FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
With computer advances, it could be expanded to be 12x12 in the future.
In an other thread I was depicted as an idiot for requiring chess to be played on a bigger board to avoid engines. Posts like this strengthen me somewhat that !'m not alone with my idea.
I have read that the game of chess was invented by giving each piece different powers in a 5x5 grid.
The Bishop used to be the Alfil and jumped 2 squares diagonally. The Queen used to be the weakest piece on the board, moving only one diagonal square at a time. The Rook was the same.
Mapping out each piece's powers, so far:
The Knight got the leftovers.
Rooks, archers on battlements, or fortifications, possibly even a war wagon, or siege tower. The Queen is a combination of mounted archers, and a fortified war wagon. Ancient China did have them.
Actually I imagine the rooks as wizards, since I played D&D for many years. The queen could represent a great hero or an archmage.
We have the same idea about the bishop representing an archer, knight and pawn obviously remind infantry and cavalry. King may be the general who gives the orders, or may just represent the safety of the kingdom itself?
In chaturanga, the rook was actually a chariot. Because this was actually how the indians fought: With infantry, horses, elephant and chariot (see Mahabharata/Bhagavad Gita).
Kind of funny how everybody has a different subjective image of every chess piece. It might not be very imaginative, but I think of knights as the cavalry, the bishops as priests mounted on elephants (in Spanish, knights are "caballos", or horses; and bishops are "alfiles", etymologically elephants). Rooks are castles (or the archers on these); pawns are, well, pawns; and the king and queen don't change either. The elephant idea is only present in Spanish, though. It also makes sense that the cavalry moves more than the pawn, but differently, and the bishop "mounted on an elephant" moves more than normal soldiers, since it is shielded by them. The answer to what each piece means lies, to me, in the combination of both languages and basic understanding of ancient warfare (with the exception of the bishop in Spanish, whose meaning must be found in etymology). IMHO, chess should not be looked at as a game that resembles others that are more ancient, but rather as the evolution of those ancient games in order to resemble warfare more effectively while allowing tactical play on the board.
Nice to see so many replies yet, but my question was : who can tell us more about the genius who invented the knight's move, perhaps before chess was popular.
So, Zephyl and me are curious to know ; bean_Fischer's reply gives a good hint : "... someone modified it ..." during or after the Xiang Qi period ? !!
My point was it wouldn't take a genius. It logically fills a gap the other movements leave. Anyone interested in the basic geometry of the pieces' movements could have made that casual observation and thought up the knight's move.
You miss the point. Chess has not been solved, so it can't be now. It will be in the future.
BTW, many share your idea. But they may not be the same and not for the same reason.
I only want this:
I don't think it was warfare. There was a time when there was no nations, no borders. Tribes made their own territory. The territory was meant to obtain food by hunting animals.
They learned how lions and tigers got their preys. So they draw it. Then they learned how to get food using some strategies. The K is the food or animal. They cornered the K, so it has nowhere to go. Hence CHECKMATE. When the animal or the K is CHECKMATED, they got their food.
where is the i?
I don't think chess dates back so far in time... But warfare does. The game resembles warfare and not exactly hunting, even though warfare may (coincidentially or not) resemble warfare sometimes. I may be wrong, but I don't see any relationship between your "K" theory and a checkmate...
BatGirl has an article about the date chess was invented in India, in the 5th century. Even by the person that invented it (an advisor to the ruler), even why he invented it.
Very good research done by BatGirl, that article is not common knowledge, as far as I know, especially in the U.S. . It was posted in the Lancet in the 1830's, which was like a paper in England. How accurate is it, its the oldest known article I know of that speaks of the origins of chess.
I do remember reading in the late 70's somewhere, that some scholars thought chess originated in India, because the oldest known chess set ever found came from there, and that it was over a 1000 years ago, because of the age of the tomb they found it in.
I don't remember where I read it though, I've read so many books, etc.. I don't remember all the titles, or authors sometimes. Anyway, BatGirls article tells why the person invented it. If your interested in the history of chess, you should check her article out.
The mentioned Chinese XIANGQI 's 相( 象 for black but just another way to write it like canon 炮 for red and 包 for black) is not elephant but minister,yeah maybe in old days the minister of Europe Kindoms are bishops?
And the horse of XIANGQI refers to knight as well(One character can has many meanings) , for example "一马当先" means "One knight leads the army" but not "one smart horse".
Some say chess comes from asian(India or China), yeah I am happy to see you say some asian elders are genus.
knight can play havoc when its moves are not taken seriously - can cause irreparable losses when supported by queen - realy very very dangerous - I used to exchange it with bishop
While other angles of movement can be found in other games, the knight move appears to be unique to Chess. Therefore, whoever the genius is who invented the knight move could be considered the initiator of this game we all love. Did you know Mikhail Tal grew up with a misconception of how the knight moved? He thought knights could only move two forward and one to the side. He played this way as a child for a while, the result being that his strategy was to leap the knight forward in a sacrificial manner. This contributed to his spectacular playing style which developed later.