The Origins of Chess

Contadini - Islamic Chessmen (Page 5)

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Bibliography

Catalogue
Apart from the two from Fustat, all the other pieces were given to the Ashmolean Museumby the Rcvd GJ. Chester, in different years. In the following classification the first number is my listing number, the second is the inventory number and the number between brackets is the year when they arrived at the Ashmolean. All are presently in the Department of Eastern Art, and, apart from the two from Fustat, have been transferred from the Department of Antiquities

1-4. Acc. nos X3325 (1883); X3326 (1883) X3327 (1883); X3328 (1883) King (or Queen) and Three Pawns from the.same set {Figs 12-15). The top of nos 1 and 2 is broken off. Nos 3 and 4 have a flattened finial the at the top. All have three circles above the base, and a raised band of concentric circles at the base of the sphere.

1. King. Height 4.5cm, diameter of base 2.8cm. From Cairo. Radiocarbon dating gives the range AD 1410-1650.

2. Pawn. Traces of a red colour.Height 3cm, diameter of base 2.1 cm. The piece has a long hair crack. From Cairo

3. Pawn. Traces of a red colour. Height 3cm, diameter of base 2.1 cm. The piece has a long crack. From Cairo

4. Pawn. Height 3cm, diameter of base 2.1 cm. The piece has a long crack. From Cairo

5. Acc. no. X3330 (1883). King (fig.17) Inlaid with four bands of metal wire. Flattened top debording over the central body. Pale ivory. Height 4.1 cm, diameter of base 2.2 cm. Good condition. From Cairo

6. Acc. no. X3323 (1891). Bishop (or Knight) Long narrow neck. Black inset at the top. Pale ivory with a yellowish transparent varnish on the surface. Height 5.3cm, diameter of base 2.1 cm. No provenance. Radiocarbon dating gives the range AD 1470-1950

7. Acc. no. X3324 (1891). Rook (fig.22) Originally had an x-shaped head now worn away for a third. Dark wood decorative insets in top and front. Yellowish, crackled ivory. Radiocarbon dating gives the range AD 1410-1645.

8 Acc. no. X3320 (1892). Rook ifig.25). Rectangular with two horns at the top, each inlaid with black 'eyes', probably mastic. Pale crackled ivory. Height 5.7cm, 5.8cm wide, 2cm thick. The piece is clipped. No provenance. Radiocarbon dating gives the range AD 1060-1395.

9. Acc. no. X3316 (1892). Rook (fig.26). Flat front, two horns at top with five deep ridges running vertically down between. Clipped on back. On the front there are clear traces of a dark red colour. The two opposite parts, in the case of ivory sets, were identified by different colours: white and black, or white and red, or red and green. Height 5cm, 4cm wide, present thickness at base 1.6cm. No provenance. Radiocarbon dating gives the range AD 630-895.

10. Acc. no. X3329 (1883). Pawn (fig.27). Two pairs of circles around body. Stepped domed top. Pale yellow ivory of a fine grain visible at the top. At the middle of the top there is a tiny hole which was probably filled with mastic for decoration. Height 3.8cm, diameter of base 2.3 cm. Good condition. From Cairo.

11. Acc. no. X33I9 (1892). King, Queen or Pawn (fig. 29). Slightly waisted. Three incised .circles above the base, and small concentric circles at the top with a dot in the middle, forming a bunch of grapes. Yellowish, crackled ivory, of the same kind as no.8, which is also similar in style. Height 3.6cm, diameter of base 2.4cm. Reported to come from Old Cairo.

12. Acc. no. X3318 (1892). Pawn (fig.32). Rounded head. Tiny hole at the middle of the top which was probably filled with mastic for decoration. Very pale ivory of a fine grain visible at the top. The piece is undecorated and has a hair crack. Height 3.5 cm. diameter of base 2.7 cm. From Old Cairo.

13. Acc. no. EA 1974.65. Draughtman (fig.34) Excavated at Fustat, excavation 00.72.10.49 XXI1.5. Pit B and D, at level 3.3-5.25m. Height 0.5cm, diameter 2.7cm. This is a very fine piece of ivory work. It retains traces of a dark red colour, which probably identified one side which seems to have been scratched. Flat base. Good condition.

14. Acc. no. X332I (1892). Draughtman (fig .35). Fine piece of work with two concentric circles. Yellowish ivory. Flat base with an inscription transparent varnish in black ink referring to the date of purchasing: "Old Cairo 1878". Diameter 3.5cm, 0.7cm thick. Very good condition. From Old Cairo

15. Acc. no. EA 1974.64. Rectangular die (fig 36). Found at Fustat, excavation no.72.11.57, XXI1.5, surface. Length 6.1cm, 1cm thick. The die bears the following numbers on its opposite faces is: 1-6, 2-5. The numbers marked with two concentric circles and a dot in the middle. In one of these circles, at the number five, there is a trace of a black colour. The number six is marked with three rows of two concentric circles unlike the pieces that show two groups of three dots arranged in a triangle on the two sides of the face.(no 16, Appendix II, nos 2, 3, 6). The piece is slightly chipped.

16. Acc: no. X3322 (1892). Rectangular die (fig 37) It bears the following numbers on its opposite faces - 1-6, 2-5. The numbers are marked with one incised circle and a dot in the middle. The piece seems to have a dark transparent varnish. The colour of the ivory is very similar to that of no.14. It is possible that they come from the same set. Length 5 2cm, 0.7cm thick The piece is cracked in the middle.Bought in Cairo, but reported to come from Old Cairo.

17. Acc. no. X333I (1872) Chester Collection, no. 1448. Cubic die (fig..38). This is a cubic die with rounded comers. The numbering of the opposite faces: 1-6, 2-5 & 3-4. The numbers are marked with holes enclosed within two concentric circles. . In those circles there are traces of a dark colour. Pale ivory. Height 2cm. Good condition. Bought in Cairo.

Appendix I

The following is a selection of abstract chessmen for which there is some evidence of date. Nos 1-5 all come from archaeological contexts while the others can be dated with fair certainty by their shape and decoration. (74)

1. Nishapur pieces, style set A (ftg.4). Twelve ivory pieces (three Kings or Queens, two Bishops, a Knight, four Rooks, two Pawns) excavated at Nishapur by the Metropolitan Museum's Iranian expedition in 1940, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. nos 40. 170.148-151. 9th century. (75)

2. Qasr al-Hayr pieces, style set A. Four woodenpieces (two Rooks, and probably two Pawns) from Qasr al-Hayr East, now in the Kelsey Museum of Archaeology, University of Michigan.They are decorated with encrusted small circular bone units arranged in circular rows. The wood has been dated by carbon-14 ,analysis to AD .870 + - 120 years (76)

3. Serce Limani pieces, style set A (fig 42). Eight wooden pieces (a King, a Queen, two Rooks, a Knight, three Pawns) from the ship-wreck of Serce Umani, inv. nos GW 484-489 GW 945- 946, presently at Bodrum. First half 11th century (77)

4. Siraf pieces, style set A. An ivory Rook found at Siraf with a rectangular shaped body and a deep cut in the middle forming 'horns' -apparently datable to the 15th century; (78) - and ten ceramic chess pieces (inv. nos 755-764) datable to the 13th century (79)

5. Ghubayra piece, style set B. An ivory King or Queen excavated at Ghubayra in 1971 inv. no. Gh. 71-44, School of Oriental and (p.140) African Studies, University of London. Attributed to the Ilkhanid or Muzaffarid period. (80)

6. Rock Crystal. The Ager Chessmen, style set A (Figs 43, 44). Fifteen rock crystal pieces called the 'Ager Chessmen', formerly in the Behague Collection, now Kuwait, A Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyya, inv. no. LNS I HSa-j. Egypt, l0th century (81)

7. Rock Crystal. The Charlemagne Chessmen,style set A (fig.45). Fifteen rock-crystal pieces called the 'Charlemagne Chessmen', in the cathedral treasure of Osnabriick. Egypt 11th -12th century.(82).

8. Glass. Cairo pieces, style set A. Seven marvered glass pieces (a King, a Queen (?) two Knights, a Rook, two Pawns), Cairo, Islamic Museum. Late 12th-early 13th century. (83)

9. Ceramic pieces, style set A. Thirty-two ceramic pieces, with turquoise and purple glaze, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, inv. no.1971.193 a-ff, said to be from Nishapur, 12th century. (84) Twenty-three pieces in ceramic with cobalt and turquoise glaze, Iran, i2th century (fig 46). (85)

10. Ivory. British Museum pieces, style sets A and B. Four ivory pieces belonging to style set A. (three Kings or Queens, and a Knight) on exhibition in the John Addis Islamic Gallery, inv. nos 77.8-2.8 (acquired in Sicily, Catania); 62.8-9.2; 56.6-124; 81.7-19.47.(86) (fig.47) And,a group of pieces in the Medieval and Later Antiquities Department, mentioned above, of style sets A and B, 10th to 11th century.

11. Wood. Ghazni piece, style set A fig.n). A wooden King, bought in Afghanistan. The decoration on one side of the piece indicates the Ghazni period, 11th-12th century.(87)

Appendix II

The following list includes Coptic and Medieval Islamic draughtsmen and dice, mostly from archaeological contexts.

1. Coptic bone draughtsmen and dice. Several pieces excavated at Karanis now in the Kelsey Museum of Ancient and Medieval Archaeology, University of Michigan (see note 36)

2. Mansura ivory draughtsmen and dice. (Figs 48,49, 50). Two draughtsmen (inv. nos 1031,1016/28) and two dice: one rectangular (1-6, 2-5), inv. no. 1027, and one cubic (1-6, 2-5, 3-4), inv. no. 57.11-18.67, now in storage at the British Museum. 10th Century (?) See below, Appendix III 'The Mansura Pieces'.

3. Fustat bone die {fig. 51). A rectangular die from Fustat (1-6, 2-5), Kelsey Museum of Ancient and Medieval Archaeology, University of Michigan. 9th-10th century. (88)

4. Serce Umani bone draughtsman (fig.52). A draughtsman from the shipwreck found at Serce Limani. First half 11th century.(89)

5. Glass draughtsman (fig.53). A draughtsman in New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no. 1974.98.6. 7th-10th century. (90)

6. British Museum ivory die {fig. 54) A rectangular die on exhibition in the John Addis Islamic Gallery, inv. no. 95.11-27.2. 9th-10th century (?). (91)

7. Louvre ivory die. A rectangular die, Paris, Musee du Louvre, inv. no. 1346, 9th-10th century. (92)

8. Tepe Dasht-i Deh bone die. A cubic die excavated at Tepe Dasht-i Deh, presently in Iran. 13th century. (93)

(p. 141)

Appendix III

THE MANSURA PIECES
The Mansura pieces consist of a number of ivory fragments {figs 55,56), so far believed to be chess pieces; two draughtsmen; and two dice one rectangular (1-6, 2-5) and the other cubic(1-6, 2-5, 3-4). Excavated by Bellasis (94) in 1855 at Mansura, the Muslim city raised near the old city of Brahmanabad, the present Hyderabad in the Pakistani region of Sind, they are presently in the collection of the Oriental Department of the British Museum, inv. nos 1857.11.18.55-63. They have been recently restored and properly photographed. First brought to attention by Murray, they have not been published since. In his account on the excavations Bellasis states that he sent drawings of various relics, including those of the chessmen, to Lieutenant Colonel W. H. Sykes, at East India House.(95) These drawings are now in the India Office Library, MSS Eur G 45/3b, Eur G 45/9, including only a watercolour of the cubic die at fol. 71 of the latter. Two illustrations from The Illustrated London News, where the engravings of some chess pieces and the rectangular die were published, are attached at fols 347 and 44 respectively. Bellasis dated his findings to the 11th century, when the city was supposedly destroyed by an mearthquake.(96) More recently Pathan concluded that the city had been destroyed by an earthquake, but at the end of the ninth century.(97)

This would mean assigning the pieces to a similar date at the latest. The finding of ceramic lustre fragments of a type ascribed to the 9th ,or early loth century might support this dating for the city of Mansura.(98) After restoration and reconstruction of the fragments, their identification as chess men was no longer obvious. Some are entirely hollow. Others have pegs, which makes one suppose that they were finials. Bellasis thought that the pegs were for a board with holes, like those of modem times, which seems rather, unlikely. Murray (see note 94) thought that the epieces, being quite big, were made in different sections and held together by these pegs. In my opinion, the completely hollow objects are not chess pieces, but handles. Those with pegs could be either finials or chess pieces. We do not know enough about the making of ivory chess pieces to be sure. There are hollowed ivory chess pieces (but not hollowed up to the top), and there are also chess pieces made in sections with a central part (similar therefore to a peg) in the middle (like some ofthe pieces in the British Museum). The pieces could have been made in sections because they were made from ivory remnants. Finally, the nine objects resembling pawns seem to be gaming pieces (fig. 56). They are hollow, but not up to the top. The knob on the top is separate. It should not be forgotten that they were found with dice, one cubic and the other rectangular.

(p. 142)

ENDNOTES 1.
I should like to thank especially James Allan, lrving Finkel and Ralph Pinder-Wilson for their support, time and help. I am also grateful to many other institutions and friends: in the British Museum, the stafTofthe Department of Oriental Antiquities; Neil Stratford and the staff of Medieval and Later Antiquities; K.J. Wallace, archivist. Also: Philip Dymond, formerly India Office Library; Prof. Michael Rogers, School of Oriental and African Studies; Prof. Geza Fehervari, formerly School of Oriental and African Studies; Shaikha Hussa al-Sabah, Director of the Dar al-Athar al-Islamiyya, Kuwait; Daniel Walker of the Islamic Department, and the staff of the Medieval Department of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Irene Aghion, Cabinet des Medailles, Paris; Prof. George Scanlon, American University in Cairo; Prof. George Bass, Director of the expedition at Serce limani; Elaine Gazda, Director of the Kelsey Museum of Ancient and Medieval Archaeology, Michigan; L. van der Heijdt. The drawings for this article are by Sue Godard.

2. The bibliography on chess is vast. On Islamic chess, see especially Stamma (1840); van der linde (1874 a and b); Murray (1913), Part I, ch.x; Wieber (1972); Eales (1985). For chess literature in specific libraries, see Bibliotheca (1955), containing c. 6,500 entries; Frankfurt (1982); and Vickery & Webb (1977) and Massmann (1982), mainly concerned with the game.

3. A few early Islamic representational pieces have survived. A mounted knight, in ivory, found at Samarkand: Orbeli (1936), 144-45, fig. 14, 8th or 9th century; Wilkinson (1943), 279; Under (1964), fig at 15; Kiihnel (1971), 30, Taf.V, 16a-b. An ivory elephant, Florence, Museo Nazionale del Bargello {fig. a): Kiihnel (1971), 29-30, Taf.VI, i4a-b, Iraq, probably late 9th-early loth century; Grube (1993). An ivory elephant, Paris, Cabinet des Medailles, which bears the kufic inscription min'amol Yusufal-Bahili. The piece has been ascribed different dates: for a 15th-century attribution, see Barrett (1955). Kiihnel considered the inscription authentic and identified the artist with a 9th-century Indian sculptor: Kiihnel (1971), 30-31, Taf.VI, 17a, VII, 17b-e. Scholars now tend to a date in the late 9th-early l0th century. In Europe such pieces began to appear in the 12th and 13th century, including the so-called Charlemagne pieces in. Paris, Cabinet des Medailles, reputedly a gift from Harun al-Rashid: on these and others in the Bargello, Florence, see Pieces d'Echecs (1990); Pastoureau (1990). On the famous Lewis chessmen, British Museum and National Museum of Scotland, see Madden (1832), 203-91; Dalton (1909), 63-73, pis XXXVIII- XLVIII; Murray (1913), 758-61, drawing at 763; Liddell (1938), 136-42, and fig. facing p. 15; Taylor (1978).

4. Scholars tend to attribute the appearance of abstract pieces to the Islamic rejection of representation: see, for example, Liddell (1938), 26; Wichmann (1964), 16. The accepted theory has been that figurative pieces were used in India; that, with the advent of Islam, they became abstract; and then figurative again in Europe, with the Lewis chessmen. As is well known, however, secular art was widely representational from the very beginning of Islamic times.

5. It has been suggested that the Sassanian stone elephant, 6th or 7th century, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. no .48.154.8, could have been a chess piece: Herzfeld (1931), 27; Sarre (1939) 1,593-600, and IV, pl.i69b; Wilkinson (1968), xxvii and fig.i; Harper (1978), 172-73, no.89. See also van Lohuizen de Leeuw (1981), for an ivory piece from Mantai, 2nd-3rd century AD.

6. Contadini (1993), no.6,71-72; Sanvito (1988); Sanvito (1992). Fuhrmann (1941), 616-29, figs 121,122 and Chicco & Rosino (1990), 7, figs 1, 2 date the former 2nd century AD and the latter 5th- 6th century AD on archaeological grounds, but in fact their context is not clear. A date to the late 10th-early 11th century is now confirmed by the result of the examination at radiocarbon accelerator conducted on the pieces at two different laboratories, in Naples (Italy) and Sydney (Australia), yielding the same results. See Venafro (1994).

7. A figural chess set found at Afrasiyab, Samarkand, during excavations in 1977, datable not later than the 7th century AD: Buryakov (1980), 162-72, and figs. To the Afrasiyab pieces it is possible to relate an ivory chariot (Rook), British Museum, Oriental Antiquities (inv. no. OA 1991.10-12.1), reportedly from Samarkand area (fig.3)', and two figural pieces, British Museum, John Addis Islamic Gallery, one of ivory, in the form of an elephant with mahout, probably a King or Rook, allegedly from Nishapur (inv. no. 1980.7-30.1), the other of red unglazed terra-cotta, possibly an elephant (inv. no. OA+7838); see also the ivory piece in New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art (inv. no.65.53), which Wilkinson (1968), no.3, dates to the 11ith century; and an ivory rider on an elephant (Christie's (1994), lot 337, 12th-13th century)

8. Reference to chess in Indian literature goes back to the first half of the 7th century: Thomas (1898), 272; see also MacDonell (1898), 117-41; Murray (1913), 51-56. The earliest references to chess in Persian literature are from the Sassanian(1987), col. ill.43. period: Kamamak-i-Artakhshatr-i-Papakan, written between 590 and 628, referring to an earlier date: Noldeke (1878); see also Murray (1913), 149. For the Chatrang-namak, see Noldeke (1892) and Murray (1913), 149. For the pahlavic text, see Pagliaro (1951) 97-110. For the game in Persian literature, see Bland (1852), 1-70. For the Shahnama, see note 17. On the ancient history of the game: Pagliaro (1940) 328-40. In the Islamic period there are references to chess in Arabic literature from Umayyad times: al-Qadi (1992), 230, 243; also al-Mostatraf (1902), Vol.2, 637-39.

9. Inv. no.40.170.148-151. See Wilkinson (1943) and Wilkinson (1968), xxviii, fig.2.

10. Inv. no.50 Sb. The Lothar Schmid Collection, Bamberg, contains a turquoise glazed pottery Knight, with a completely abstract conical body, but the stylized head of a horse. This piece, whose provenance is unknown, is attributed to the 9th-10th century: Petzold (1987), col. ill.7.

11 For the names of the game and the pieces in Arabic and other Oriental languages, and their development and transformation in the West, see Hyde (1694), Libro 1,1-30; van der Linde (1881) 15; Murray (1913), 421-28; Wilkinson (1968) xxv-xxvi.

12. The manuscript, Libra del Ajedrez, tablas y dados with 150 miniatures, is in San Lorenzo del Escorial, Biblioteca Real, no.T.1.6. For a black-and-white facsimile, see White (1913), and in colour, Libra del Ajedrez (1987). See also Janer (1874), 3, 225-55 White (1913); Steiger (1941); Garcia Morencos (1977)

13. In Murray (1913), 769 there is a diagram of chess pieces represented in certain European manuscripts, starting with the Alfonso manuscript.

14. Fol.3r. The miniature shows both the preparation of the board and the manufacture of the chessmen.

15. Heidelberg, University Library, Pal. Germ.848. The part of the manuscript with this miniature can be dated to the first quarter of the 14th century: Wichmann (1964), 287, col. ill.61; Petzold (1987), col. ill.37. In the depiction of medieval European courtly life we frequently encounter, as part of the process of courtship, a scene of a couple playing chess: see ivory plaques in Gazette des Beaux-Arts, CXVIII, November 1991,fig.3. See also Simons (1993).

16. Kassel, Landesbibliothek, the 'Willehalm Codex', MS Poet et roman i, fol.25r. See Petzold

17. The Shahnama (early 11th century) gives two stories about chess, one relating how chess was invented in India, the other, derived from the Chatrang-namak, telling how chess passed from India to Persia around the mid-6th century AD: see Murray (1913), 156-57. The Arabic sources and the Alfonso manuscript agree with the attribution to India, while Cessolis (see note 22) ascribes it to Babylon. On the origins of the game in the Empire of Elam and China, respectively, see Wichmann (1964), 9, note 4; Bidev (1972) and Dickens (1973). Neither hypothesis has found general acceptance.,

18. For example, two illustrated leaves from a 14th-century Shahnama, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, Joseph Pulitzer Bequest Fund, inv. no.34.24.1,34.24.2: Wilkinson (1968), xii, xiii. For an illustrated, probably 16th-century, Persian treatise on chess in the Royal Asiatic Society: Codrington (1892), 532, no.2ii; Golombek (1976), .fig. at 31, and col. ill. at 36 and 53. For the manuscript, see Bland (1852), 1-17; Murray (1913), 177.

19. Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, respectively MS Or. Bl. 2606, fol. 4255 and MS Diez A, Bl. 68ob, fol.i: Petzold (1987), nos 2,4, for colour illustrations.

20. For this shape, see a Spanish representational ivory Queen, 12th century, in the Walters Art Gallery: Randall (1985), fig.254; see also the Mozarabic ivory King, 11th century, in Boston, Fuld Collection: Wichmann (1964), 280, fig.21.

21. For the ivory pieces in Bamberg, Sammlung Lothar Schmid, reported to have been found in the area of Nishapur, see Petzold (1987), col. ill.6. See also the 7th-century AD pieces found at Afrasiyab (note 7) and the wooden Ghazni piece published here for the first time at fig. 11.

22. As represented in the Alfonso manuscript. In the West this kind of set is well exemplified by the

(p.144)

engravings in Caxton's (1480) English translation of Jacobus de Cessolis's Liber de moribus hominum etqfficiis nobilium (second half 13th century): Murray (1913), 542-43.

23. See English medieval bone pieces in the British Museum: Dalton (1909), nos 229, 233 238, Dalton (1927), 77-86; or the four ivory pieces excavated at Chatenois (Vosges), Paris, Musee de Cluny (inv. nos 14422-14425), for which see Wichmann (1964), 278, figs 10-11. For a 17th-century set based on Arabic prototypes, see Petzold (1987), col. ill.i9. A tentative development of shapes in Europe derived from Arabic originals has been outlined: Murray (1913), 770-74; Petzold (1987), 75.

24. Thirteen bone pieces, 8th/9th century, Nuremberg, Gennanisches Nationalmuseum (cat. no. H. G. 2172-85): Wichmann (1964), 275, fig.6.

25. Appendix I, style set

26. Appendix I, no.4. In Europe, see the sixty-seven bone chessmen reported to have been found in the 12th to 14th-century levels at Novgorod: Linder (1964), figs at 72-73 and Thompson (1967) fig. 102.

27. For two Ottoman sets of the 16th-17th century in the Treasury of the Topkapi Sarayi Museum, in rock crystal and gold and agate, see Rogers (1987), col. pls 120, 121a, 121b; Soliman (1990), 224, no.238.

28. One is published in Dalton (1909), no.6o3. In the British Museum, Medieval and Later Antiquities, there are several abstract Islamic ivory chess pieces: cf. Dalton (1909), pl-CXXV. This large and interesting collection shows a close similarity with that in the Ashmolean Museum. Henceforth I refer to these pieces as BM Dalton plus .

29. See, for example, Murray (1913), figs on 361

30. For Revd Chester, see Budge (1920), 84-85, note i; James (1981), 20-23.

31. By Rupert A. Housley, at the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and History of Art Oxford University, September 1991. The range given has a 95 percent probability of accuracy.

32. See for example a Turkish set of the 17th century in Hyde (1694), Libro 1, 133. Also an Indian set of the 18th century in the Metropolitan Museum of Art: Wilkinson (1968), no.9.

33. Schachspiele (1987), col. ill.032.(1888), 183-85.

34. The term 'draughtsmen' has no connection with the modern game of draughts, but rather with nard, which corresponds to backgammon. On the pieces see Stoep (1984), which is based mainly on Murray (1952) and Kruijwijk (1966)

35. See, for example, the draughts datable to the 3rd-4th century AD in the Vatican Museum in Rome: Morey (1936), Taw.IV, VI.

36. Bone and glass draughts with this shape and,decoration were found at Karanis (now Kelsey 239; Museum of Ancient and Medieval Archaeology, Michigan). The Karanis material includes many bone dice, and is in the process of being studied.

37. For example, one from an ivory set in the British Museum, Indian Gallery, inv. no. OA1939.6-19.336.

38. See note 35, and the Roman dice in the Walters Art Gallery: Randall (1985), figs 98-100.

39. For example, Dalton (1909), 83-84.

40. For these games, see Murray (1952), 2.8.3, 4. i .3,6. i .2.

41. There is no monograph devoted to Islamic dice, but see Culin (1895 and 1897) and van der Heijdt (1990).

42. On gambling, see Rosenthal (1975).

43. Culin (1897), 826-27, fig.147.

44. The orthodox transliterations would be: ka 'b,ka'batan and ka'abat.

45. Culin (1897), 829.

46. See Murray (1913), 46-50.

47. See Murray (1913), 340-41.48. According to a common distinction, chess is considered a war game, and nard, or taivula, or backgammon, a race game. Awerbach (1991) has proposed recently that chess derives from a race game: for an English translation, see Finkel ed., Board Games in Perspective (forthcoming).

49. Whether the two-handed game or the four-handed dice chess came first is still a matter of controversy: see Jones (1790), 159-65; Murray (1913), 68; Rosenfeld (1960), 24. See also Ghosh (1936), a manual of four-handed dice chess which, however, I was not able to consult. Awerbach (1991) has suggested that the two-handed game derives from four-handed chess and that, in this development, dice were abandoned.

50. The game of Chaturanga is described in detail in the Bhavishya Purana. It is not certain from this whether the die was employed after the opening move. See Culin (1897), 857, no.45.

51. Al-Biruni (1958). See the translation by Sachau (1888) 183-185. For al-Biruni's account, see Murray (1913), 68-69.

52. For these games, see Murray (1952), 6.4.6, 6.4.3, 6.4.1, and fig 59 where it is specified that they are played with two or three long dice, faces numbered 1-6, 3-4., or 1-6, 2-5. See Culin (1897) 825, no 13, and 855, no. 40, and discussion at 858 regarding the similarity of pachisi to four handed chess. For the use of dice in ancient India, see Luders (1907) and Vreese (1948)

(p.145)

53. See Murray (1952), 95.

54. See Murray (1913), 74, where he quotes the account given by J. Cresswell in the British chess Magazine, 1900, 6.

55. Fol. 4v, see Steiger (1941), 24

56. See Gamer (1954), 739.

57. Fol. 96r, See Steiger (1941), 380.

58. Barbier de Meynard (1864). See Murray (1913), 340.

59. Kitab-al-shatrang mimma allafahu al-'Adli wa al suli wa ghairuhuma ("Book of the chess from the works of al-'Adli, a'-Suli and others"), Abd al-Hamid I Library, MS no 560, dated 535/1140. See Murray (1913), 171.

60. The Arabic master, al-Adli was at the height of his fame around AD 840. His chess work is unfortunately lost, although p[arts of it may be preserved in later manuscripts. In al-Nadim's Kitab al fihrist (377/988 - see Flugel (1872)), a section devoted to the authors of books on chess is headed by al-Adli, who is also mentioned as having written a Kitab al-shatranj ("Book on chess") and a Kitab al-nard ("Book on nard") both lost. See Murray (1913), 169.

61. See Murray (1913), 339-41.

62. Murray (1952), 114, suggested that the earliest literary reference to nardshir may be in the Talbud (compiled between AD 300 and 500).

63. Ahmad ibn Abi Ya/quab ibn Wadih al-Ya'qub, Tarikh: see Houtsma (1883), 99-102. For an acount in English, see Murray (1913), 208-11.

64. According to him, the invention of Nard is Indian and not Persian, and preceeds the Indian invention of chess rather than following it, as the Persian sources report.

65. In the Islamic tradition, in ascending order from the earth: Moon, Mercury, Venus, Sun, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn.

66. The rule was not always followed, as in the case of an oblong stone die said to come fromAkhmim, now in the Ashmolean Museuam (acc. no. X3317), which has on the opposite faces the following numbers: 1-2, 5-6. The symbolism of the die is briefly treated in Buchenmatth (1990).

67. Add. MS 7517 Ricj., dated 655/1257, fols 5v-6v. The manuscript has been translated into Spanish, with a transcription of the Arabic textand critical notes by Pareja Casanas (1935). See also Murray (1937), 169-76, a review of this book.

68. Hyde (1694), Vol II, 255-56

69. Noldeke (1892), 23

70. On backgammon seee Raverty (1903); Medows (1931); Jacoby and Crawford (1971); and Obolensky & Jones (1971).

71. See Barakat (1974). Murray suggested that the name derives from the Byzantine-Greek 'tabla'. But the matter deserves further investigation: 'tawula' might also be a reletively modern borrowing from Italian 'tavola'. This is the only etymology offered in Hinds & Badawi (1986).

72. See Scanlon (1981), 62. No illustration is given

73. The piece was found during the 1972 excavation at Fustat, on the surface of area XX1.5. Scanlon does not mention it.

74. The identification of a bone object excavated at Fustat as a chess piece is dubious (fig. 41). It resembles one of the pieces found at Mansura (see below) now thought to be a finial. It has been dated to the 9th-10th century. Scanlon (1974), pl.XVI-7.

75. See Wilkinson (1943), 271-79: fig. at 274:also Wilkinson (1968), no. 2.

76. Graber et al. ((1978), Vol. I, 189, Vol. II, figs 81-83.

77. Cassavoy (1988), 28-29

78., Found with four cylindrical wooden objects, each with a hole on top, thought to be gaming pieces, in Site E, corresponding to the 15th century buildings. See Whitehouse (1969), 39-62, pl. V (e). It is not clear from his account whether the 15th century date applies to the gaming pieces.

79. Tampoe (1989), 19, and fig 16, 193.

80. The piece was found in the Citadel Platform room 5: Bivar & Fehervari (1974), 107-40.

81. See Jenkins (1983), col.ill. at 60. For a history, literature and drwing of the pieces see Murray (1913), 764-66; Lamm (1929-30), 2, Taf. 77; Wilkinson (1943), 276. The plain pieces are much smaller than the others and must belong to a different set.

82. Murray (1913), 765-66, fig. facing 766; Lamm (1929-30), Vol. 2, Taf 76, nos 7-18; Wichmann (1964), 275-77, fig 7.

83. Lamm (1929-30) Vol 1, 101-102,: Vol 2, Taf 31, nos 8-16: Wilkinson ((1943), 278. There are other marvered glass pieces: A King or Queen, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art. inv. no. 1972.9.3;21, 10th century (Jenkins (1986) col. ill. on 52); two Pawns, Washington D.C. Freer Gallery of Art, inv. nos 09.779, 09.980, ascribed to Egypt, 10th-12th century (Ettinghausen (1962) figs 69, 70). On the dating, see James Allan's article in this volume.

(p.146)

84. Samples were taken (in October 1971) from a turquoise-glazed King and Queen and one of the manganese purple-glazed Pawns for testing by thermoluminesence at the Research Laboratory of Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford University. The tests showed that the pieces were last fired between AD 1081-1531, a result consistent with the suggested period of manufacture (12th century).

85. Nine published in Hoare (1985), col. ill.62.(see note 88). The present location of these pieces is unknown to the writer. There are also two turquoise and cobalt blue glazed ceramic gaming pieces in the Ashmolean Museum, ace. nos 1986-42,1986-43 of which one seems to be a chess piece, possibly a Bishop.

86. Dalton (1909), pl.XLVIII for nos 225 (King or Queen, 62.8-9.2), 226 (King or Queen, acquired in Sicily, 77.8-2.8), 228 (Knight, 81.7-19.47). Compare also an ivory Knight in New York, Metropolitan Museum and a King in Berlin: Kiihnel (1971), 28, figs 9,10; and Pinder-Wilson (1973), 233-34, pl.LXXXIVa, for dating.

87. Location unknown. For a comparative design, see the frieze on the marble panel from Afghanistan, of the Ghazni period, early 12th century, in the David Collection, Copenhagen:von Folsach (1990), back cover.

88. See Scanlon (1976), 75, fig. 14.,

89. Cassavoy (1988), 28 and fig. on 29. A bronze cube found in the ship is reproduced,on 29. Because of the strange sequence of numbers on its side (from a maximum of 14 to a minimum of 5), it is now supposed to be a weight. It is worth noting the possibility, however, that this cube is a fortune-telling die: see Culin (1897), fig. 139.

90. Jenkins (1986), col. ill. at 52.

91. Ascribed to Egypt, 10th/11th century. However, it has the same peculiar arrangement of decorative concentric circles as the bone century).die found at Fustat m the 9th-10th-century level. See note 88.

92. The piece has the numbering 2-5, 3-4.

93. Williamson (1972). 177-78, pl.XIIa. Together with the die, two other bone objects were found ,which look like gaming pieces.

94. Bellasis (1856). See also Tlie Illustrated London News (1857); Elliot (1867-77), 369.95- Murray (1913), 89-90, and fig. at 88. Bell (1979), 58 gives a drawing of a hypothetical reconstruction of six of them, but the drawing is not accurateand the reconstruction most unlikely.

95. Bellasis does not specify how many fragments he saw, saying only that he took,drawings of 'most' of the relics found atBambra-ka-thul, including the chessmen. See Bellasis (1856), 18.

96. Bellasis (1856), 9-12.

97. Pathan (1978), 269-78.

98. Hobson (1932), 8-10, fig. 14.

(p. 147)

Forward to - Bibliography