators, however have explained the term as referring to
idols, and the Shi’te and Moghul chess-players have no objection to using real
carved chessmen. The Summite player on
the contrary will only use pieces of conventional type in which it is
impossible to see any resemblance to any living creature”. (A History of Chess, Oxford 1913 p.
188).
M. D. Liddell
“From the ancient pieces that
have come down to us, there is no doubt that the earliest men represented
living forms and that the conventionalisation came from motives of economy,
from the desire for portability (too elaborated men cannot be carried in a bag
on a camel) from religious scruples”.
(Chessmen, Usa, 1937, p. 11).
H. &S. Wichmann
“The motives leading to the
creations of these novel, abstract chess pieces were religious. Since the Koran prohibits any kind of
imagery, the Mohammedans had to create new forms, which had to reinterpret in
abbreviated form the realistic-naturalistic models. This metamorphosis caused the sectional
structure of Indian sculpture to be condensed and the intricate and visually
striking outer surface to be reduced to elementary curves. The moulded mass became rounded under the
influence of the basic forms of the sphere and the cylinder”. (Chess, Munich 1964, p.16).
A. E. J. Mackett-Beeson
“Chess did not become known to
the Arabs until their conquest of Persia in the 7th century, and
therefore any reference to the game in their Sacred Book is impossible. Since the Koran strictly forbade all the
believers to handle figures in any shape or form, it is not surprising that
when chess did became known, the legitimacy of the game among the Arabs was
suspect because of its image association, and it was only after many years of
debate that judicial decision was reached.
It was finally decreed that the game of chess was perfectly legitimate
provided that chess pieces used were of simple geometric shapes, and that the
game was not played for the purpose of gambling - (Islamic) chess pieces can be
of simple form and yet pleasing to the eye; they have a delightful symmetry,
they are well balanced”. (Chessmen,
London 1968, p. 71).
F. Lanier Graham
“While the Arabs were
developing the literature of the game, they also were developing the design of
chess sets. The designs they inherited
from Persia and India in the 7th century were naturalistic
images. The Muhammadans, being extremely
fond of the game, developed an alternative.
They designed their chess pieces abstractly”. (Chess sets, New York, 1968, p.14).
C. K. Wilkinson and J. Mac Nab Dennis
“The pieces may well have been
made in a not entirely realistic manner so that they would be easy to handle in
playing. Incidentally, it is wise not
to put too much stress on the non representational character of Muslim pieces,
for the taboo on representation in things that were not strictly of
religious nature was not particularly strong, especially in Persia with its
never dying pictorial tradition”. (Chess,
East and West, Past and Present, XXVIII, 1968).
Dr. I. Linder
“Under the influence of
prohibitions, chess from the east was basically devoid of images, and instead
of battle elephants and horsemen, shahs and foot soldiers, there were symbolic
and abstract pieces”. (Chess in Old Russia,
Moscow 1975, p.28).
F. Greygoose
“The Koran forbids any form of
imagery and therefore Mohammadans were forced by their faith to turn the
Persian like figures into abstract forms”.
(Chessmen, London 1979, p. 18).
V. Keats
“The whole of Muslim art,
including the shapes of chess pieces, has been guided by the Koranic law, which
in turn derives from pre-Islamic civilization, stating that no likeness of man
may be created. Consequently, chess
pieces throughout the Muslim world have remained strikingly similar in shape,
from the advent of Islam right up to the present day”. (Chessmen for collectors, London 1985, p.
43).
C. Schafroth
“The abstraction of
naturalistic chessmen by Arabian artists was largely due to the beliefs and
tenets of Islam. The use of images was considered sacrilegious and believers
were forbidden to handle graven images.
This posed a serious problem for the Muslim chess player. The solution was to significantly abstract
the forms of the pieces. The resulting
chessmen were somewhat blocky, with knobbly projections and smoothly modelled
surfaces”. (Sculptures in miniature, Chess sets from the Maryhill Museum of
Art, Goldendale 1990, p.17).
A. Chicco
“On the other hand, it is
neither exact (to say) that the typical stylised form taken by the Arabic chess
pieces must be necessarily associated with the prohibition of the Kur’an,
which, as it is well known, forbade the images of living being. A great deal before the Hegira (622AD) the
Arabs had the opportunity to know religions which were forbidding statues and
simulacrums. There are no prejudicial
reasons which exclude a priori the existence of “stylised” chessmen even before
the Hegira or even their presence in a tomb of Roman age”. (Storia degli scacchi in Italia, Milan 1990,
p.7).
M. Pastoreau
“L’Islam en effect utilisait
des pieces stylisees, non figures, suivant en cela les principes (non
coramiques) qui interdis aux Musulmans de representer la figure humaine ou
animale. Les Occidentaux ont
d’abord utilisé ces pieces musulmanes non figurées, puis ils les ont
imithees”. (Pieces d'echecs, Paris 1900,
p. 13).
A. Sanvito
“Who ever suggested the idea
of Islamic design to the carver, surely was concerned with the aspect of
practicality and simplicity, but probably tried to convey, even in the abstract
and stylised form, the original realistic figures. The fact that before the birth of the chess
game, thought to be around the 6th-7th century many
tabula games were in existence, some of which requiring pieces whose forms may
well have influenced the chessmen models which followed. Those stylisations made in the East for
practical reasons or, maybe and more than anything else, for religious
reasons”. (Figure di scacchi, Milan
1992, p.16 and 24).
K. Whyld
“It is often said that the
shape of chessmen became simple because of Muslim religious objection to the
making of images of living creatures, but, with the exception of the relatively
recent horse’s head for the knight, this has always been the case with playing
sets. The main criteria have been
simplicity of the design and ease of production”. (The Oxford Companion to chess, London 1992,
p.76).
(2) “La letteratura Persiana” Pagliaro/Bausani,
Milan 1968, p.126.
(3) “Chess sets” Graham, New York 1968, p.13.
(4) “Pieces d’echecs” Pastoureau, Paris 1990, p.11.
(5) “Chess in old Russia”, Dr.I. Linder, Zurich. 1975, p.24/28 (6) idem,
p.24.
(7) “The creation of Islamic art” O. G. Grabar, Rev. ed.1987, p.72.
(8) “The history of chess” D. Forbes, London 1865, p.166.
(9) “Vita di Maometto” Tabari, Milano 1985, p.85.
(10) Deuteronomio, V, 7-8 (11) “Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam”, H.A.R. Gibb and
J.H. Kramers, 2nd ed. 1974.
(12) “Islamic art” B. Vrend 1991 p. 26.
(13) “Islamic calligraphy” Y. H. Safadi, p. 7.
(14) “Islamic art”, B.Brend, p.26 (15) idem, p.28.
(16) idem, p. 29.
BIBLIOGRAPHY on Islam.
The Koran, translated with notes by NJ.Dawood, Penguin books,1993.
Il Corano, translated with notes by A-Bausani, BUR, 2nd ~d ed.
1990.
“L’arte dell’Islam”, M. Dimand, Sansoni 1972.
“Historie et civilisation de l'Islam en Europe”, F. Gabrieli, Bordas
1983.
“Le arti nell’Islam”
G.Curatola e G. Scarcia, NIS 1990.
“L’arte dell’islam”, C. Du
Ry, Rizzoli 1972.
“Gli Arabi in Italia”, R. Gabrieli
e U. Scerrato, Garzanti 1985.
“Principles of Islamic
jurisprudence” M.H.Kamali, Cambridge 1991.
“L’Islam”, A. Bausani,
Garzanfi 1987.
“La sfida dell’Islam”, G.
Rizzardi, CdG 1992.
“The mediation of Ornamenti”,
Oleg Grabar, Princeton Un. Press,1992.