At all conclusions of parties, when a player seems not to know how to give the difficult mates, as that of a knight and a bishop against the king, that of a rook and a bishop against a rook, &c. at the adversary’s request, fifty moves on each side must be appointed for the end of the game: these being accomplished, it will be a drawn game.
[34] Reasons calculated to allay the surprise which attends the first mention of the rule, may be found in the Introduction to Chess, in the first volume.
The EDITOR invites the experienced reader’s particular attention to the 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th rules; as some points intended to be established by them, seem open to discussion.—_vide_ Appendix.
=GAMES=
=_Played without seeing the Board_=.
Mr. Philidor being of opinion that an entire collection of the games he has played without looking over the chess-board would not be of any service to amateurs, he will only publish a few parties which he has played against three players at once, subjoining the names of his respectable adversaries, in order to prove, and transmit to posterity, _a fact_, of which future ages might otherwise entertain some doubt.
_The following Account appeared in the London News-papers, the 9th of May, 1783_:
"Yesterday, at the Chess-club in St. James’s Street, Mr. PHILIDOR performed one of those wonderful exhibitions for which he is so much celebrated. He played at the same time three different games, without seeing either of the tables. His opponents were Count BRUHL, Mr. BOWDLER, and Mr. MASERES. To those who understand chess, this exertion of Mr. PHILIDOR’S abilities, must appear one of the greatest of which the human memory is susceptible. He goes through it with astonishing accuracy, and often corrects mistakes in those who have the board before them. Mr. PHILIDOR sits with his back to the tables, and some gentleman present, who takes his part, informs him of the move of his antagonist, and then, by his direction, plays his pieces."
In the triple party before mentioned, Mr. PHILIDOR gave the move to Count BRUHL and Mr. BOWDLER, and the advantage of a pawn and the move to Mr. MASERES: the moves of each party were played alternately.
COUNT BRUHL’S PARTY.
1. B. King’s pawn 2 squares. W. The same.
2. B. King’s bishop at his queen’s bishop’s 4th. W. King’s knight at his bishop’s 3d.
3. B. Queen’s pawn 1 square. W. Queen’s bishop’s pawn 1 square.
4. B. Queen’s bishop at the adverse king’s knight’s 4th. W. King’s rook’s pawn 1 square.
5. B. The bishop takes the knight. W. The queen takes the bishop.
6. B. Queen’s knight at his bishop’s 3d. W. Queen’s knight’s pawn 2 squares.
7. B. King’s bishop at his queen’s knight’s 3d. W. Queen’s rook’s pawn 2 squares.
8. B. Queen’s rook’s pawn 1 square. W. King’s bishop at his queen’s bishop’s 4th.
9. B. King’s knight at his bishop’s 3d. W. Queen’s pawn 1 square.
10. B. The queen at her 2d square. W. Queen’s bishop at his king’s 3d.
11. B. The king’s bishop takes the bishop. W. The king’s bishop’s pawn takes the bishop,
12. B. The king castles with his rook. W. King’s knight’s pawn 2 squares.
13. B. King’s rook’s pawn 1 square. W. The knight at his queen’s 2d.
14. B. King’s knight at his king’s rook’s 2d. W. King’s rook’s pawn 1 square.
15. B. King’s knight’s pawn 1 square. W. The king at his 2d square.
16. B. The king at his knight’s 2d. W. Queen’s pawn 1 square.
17. B. King’s bishop’s pawn 1 square. W. The knight at his king’s bishop’s square.
18. B. Queen’s knight at his king’s 2d. W. The knight at his king’s knight’s 3d.
19. B. Queen’s bishop’s pawn 1 square. W. Queen’s rook at its king’s knight’s square.
20. B. Queen’s pawn 1 square. W. The bishop at his queen’s knight’s 3d.
21. B. The queen’s pawn takes the king’s pawn. W. The queen takes the queen’s pawn.
22. B. Queen’s knight at his queen’s 4th. W. The king at his queen’s 2d.
23. B. Queen’s rook at its king’s square. W. The king’s rook’s pawn 1 square.
24. B. The queen at her king’s bishop’s 2d. W. The bishop at his queen’s bishop’s 2d.
25. B. Queen’s knight at his king’s 2d. W. The king’s rook’s pawn takes the pawn.
26. B. The queen takes the pawn. W. The queen takes the queen.
27. B. The knight takes the queen. W. The knight gives check at the adverse king’s bishop’s 4th.
28. B. The king at his rook’s square. W. The king’s rook takes the pawn.
29. B. King’s rook at its king’s knight’s square. W. The king’s rook takes the king’s knight, and gives check.
30. B. The king takes the rook. W. The rook gives check, at its king’s rook’s square.
31. B. The knight at the adverse king’s rook’s 4th, covering check. W. The rook takes the knight, and gives check.
32. B. The king at his knight’s 3d. W. The knight at the adverse king’s rook’s 3d, discovering check from the bishop.
33. B. The king at his knight’s 4th. W. The rook at the adverse king’s rook’s 4th, giving check-mate.
Not to retrace a connected series of moves in the game, the reader will perceive that the black king should have been moved to his knight’s second, and not to his knight’s fourth, by which the mate would have been thrown to a considerable distance; if a blemish be in the 33d move conspicuous, so was brilliant manœuvring in preceding stages.
These exhibitions of play are not, indiscriminately, models: but the amateur who wishes to see the gambit pursued, from the inceptive state in which the studied examples leave the gambit, to a decisive result, may consult Count BRUHL’S SECOND PARTY with advantage.
The EDITOR cannot express greater admiration than he feels, at the talents which supported the masterly professor in a successful combat with distinguished players, under combined difficulties and privations voluntarily encountered. The chance of confusion in the picture in his mind, furnished some dependence to his opponents: but it was scarcely to be expected, that a player, so completely exercised, should be drawn into a novel situation, or an untried combination; or that if such could be offered to him, that his progress would be embarrassed.
APPENDIX.
_ON DISPUTED POINTS._
By suggesting elementary regulations, and by improvements on the best plans of his predecessors, PHILIDOR laid a foundation for investing the theory of the game with stability and excellence; and there wants only the concurrent efforts of reasoning players, to give the few principles which remain afloat, or which rest, by sufferance, on bases that do not harmonize, a settlement that by an agreement of parts, and a coincidence with order, shall be entitled to permanence.
As the object of the game is to convey into the mind a facility at resource by exercise, it seems peculiarly worthy to receive, from time to time, all the improvement, as a system, that experience and reflection can bestow. But the thinking votary of Chess, in the cultivation of this slow maturity, will guard it from all radical changes; because the history of its progress, through successive ages, and in various countries, allows no hope of producing all at once, by any effort of mind, a combination of study with amusement, to be pursued as a game, that shall rival it in utility and interest.
As a prelude to a complete adjustment of principles, the Nomenclature of Chess, circumscribed in subjects, but redundant in obscurity and error, deserves attention. Care should be taken to distinguish, by appropriate terms, the _Elementary Institutes_ which fix the powers, and modes of action of the pieces, from the _General Maxims_, or Directions for Playing, which communicate, as far as theoretic indications can, the most dextrous ways of using them; and these, again, should be distinguished from those _Laws_ or Regulations which obviate or decide disputes between players, respecting punctilios in the management of the pieces, and the board. In Treatises of Chess, these have been indiscriminately blended under the general name of _Rules_; to the impediment of the student, exploring publications for a lucid path to the game. A neglect of division and arrangement, was the less pardonable in works professed to be scientific compendiums of Chess, because discretionary liberty was afforded, in the local position of the materials, by the extent of the plan. The framers of the _Laws of Chess_[36], on the contrary, had it not in contemplation to compose a system for the uninitiate; which is a satisfactory apology for their mixing decisions on a few disputed points, which belong to the class of _Elementary Institutes_, with Provisions, or _Laws_, to prevent the errors or inadvertencies of players, from obstructing the game.
[36] Ante page 199.
It is not intended to call in question the justness of the general tenor of their short code, which administers corrections of incidental informalities, perfectly equitable. Sections IX, X, XI, XII, however, are employed in regulating the powers and modes of action of peculiar pieces, embracing the most problematical points. Separating these, we investigate their propriety, in the order there pursued.
Section IX. enacts, that a pawn may become a queen, when ALL _the pieces remain on the board_. Consequently a player may have two, or a greater plurality of queens. How, enquires the player recently entered on the study of the game, is each additional queen to be represented and distinguished? By placing two pawns on one square, and pushing them about in company; a solecism in theory, a barbarism in practice. Against it, PHILIDOR, in the first edition of his work, violently inveighs. His reasons and his poignant ridicule are recorded; but he has not favoured us with the arguments by which he was afterwards induced to give it countenance. Perhaps he was overborne by a majority, prepossessed in favour of a practice, to which, from their first acquaintance with the game, they had been accustomed.
The EDITOR begs leave to suggest, that by limiting the promotion of the pawn to the highest office or, power, _vacant_, an incongruity revolting against method, may be avoided; and a moderate share of skill will still enable the player, to derive the utmost preponderance from a pawn on the eve of promotion. It is only necessary previously to offer an exchange of queens, which can seldom be refused, without surrendering the advantage of position: not to mention that the conversion of a pawn merely into a rook, would prove, in the hands of an able player, an effective acquisition.
We now enter on the consideration of Section X. It must be owned that PHILIDOR was always an advocate for the principle which pervades it, inculcating it before it was engrafted in the English code. It professes to establish, that an unmoved pawn may be disqualified from advancing two squares, by the circumstance of an adverse pawn having penetrated to the fourth square of an adjoining file. There is a refinement in this decision, which, while the mistake on which it rests lay undetected, recommended it to the ingenious. Expose the mistake which probably gave rise to it, and the rule is left without foundation. The phrase "two _steps_ the first _move_," or "two _moves_ the first _step_," an occasional substitution, was current through chess books, and with players. Hence a habit was implicitly contracted, of contemplating a pawn exercising this power, as making TWO _moves of_ ONE _square each_, not ONE _continued integral move of_ TWO _squares_. The EDITOR observes, that if the former idea be right, every one must admit the rule to be right; for who could make a journey of 20 miles, that is precluded from going the first 10. But if the latter idea be the correct one, if the pawn, at its first move, have really the power of going two squares at one effort, it is as irregular to prohibit the exercise of that power, because the pawn, were it to halt on its way, would be taken; as it would be to prohibit the bishop, the rook, or the queen, the full exercise of their greater powers, whenever there is a square in the line of their passage, at which they could not rest without being taken. Ought any of the latter pieces to be precluded from passing such a square? The absurdity of the phraseology which supports the rule is conspicuous, when extended to the queen; it would be grotesque to say, that she makes seven moves. For these reasons, in describing the properties of the pawn, in the _INTRODUCTION TO CHESS_, in the first volume, no notice is taken of this disqualification.
Section XI. involves nothing that can materially offend the advocate of order, except that in pursuing one species of uniformity, it loses sight of another. By confining the king to move precisely the same distance from his original square, whether he castles on the king’s side or the queen’s side, his relation to the covering pawns, when castled, and the space from the exterior of the board, is not on each side uniform. If the rule be intended to restrain a piece from exerting unnecessary license, in leaping over another piece, it should be remembered, that either the king or the rook must vault three squares in castling on the queen’s side, and the king is entitled to the prerogative of taking this flight once in a campaign, in preference to the rook. Under the mode here prescribed, the king is not equally shielded on the queen’s side as on the king’s. In the inceptive games of the Introduction, the castled king is invariably placed on the knight’s square, and the rook on the bishop’s. The object, however, is of less importance than the two preceding; and as to any striking influence on the aspect of the game, does not furnish materials for a cogent argument, founded on a comparison of effects. The reader having surveyed both modes, will induct that which he approves, into his own practice.
Section XII. embraces several objects. It is therefore recapitulated, with the points which the EDITOR invites to be considered, distinguished by Italics. "The king cannot castle _when in check_, nor after having been moved, _nor if in passing he was exposed to a check_, nor with a rook which has been moved: and he that castles when he should not, must play his rook touched, or his king, at his own choice." Is not the prohibition upon the king from castling, when in check, as extraordinary as if a general were prevented from flying under the guns of a fort, when the efforts of a numerous enemy were concentrated on him? If this disability be essential to a tactical conduct of the game, let it be continued. It seems, however, to have been transmitted from player to player, after the reasons which occasioned it ceased to exist. In past eras of Chess, the king and rook had such a latitude in castling, that the assailant might be defied to conjecture to what part they would be transported. The most expedient qualification of this license, that then presented itself, was to restrict the king from castling when in check, in order that an elaborate attack might not be entirely eluded. Succeeding legislators of Chess have defined the place of castling, and the distance to be passed; and the original argument, for the prohibition under discussion, has vanished. Reason will not oppose a repeal of one of the restrictions on the chief piece on the board, at the multiplicity of which every person, on a first introduction to the game, feels surprise. It is to be added, that very interesting situations occur, by allowing the king to castle when in check; and that trains of operation parallel, cannot be induced under a contrary practice.
With respect to the prohibition from castling, _if the king in passing would be exposed to a check_, it rests precisely on the same grounds as the disability imposed on the pawn; and a restriction from passing a square on which an adverse piece acts, should be imposed on all the pieces, or on none; now if it were general, it would be impossible to pursue the game, from the wearying and minute examination of every square, in all possible tracks, which would be incumbent on the player; and the consequent paralysis of the leading pieces, which it would occasion. If this excessive refinement controlled all the movements on the board, chess would have a constitution most ingeniously impracticable.
FINIS.
_Printed by W. Smith, King Street, Seven Dials._
BOOKS
_Published for_ SAMUEL BAGSTER, _No. 81, Strand_.
BELL’s BRITISH THEATRE,
CONTAINING _The Ninety most esteemed Plays_,
EACH ORNAMENTED WITH A CHARACTER PRINT,
At Sixpence each, or, neatly bound and gilt in 22 Vols. 3l. 3s.
_The same Work may be had_, PRINTED ON FINE VELLUM PAPER, And each PLAY embellished with TWO PLATES, Price 4l. 8s. complete in Numbers, or, 6l. elegantly bound in 22 Vols. with the Titles of each Play lettered on the Back.
_List of the Plays in_ BELL’S _British Theatre_.
1 Comus 2 Maid of the Mill 3 Lionel and Clarissa 4 Love in a Village 5 Beggar’s Opera 6 Venice Preserv’d 7 Fair Penitent 8 Zara 9 Douglas 10 Mourning Bride 11 Rule a Wife and have a Wife 12 The Alchymist 13 Love for Love 14 Love makes a Man 15 The Busy Body 16 The Orphan 17 The Albion Queen 18 Cato 19 The Country Girl 20 The Chances 21 The Tender Husband 22 The Beaux Stratagem 23 The Spanish Friar 24 The Distrest Mother 25 The Earl of Essex 26 Jane Shore 27 Edward the Black Prince 28 The Conscious Lovers 29 Every Man in his Humour 30 Philaster 31 The Careless Husband 32 The Provoked Husband 33 Boadicea 34 Oroonoko 35 A Bold Stroke for a Wife 36 Lady Jane Grey 37 The Suspicious Husband 38 The Carmelite 39 She Stoops to Conquer 40 Alzira 41 The Country Lasses 42 The Fair Quaker of Deal 43 Oedipus 44 Medea 45 The Miser 46 Cleone 47 Ximena 48 All for Love 49 Tamerlane 50 The Way to Keep Him 51 Tancrid and Sigismunda 52 All in the Wrong 53 The Recruiting Officer 54 The Grecian Daughter 55 Isabella 56 The Constant Couple 57 The Gamesters 58 George Barnwell 59 The West Indian 60 The Hypocrite 61 The City Wives’ Confederacy 62 The Wonder 63 The Committee 64 The Gamester 65 Amphitryon 66 The Foundling 67 The Good Natured Man 68 The Brothers 69 The Minor 70 The Earl of Warwick 71 The Natural Son 72 The Roman Father 73 The Jealous Wife 74 The Refusal 75 She Wou’d and She Wou’d not 76 The Double Gallant 77 The Drummer 78 The Clandestine Marriage 79 The School for Wives 80 The Fashionable Lover 81 The School for Lovers 82 The Countess of Salisbury 83 The Choleric Man 84 The Battle of Hastings 85 The Discovery 86 The Revenge 87 Theodosius 88 The Rival Queens 89 King Charles 90 Siege of Damascus
THE MINOR THEATRE,
(being a Companion to the BRITISH THEATRE) containing THIRTY-SIX CHOSEN FARCES OF THE _BRITISH STAGE_, WITH MINIATURE PORTRAITS OF THE ACTORS, in 7 Vols. neatly bound and gilt, 17s. 6d.
_The same Work may be had_, PRINTED ON FINE VELLUM PAPER, WITH PORTRAITS and SCENE PRINTS, bound in 7 Vols. elegant, 1l. 8s.
_Neatly Printed in One thick Vol. Octavo_, GLEANINGS FROM BOOKS on AGRICULTURE, WITH TWO PLATES OF INSTRUMENTS USED IN AGRICULTURE,
Price 7s. 6d. Boards.