Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Single Comment

Chaturanga. The first known variant of chess. (8x8, Cells: 64) [All Comments] [Add Comment or Rating]
Charles Gilman wrote on Mon, Jan 16, 2012 07:01 AM UTC:
'As I stated in my last post, the observation that Xiangqi has no divergent pieces in it until the cannon does not apply because Xiangqi's earliest known version had only 1 counselor and no minister.'
What is the connection?
'This progression from 11 pieces to 14 to 16 where 8x8 chess always had 16 to begin with and had the same moving pieces (not counting cannon) means that Xiangqi predates and influenced 8x8 Chess.'
As it's a different 16 pieces in each case the comparison is irrelevant. Shogi (20 pieces aside) is older than Diana (only 12 pieces aside).

'The issue with the pawn in 8x8 Chess capturing differently than it moves does not necessarily mean that the game is older than Xiangqi.'
No, but it could be that the Pawn structure was abandoned to open up the back rank and ionce that happened all that was required was something to stop the Rooks capturing each other - something which no longer needed to be as complicated as a Pawn. Or perhaps the Pawn had a non-divergent predecessor even on the 8x8 board, but was reduced in number in China to improve back-rank mobility before being replaced by the Pawn in India to improve front-rank interactions.

'I also noted step by step how Xiangqi developed, and there is no apparent influence from 8x8 chess, and 8x8 Chess looks like a more modern version of Xiangqi.'
Yes. but how? To what documentation do you refer? Most of us have seen back to Chaturanga in India and 8x8 race games before that, but only back to 14-piece Xiang Qi in China. Chaturanga does not look consistently more modern. A point that you yourself made, that the Elephant nearer the King does not work so well in Chaturanga, could be used as an argument that the files were expanded to 9 to make the side that did not work match the one that did, and the pieces moved from squares to intersections to save making a new board.

'It seems like I am using common sense logic, and I am being refuted with a different kind of logic that I could not have come up with unless I saw the responses to my posts here.'
Well to me it looks as if everyone else's logic is common sense.

'I am giving a great deal of detail, and it seems that I am getting back a line of logic that is making my head spin.'
Again, the feeling is mutual.

'Why does a more modern pawn in 8x8 chess have to be from something other than a simple moving pawn in Xiangqi?'
See comments above. The fact that I have to say this indicates that your 'great deal of detail' tends to be poorly organised and consequently repetitive.

'It's like saying that because Xiangqi has no queen in it, then it must be the newer game because it has older moving pieces in it like the counselor meaning that 8x8 Chess is an older game because it requires more change to get where it needs to be.'
No, that is what saying that Xiang Qi is an older game because it is better developed is like.

'That kind of thinking is prevalent here instead of the more obvious line of logic that a 1 space moving counselor is probably from a game that requires a 1 space moving counselor for the game to work right.'
Well it does 'work right' in Chaturanga, and so does the Elephant beside it. It is just the Elephant beside the King that doesn't, and inserting an extra Ferz in between (and therefore an extra file) addresses this.