change places with any of his forces without going into check, he was deemed vanquished. Finally, when White happened to give stalemate on capturing the last of Black's pieces, he of course won the game.' 66 The Arabs, and after them the Persians, call the Endgame Manṣuba," which corresponds exactly with our words "position" and "situation," being a "determinate" Chess problem, the solution of which is reduced to a certainty. It would appear that their best players prided themselves on their readiness of seizing on such positions as led to victory in a certain number of moves. Hence the epithet "manṣuba-dan," "a man cunning in positions," or "a cunning chess-player," came figuratively to signify a "prudent" or "far-sighted man." So the term "manṣūba-baz," literally "a position player," denoted "a first-rate Chess-player," and figuratively "a man of resource." Such appears to have been 'Ali Shatranji, of whom it was said that no mortal could either divine his coming move or perceive its purport when made. Hyde, from his utter ignorance of Chess, confounds the Manṣuba with the Ta'biyat; although the former is simply the conclusion of a game, as the latter is the opening. Yea, even in the latest edition of Richardson's Persian and Arabic Dictionary we find the meaning attached to Manṣuba to be simply "the Game of Chess!!" The following problem is interesting inasmuch as it completely disproves the assertion of the authors of the 1 An instance of this kind of victory will be found in our tenth problem further on. At the 8th move on the part of Black in that end-game he captures the White Knight with Rook, giving what we should call stalemate, and consequently making it according to our rules, a drawn game. In the mediæval game, however, the mere capture of the White Knight won the game, and the consequent stalemate is of no account, "Essays," respecting the restrictions under which the King was supposed to move in the medieval game. We here find that the Black King, without being in check, commences by moving and capturing angularly, simply because it is the best move for him on the board. It is no ways a compulsory move on the part of Black, for he has his Rook still remaining, and he may move the latter if he chooses. PROBLEM VI., FROM MS., NO. 16,856, FOLIO 41, A. If he does not check, Knight's Pawn threatens mate next move, if he moves R to his own third square, then Q moves as above, and next move Black Rook must either move away or take Pawn which in either case finishes the game. 1 If he does not check, Knight's Pawn threaten's mate next move, if he moves R. to his own third square, then Q. moves as above, and next move Black Rook must either move away or take Pawn, which in either case finishes the game. 2 From what I have stated a few pages back, the reader will, I think, concur with me in concluding that no restrictions on the King ever existed. Hence the beautiful simplicity, and scientific contrivance of the moves and powers of the King, Rook, Knight, and Pawns, as displayed in the ancient Chaturanga, have remained unaltered since the days of Vyāsa Muni and his pupil Yudhishthira down to the present time. The moves and powers of the Bishop and Queen have been merely extended, but no ways changed, in modern times. We e may here observe, that all the Oriental problems which are solved by giving checkmate, provided there be no Queen or Bishop on the board, are precisely the same as ours of the present day. For example, the following neat position from the old Arabic MS. 7,515, is believed to have been the composition of Damiano,3 though in reality it existed and had even been booked more than three hundred years before the latter was born. I have no doubt that both Lucena and Damiano are, in like manner, indebted to the Arabians for most of their problems, either in an unaltered state, or slightly modified so as to suit our modern game. 3 In Lewis's translation of "Carrera," page 218, the problem is given as Damiano's. It is also found in Stamma, who is sometimes given out as the author. Both Damiano and Stamma have altered the form of the problem, and cumbered the board with a number of useless pieces. The Arabian original is in far better taste. PROBLEM VII., FROM THE OLD ARABIC MS. OF THE 1 I suppose the authors of the Essays would here say that because Black King moves and captures Rook in a straight line, he was not then allowed to move or capture otherwise. The real cause, however, for his moving as above is a much more rational one-he cannot possibly move otherwise. On End-Games Drawn by Force. We have just seen that in the Shatranj a player might lose the game in three different ways-viz., by receiving checkmate, by being stripped of all his forces except the King, and by receiving stalemate under certain conditions. Even with this licence, we find that in the Oriental game the probabilities in favour of its ending in a draw were still very considerable; and this fact brings to light one of its defects or anomalies-proving at the same time that Chess, like all human inventions, ever has been susceptive of progressive improvement. As a ludicrous instance of inconsistency in the Mediæval Game, I may mention that it sometimes ended in a draw, not from an absolute numerical equality of forces, nor anything near it; but owing to the peculiar powers and limited range of some of the pieces, these being such that they could not encounter their adversary's, of which occurrence a curious instance will be noticed hereafter. The laws respecting drawn games, as given in the MSS., have, as a matter of course, anticipated the existence of a plurality of Queens, averaging from two to five on either side. This arose naturally from one of the laws of the Mediæval Game which, as we have seen, compelled every Pawn to become a Farzin or Queen only, on reaching the opposite extremity of the board. The joint power of the Queens was considerably modified from the circumstance of their being all of the same colour, or of some of them running on black squares and the rest on white. When the Queens ran on what we should call the same colour, they were said by the Muslims to be " Muwafik," ie., "concordant" or similar;" and when on different colours they were said to be "Mukhalif," "discordant," or "dissimilar." The books lay down several rules by the aid of which a player may know whether a Pawn, on queening, may prove to be similar or dissimilar to such Queen or Queens as he may already have on the board. Now this fact affords us the clearest possible proof that the Oriental board was not chequered with two colours till at least a comparatively recent period. Had the board been chequered |