Sir William Jones, both of Oxford, arrived at the conclusion, which I hold to be the correct one, that Chess was invented in India, and thence introduced into Persia and other Asiatic regions during the sixth century of our era. This view has been adopted, solely on its own intrinsic merits, by Mr. Francis Douce2 and Sir Frederic Madden, in their more recent communications on the subject to the "Transactions of the Archæological Society."

3

In the following Chapters, it is my intention to advance still farther on the path already pointed out by the Orientalists of Oxford. I happen to possess sources of information which to the latter were either altogether inaccessible or imperfectly known. I think I can clearly show that the game originated in India, and nowhere else. I do not mean to say that I can intimate anything like the precise time when, or the exact spot where, the invention took place; nor is this at all requisite for the investigation. In fact, many of our noblest discoveries, even of comparatively recent date, are still involved in obscurity. We know not to a certainty who it was that first applied the magnetic needle, so as to serve as a guide to the adventurous mariner across the pathless surface of the "vasty deep." The art of printing with moveable types-an art by which the secrets of the remote past are transmitted to the remotest future-is little more than four centuries old, yet are we still in a state of uncertainty as to the precise time when, the place where, and the person by whom this divine discovery was made. This much, however, we may safely say, that the art had its birth somewhere in the Rhineland, either at Strasbourg or Maintz, or still lower down at the city of Haerlem. On the other hand,

1 "Asiatic Researches," London edition, 8vo. 1801, page 189, &c.

2 "Archæologia," 4to. London, vol. xi. page 397, &c.

3 c

Archæologia," &c., &c., vol. xxiv. page 203, &c.

if any one were to assert, as some shallow-brained visionaries do, in the case of Chess, that printing originated among the Scythian shepherds or the Arabs of the desert, the idea would at once be scouted by all people of sense.

Precisely in like manner we have ample historical evidence, native and foreign, that Chess was invented in India, but not a single reliable scrap tending to prove that it was either invented or known in any other country previously. It may be asked, then-how came so many writers to ascribe the invention to so many other countries? The answer is simple: it resulted from sheer error of judgment on their part, and the causes of such error are worth noticing. In the first place, the Greeks had a rude and primitive game played on a board, by means of pebbles, called Teτteiα or teσσo which bore no resemblance whatever to Chess. Then the Romans had two distinct games, something like our draughts and backgammon, derived, as is believed, from the Grecian, and respectively called "Ludus Latrunculorum," and "Ludus Calculorum," neither of which had the least affinity to Chess.1 Now, during the middle ages, whilst Latin was the literary language of Europe, when a writer had occasion to mention the game of Chess, we find that, to save himself trouble, he employed the unwarrantable term, "Ludus Latrunculorum," taking it for granted that Chess was identcial with game of the Romans.2 Bye and bye, when the modern

the

1 Since this Chapter was written for the "Illustrated London News” about the middle of 1854, a series of valuable papers on "Greek and Roman Chess" appeared in The Chess Player's Chronicle, for the months of March, &c., in 1855. In these the reader will find all that can be said on a subject on which our information is so scanty. The author modestly signs himself H. C.; but assuredly he has no occasion for withholding from us his full length name He is a most sound reasoner, deeply read in classic lore; and I am proud to say that the results of his able researches amply verify what I had previously stated. 2 For instance, Burton, in his "Anatomy of Melancholy," page 349, Edition

languages of Europe became a little cultivated, and translations from the classical writers began to be made for the use of the people at large, the "Ludus Latrunculorum,"

or

Ludus Calculorum," was generally translated as "the game of Chess," in order to give the thing the greater dignity. Now, we here see how one error re-acts upon another so as to multiply itself beyond any assignable limit, the refutation of which would now be mere waste of time.

:

In the second place, a host of writers of respectable literary abilities have, each according to his own preconceived notions (founded absolutely on nothing), attributed the paternity of Chess to various nations and tribes who themselves never laid any claim to the honour. For example one man writes a quarto 2-to prove that Chess was invented by the Scythian shepherds, nobody knows how long ago; and that, in the course of time, this game was communicated to Palamedes, at the siege of Troy, who quietly took to himself the honour of the invention. All this is sheer imagination. Who were the Scythian shepherds? Why, they were the fathers of the savage Cossacks. Had he taken the Chaldean shepherds instead, 1836, 8vo., says, alluding to Chess, "Latrunculorum ludus inventus est à duce (quodam) ut, cum miles, intolerabile fame laboraret, altero die edens, altero ludens, famis oblivisceretur." The passage is quoted from Bellonius, an author with whose works I am unacquainted.

1 Of this second species of hallucination here follow two specimens. In the Translation of Seneca's work by Dr. Thomas Lodge-Folio, London, 1614, we have―" He was playing at Chess, (ludebat Latrunculis,) at such time as the centurion who led a troop of condemned men to death, commanded him likewise to be cited," &c. &c.-Again, Du Cange the great medieval antiquarian gravely says, "Lucanus in Paneg. ad Pisonem a decrit elegamment le jeu des Eschecs"!!! Now it is well known that the poem alluded to has nothing whatever to do with Chess; and this is the way by which errors arise and spread.

2 "An Inquiry into the ancient Greek game supposed to have been invented by Palamedes," &c. &c. 4to., London, 1801. The work is said to be the production of a Mr. Christie, an auctioneer of that time. It may be characterized more fanciful than sound."

as

1

there would be a little less absurdity in the matter: but the Scythian shepherds! this is too ridiculous. Another writer insists that Chess was invented either at Babylon or Palmyra-I forget which-because the queen has such great power in the game. This is the greatest dreamer of the whole host. He evidently did not know that the word Queen was never heard of in Oriental Chess; and even if she were, the piece so called by us was one of the weakest on the board, even in Europe, till the beginning of the sixteenth century, as may be seen in any of the old writings on the game. Finally, another writer 2 of higher qualifications than all the rest put together, tries hard to confer the honour on the Persians, an honour to which not one single author of that nation lays claim. I pass over the pretensions of the Irish,3 the Welsh, and the Jews, as "matters well worthy of confirmation," to use an expression borrowed from our Transatlantic cousins.

It is evident, then, that these two causes, to which others might be added, have tended to render the history of Chess an inextricable labyrinth. An ordinary writer intending to give a popular lecture on the subject, is compelled, as it were, to give the following stereotype paragraph, or something like it, in commencing his discourse" Some historians have referred the invention of Chess to the philosopher Xerxes; others to the Grecian Prince Palamedes; some to the brothers Lydo and Tyrrhene; and others, again, to the Egyptians. The Chinese the Hindus, the Persians, the Arabians, the Irish, the

1 In honour of Semiramis, or of Zenobia.

2 "Persian Chess," &c., by N. Bland, Esq., M.R.A.S., 8vo., p. 70. 3 The Irish and Welsh pretensions will be noticed in the Appendix.

4 I do not think the Welsh absolutely claim the invention of the Game. It is mentioned in the "Laws of the Howel Da," &c., that is, if it be Chess which is there alluded to, a point on which the learned of Cambria by no means agree.

Welsh, the Araucanians,' the Jews, the Scythians, and finally, their fair Majesties, Semiramis and Zenobia, also prefer their claims to be considered as the originators of Chess. But the testimonies of writers in general prove nothing except the remote antiquity of the game.2

Now if, instead of echoing each other, writers were to reflect for a moment on what they are saying, or rather repeating, they would soon find theirs is far from being the proper course "for having the matter cleared up," as the Standard-bearer" has it. A brief inquiry after the truth would convince them that the "philosopher Xerxes," and the "brothers Lydo and Tyrrhene," were, like Mrs. Harris, persons of questionable existence, the mere myth of some jovial mediæval monk. They would have found, moreover, that there is not a particle of evidence that either the Grecian Prince Palamedes, or any other Grecian prince or peasant of ancient times, knew anything of Chess; and that neither the Persians, nor the Egyptians ever did possess or prefer any claim whatever to the invention. Finally, they would have found, on a very small degree of reflection, that the presumed antiquity of Chess among the Irish, the Welsh, the Jews, the Araucanians, and all other such enlightened and civilized communities, is nothing else than the "baseless fabric of a vision."

If we calmly inquire into such plain facts as come within our reach, setting aside all foolish prejudices and partialities, we shall find that the history of Chess naturally falls under three distinct periods. The first is that of the ancient Hindu game, called Chaturanga, in which

1 The claim of the Araucanians, being a little curious and highly suspicious, shall be noticed in the Appendix.

2 The germ of this stock paragraph is to be found in a work entitled “The Incomparable Game of Chess."-London, 1820. It is an imperfect translation from the Italian of Ponziani, by J. S. Bingham, Esq., as he styles himself.