1. The sides of squares.

2. The diagonals of squares.

3. The diagonals of parallelograms of six squares, i. e. 3 by 2.

The directions of movement and attack are fourfold,forward, backward, lateral, and diagonal.

The limits of movement and attack are threefold. 1. When confined to adjacent squares.

2. Extending over the whole board.

3. Confined to the opposite squares of parellelograms, 3 by 2.

The lines of movement and attack are coincident for all the pieces except the pawns, whose line of motion is one square forward along the side, and their line of attack, one square forward diagonally.

The king's line of motion and attack is one square in every direction, forward and backward, lateral and diagonal. The queen's line of motion and attack are along both the sides, and the diagonals of squares, in every direction, to the extremity of the board; thus combining those of the rook and bishop.

The rook's line of motion and attack is along the sides of squares, in every direction, to the extremity of the board. The bishop's line of motion and attack is along the diagonals of squares, in every direction, to the extremity of the board.

The knight's line of motion and attack is along the diagonals of parallelograms, 3 by 2, in every direction to the opposite square.

CHAPTER IX.

CHESS WITHOUT THE BOARD.

Early example of blindfold playing-Buzecca-Ruy Lopez-Other examples —Modern blindfold players-Difficulties of this mode of play-Directions for acquiring the art-Blindfold game by De la Bourdonnais.

THE severe mental exercise necessary for conducting a game of chess, without the help of board or men, was practised at a very early period in the history of the game. So far back as 970 years after Christ, an individual named Joseph Tchelebi is said to have acquired a facility at playing chess, blindfold ; nor was this at all an unusual case in the East. The chess-board and men were, however, handled by these persons, and the difficulty of conducting the game was thereby greatly lessened.

Far more difficult was the task, and far higher rose the fame of the celebrated personage who appeared in 1266, and astonished the people of Italy by his performances. The name of this man was Buzecca, a Saracen, who visited Florence at the period above mentioned, and gave play at the same time to three of the best artists in chess which Italy could produce. These games were played in the presence of numerous persons of distinction; two of the games were conducted by Buzecca without seeing the board, while the third was going on between himself and an antagonist in the ordinary manner. Great was the astonishment and admiration of those who witnessed this trial of skill to find the Saracen winning two games and drawing the third. The opponents of Buzecca being on this occasion chosen men, and of a country which had become renowned for skilful chess-players, there is the more reason to admire the talent by which he was able to defeat them, and to remark on the high state of cultivation which the science of chess must have arrived at in the East.

Several persons are mentioned as excellent blindfold players, at the close of the sixteenth and commencement of the seventeenth century, especially the celebrated Ruy Lopez, chess-professor at the Spanish court, who wrote an elaborate treatise on chess, but with unusual modesty omitted to mention his own attainments as a blindfold player. Mangiolini of Florence, Zerone, Medrano, Leonardo da Cutri surnamed Il Puttino, and Paolo Boi, are some of the distinguished names of this period in that branch of chess-play

ing now under consideration. The last-mentioned individual was in the habit of playing three games at once without seeing any one of the boards, and without intermitting his usual strain of lively conversation. He was contemporary with Ruy Lopez, who was decidedly his inferior, and with Leonardo of Cutri, who was by many persons deemed his equal. The life of Paolo is sketched by two historians Carrera and Salvio, and contains many interesting particulars, which we have given in our notice of celebrated chessplayers. Paolo was the conqueror of every chess-player of his day, except Leonardo da Cutri. The contest between Leonardo and Paolo was very severe. They played a match which lasted three whole days. During the first two days they were exactly equal, but on the third Paolo, who was suffering in health at the time, lost ground, and was finally defeated. The two heroes never encountered each other again. Respecting the style of play of these two men we read that Paolo was rapid in his moves, while Leonardo was extremely slow and cautious.

Girolano Saccheri, a priest of the order of Jesuits, is spoken of by Keysler, the historian of Turin, as a man of extraordinary chess attainments. He lived at the early part of the last century, and was of so precocious an intellect, that, before he was ten years old, he could solve the most difficult problems in arithmetic and algebra, and was afterwards constituted public lecturer on mathematics at Pavia. He could play three games, or, according to some writers, even four, at the same time, with perfect clearness and accuracy, without seeing any one of the boards.

The practice of playing chess blindfold, had for so many years fallen into disuse that the astonishing performances of Philidor were regarded as a feat of intellect altogether new and peculiar to that great player. But the faculty of playing chess without seeing the board is not the invariable, nor even general accompaniment of excellence in the game. Many first-rate players have been unable to attain it, while some who have accepted odds of these, have found little difficulty in carrying out a game to its termination blindfold. Those who study chess chiefly from books, find less difficulty in playing without the board than those who have acquired their knowledge chiefly from practice. There have been very eminent men who never looked in a chess-book until their own high standing was already taken-of such were La Bourdonnais, Deschapelles, St. Amant, Boncourt,-again there were others who were essentially book-players, and likewise excelled. Mr. M'Donnell studied much from

books. In the blindfold games played by him, his moves were made more quickly than when he saw the pieces. "He expressed some feeling of annoyance if the bystanders spoke in whispers, but had no objection to conversation being carried on around him in a natural tone of voice."

But since the time of Philidor no one has excelled so highly in the art of blindfold playing as the late M. de la Bourdonnais. With very little practice he was able to play one game at a time, within a pawn of his strength, as he proved by playing publicly with MM. Boncourt, Jouy, Bonfil, and others. He afterwards played two games at once, and was preparing to play three blindfold games at once when an alarming rush of blood to the head was the result of this severe, and we may add useless, mental exertion. A long illness was the consequence, and M. de la Bourdonnais was compelled to relinquish all further attempts at playing without seeing the board.

«The difficulties attendant on acquiring skill in chess can scarcely be exaggerated even when playing in the usual manner with unlimited time at command to expend in surveying the forces on the field before us. In how vast a degree must these difficulties be multiplied when the mechanical objects of the chess-men and chess-board are abstracted, and no longer exist save in the powers of the mind; when the windows of the brain are closed down, and the faculties of sight are hermetically sealed; when a bare idea alone remains, and all abroad is darkest night; when all that is left of the chess-board and men is their vague and timid shadow, wandering, spectre-like, across the mental chamber like objects on a camera obscura; when memory and the perceptive faculties of the brain must be taxed unaided to name the position of every piece, pawn, and square of the chequer! And when these efforts of the reasoning and thinking powers require to be uninterruptedly prolonged and sustained, during a period of possibly several consecutive hours, without the slightest relief, break, pause, rest, or relaxation; then, I say, the art of playing chess without seeing the board, becomes, fairly considered, an extraordinary effort of the mind; and one which must be allowed to be, in the eyes of the metaphysician, equally curious as interesting."

These remarks by Mr. George Walker apply, of course, to first-rate players who conduct the game blindfold within a pawn of their strength, and in this way play two or even three games at the same time. But to play one game badly without seeing the board is comparatively easy, and may

be done by many a second or third-rate player who is willing to bestow a little time on the exercise.

Mr. Walker gives some very sensible directions for the guidance of those chess-players who are desirous of playing without seeing the board. Referring such as are interested in the subject to his article in Frazer's Magazine, Vol. XXI., p. 302, we pass on to notice the "Art of Playing without seeing the Board," by Carrera, whose remarks are not so well known nor so accessible as Mr. Walker's.

"Those who are desirous of learning the art of playing without seeing the board, must have in their mind all the squares of the chess-board, and all the pieces that are or were on them. It is not sufficient, as some think, to know that such a square belongs to such a piece, or has such a number, because much more than this must be learned. In the first place, the player may take as a certain rule, that on the perpendicular lines all the odd numbers are of the same colour; for example, if the first square of a line be white, then the third, fifth, and seventh squares will be also white; if the first be black, the third, fifth, and seventh will be black. It is different with the oblique lines, which are either all white or all black; for example, the oblique line which begins at the white king's rook's square is entirely white, and that beginning at the white queen's rook's square, entirely black; and as all the straight lines have neither more nor less than eight squares, it is not necessary to say anything more respecting them; but it is very different with the oblique lines; only two of these contain eight squares, namely, those which begin at the rook's squares, one of which is white, and the other black; those lines which begin at the knight's squares having only seven squares, one line is black, the other white; moreover from the knight's white square on the left hand is another line containing only two squares, and from the king's black square on the right hand, is also a line containing only two squares, but it would be tedious to mention all the squares of the oblique lines; suffice it to say, that all the squares, whether black or white, on the right hand or on the left, should be remembered by the student. This is the more required, because it is not only necessary to know the squares from the beginning, but also from the middle and end of the lines: for example, the third square of the white queen is white, which branches into an oblique line of four squares forwards on the king's side, and backwards on the same line two squares on the queen's side; forwards to the left is another line of three squares, and backwards on the king's side two squares;