I would consider Chess Strategy by Edward Lasker and Art of Chess by Mason.
http://store.doverpublications.com/0486144534.html
The First Modern Chess Book?
Sort:
I'd looked at James Mason's The Art of Chess, and it seemed to be a book on the older pattern. I would have thought Edward Lasker came much later than Emanuel Lasker, but maybe I'm wrong.
However, in looking at earlier results for books that at least mentioned the pin and the fork, I found that one of them, Chess: A Manual for Beginners, by R. F. Foster, although it did not devote a whole chapter to chess tactics, did have an explicit section about "Pinning and Forking", and this book was from 1897.
He was best known as an author on Whist and Bridge.
An earlier book, from 1868, The Book of Chess, by George H. Selkirk, mentioned the pin and fork in a section that gave advice on how to treat each of the pieces - thus, it was warned that the Rook was in danger of being pinned by a Bishop. So this didn't follow the modern pattern, but it did try to give more accessible instruction than most older books.
Wikipedia gives 1915 as a year for Chess Strategy.
http://store.doverpublications.com/0486205282.html
There is another Mason book. I think it was Principles of Chess. What about Tarrasch writings?
Mar 29, 2023
0
#5
Wikipedia is wrong that Greco wrote a book as that term is usually understood to mean something printed with multiple copies. Each of Greco's "books" was unique and hand-written. The term for these is manuscripts.
Mar 29, 2023
0
#6
Tarrasch and Steinitz come to mind as the first "modern" chess writers -- though I don't believe Steinitz ever published a book, and Tarrasch's most systematic book, "The Game of Chess" comes from so late in his carreer (1931) that it actually follows not only Lasker and Capablanca, but even the even the anti-Tarrasch books of Nimzowitsch, Reti, and company. Tarrasch's 1895 "Three Hundred Games of Chess" might still be a candidate though.
Correction: Steinitz did publish a book called "The Modern Chess Instructor." I don't know much about it or how influential it was relative to his journalism. I've never heard much about it, which makes me think it may not have landed significantly for one reason or another, but I could be completely wrong about that. His earlier, more occasional writings were of course hugely influential.
The very earliest books about Chess, such as those by Greco, Stamma, or Ruy Lopez, are today primarily of historical interest. Philidor's Analyze d'Echecs was very popular when it first came out, and is considered to be the first effective textbook of the game. However, that book is still very dated by current standards, and not just because of changes in opening theory. Staunton's Handbook, or most of the chess books of the 19th century, although more approachable, still aren't as friendly as, say, an introduction to chess by Fred Reinfeld.
A typical 19th century book about chess would include an explanation of the rules, a few general hints and maxims about proper play, a section on the openings, a section on the endgame, and some illustrative games.
What it wouldn't include is a section explaining the basic tactical motifs one by one - the pin, the fork, the skewer, and so on. After some searching, it seems to me that the first book in which the modern form of an introduction to chess was used was Lasker's Manual of Chess. So Emmanuel Lasker played a very important role as a chess writer in addition to as a chess player, if I am correct.