On
the
Origin of Chess
SOME
FACTS TO THINK ABOUT
Thematic
Notes
By:
Ricardo
Calvo
Madrid,
1996
(Minor
edition by Shapour Suren-Pahlav)
Murray
and A. van der Linde the two chess historians were almost certain that the
birthplace of chess was Indian sub-continent, but most certainly it was invented
in Iran for the following reasons: To be brief I can outline the factors.
Fact
1:
Indian literature has no early mentions of chess but Persian literature does.
The first unmistakable reference in Sanskrit writings is in the "Harschascharita"
by the court poet Bana, written between 625 and 640 CE. On the other hand,
pre-Islamic documents have solidly connected chess with the last period of the
Sassanid rulers in Persia
(VI-VII century). The "Kamamak[-i Ardashir-i Papakan]", an epical
treatise about the founder of this dynasty, mentions the game of chatrang as one
of the accomplishments of the legendary hero. It has a proving force that a game
under this name was popular in the period of redaction of the text, supposedly
the end of the 6th century or the beginning of the 7th CE. Closely related is a
shorter poem from about the same period entitled in [Sasanian-]Pahlavi "Chatrang-namak",
dealing with the introduction of chess in
Persia. Ferdowsi wrote also about it in the 11th century, but his sources are
solid and form a continuous chain of witnesses going back to the middle of the
6th century in
Persia.
Fact
2
:
India
has
no early chess pieces but
Persia
does.
The presence of carved chess men in Persian domains contrasts with the absence
of such items in
India.
There
are no chess men there from early times, and only in the 10th century appears an
indirect mention from al-Masudi: "The use of ivory (in
India
) is mainly directed to the carving of chess- and nard pieces". Some
experts believe that old Indian chess pieces may be discovered one day. So far,
this is mere speculation. The three oldest sets of chess pieces closely
identified as such belong to Persian domains, not to
India
. The most important are the Afrasiab pieces. They were found 1977 in Afrasiab,
near Samarqand 761 because a coin so dated belongs to the same layer. These
seven ivory men, questionable as all "idols" may be, are Persian, even
if the territory was under Islamic rule since 712. Next group of chess pieces,
(three chessmen) comes also from the Persian area. The so-called
Ferghana
[Valley] pieces
include a "Rukh" in form of a giant bird, and its antiquity should be
not too distant from the Afrasiab lot. In the Persian city of
Nishapur
another ivory set was discovered though belonging to later times, 9th or 10th
century. These are not idols anymore and are carved following the abstract
pattern which has been characterised as "Arabic".
Fact
3
: The Arabs introduced chess in
India
after
taking "Shatrang" from
Persia.
Games
upon the "ashtapada" board of 8x8, with dice and with two or more
players may have served as "proto-chess", but the two types of games
already differ too strongly in their nature and philosophy to make the evolution
of "Chaturanga" into "Shatransh" a simple question of direct
parentage via the Persian "Chatrang". Arab writers stated quite
frequently that they took the game of "shatransh" from the Persians,
who called it "chatrang". This happens in the middle of a
political-cultural revolution, which has been analyzed in historical texts. The
ruling Umayyad dynasty was thrown out after a fierce civil war by a certain al-Abbas,
who initiated a new era, founding
Baghdad
around
the year 750 and translating there from
Damascus
the Islamic political centre. The Abbasid dynasty was ethnically and culturally
of Persian origin. So Persian influences became clearly dominant in the cultural
renaissance which took place inside the Arabic trunk. A lot of the previous
knowledge from classical
Greece
,
Byzantium
, early Egyptian and
Middle East
civilizations
and even "from the country of Hind" was compiled and re-translated
into Arabic and absorbed in a scientific body which followed its further path
towards the West. Chess was only a part of this knowledge, packaged together
with earlier mathematical, astronomical, philosophical or medical achievements.
Fact
4
: Etymology is unclear. The roots of several chess terms may go further
to India, but the fact is that the Sanskrit word "Chaturanga" means
only "army", and it is unclear whether it referred to our chess, to a
possible form of "proto-chess" with four players, or to some
strategical exercise with pieces over a board with military purposes. In any
case, to be on safer ground, we must remember the earliest solid evidences about
the board game called chess belong to Persia. The [Sasanian-]Pahlavi word "Chatrang" means, even to- day, the
mandrake plant, which has a root in form of a human figure. So, there is a good
case in favour of a different etymological interpretation: Any game played with
pieces representing figures may be compared with the "shatrang" plant.
Another
hint is the nomenclature of the pieces, persistently related to different sorts
of animals rather than to components of an army: In the "Grande Acedrex"
of King Alfonso of Castile (1283) lions, crocodiles, giraffes etc. play over a
board of 12x12 cases with peculiar jumping moves, and the invention of it is
connected to the same remote period in India as normal chess. They are very
atypical in any context referring to
India
. (See the reference "Hasb" (War) in "The Encyclopedia of
Islam", De Gruyter, Leyden-New York 1967). On the other hand, elephants are
not at all exclusive from Indian origin (Sir William Gowers, "African
Elephants and Ancient Authors", African Affairs, 47 (1948) p.173 ff. Also
Frank W. Walbank, "Die Hellenistische Welt", DTV 1983 p. 205-6), not
even in military campaigns: The Persian army had also cavalry, foot-soldiers,
chariots and elephants as well as river ships. In
Egypt
, the Ptolemaic Kings obtained elephants regularly from
Somalia
. Strabo (16,4,5) mentions the foundation of several cities in
Africa
with the main purpose of hunting elephants. The hunters have even written
dedications to Ptolemy (Ptolemaios) IV Philopator (r. 221-204 BCE). Polybios
describes a battle with elephants between Ptolemy IV and Antiochos III in 217
BCE. Pyrrhus and Hannibal used it in the West. Modern research has confirmed all
the details.