Selected News on Old Xiangqi

1 Selected News on Old Xiangqi Franco Pratesi and Guoru Ding Abstract Several Chinese findings of chess historical interest are reviewed and discussed. The discussion deals with the development of xiangqi, but more generally with the initial stages of all forms of chess. Xiangqi quotations in the ancient Chinese literature are shortly commented on, and then attention is especially focused on recent archaeological findings. Riassunto Sono passati in rassegna e discussi alcuni ritrovamenti cinesi d’inte- resse scacchistico. La discussione riguarda lo sviluppo dello xiangqi, ma anche gli stadi iniziali degli scacchi più in generale. Sono breve- mente commentati i principali riferimenti dalla letteratura cinese clas- sica, e nel seguito l’attenzione è rivolta specialmente ai recenti reperti archeologici. Introduction This article is intended as a review of some early information on xiangqi. A particular interest of this topic derives from the possibility that it includes not just a discussion on a specific chess variation, but also on the initial steps of all chess variations. One of the authors has already published an article in this journal on the particular elements of xiangqi, more than twenty years ago. (1) The other author has made long studies on the history of weiqi (or go, as it is better known abroad, from the Japanese). It has been precisely in the field of weiqi that both authors have attained mutual acquaintance, es- teem, and collaboration. This article is the result of a common decision to dedicate some attention to the early stages of xiangqi. It is to be noted 2 that all direct selecting and first reading of the corresponding documents, published in the Chinese language, has been possible thanks to Ding, because Pratesi is not able to read this language. As a first decision, limits have been fixed in terms of time investi- gated and main sources used. The time limit set to this review is the beginning of the Southern Song Dynasty (1127-1279). Xiangqi was by then well established and practically the same game as its present form. Here the main attention has been dedicated to the previous stages of the game. Obviously, the later history of xiangqi has a great interest too, and also is increasingly better documented the more recent times are approached. However, the history of xiangqi in its initial times can be more easily connected with the history of chess in general, valid for the whole world. Another initial decision has been to use as a main source the book on the history of xiangqi written by Zhang Ruan, originally published in 1991. The relevance of this history had soon received due attention by one of the authors of this article. (2) Zhang Ruan is now a professor of old Chinese literature in Ningbo University, but has continued his studies on Chinese board games. In particular, his main work indicated above has been published again in 1998, (3) with a few corrections, and this second edition has been used for this review. Moreover, a book dedicated to xiangqi literary references (4) has been consulted, and a general reference work has been used when dealing with historical Chi- nese personages. (5) As for the numerous Western sources, Murray’s book (6) is universally acknowledged as the fundamental reference work for all chess history; unfortunately, its section for Far East Asia is the weakest one in the whole book. Remarkable reviews of the old Chinese references to board games had been previously published by Himly in several arti- cles, which recently have been collected and republished in book form. (7) A synthetic description with reasonable comments can be found in a more recent book, written by an author who is a historian by profession, at the University level. (8) A few pages by David Parlett in his major work on board games are at a similar level of a reasonable synthesis of the questions connected with the origins of chess. (9) Many other authors have published contributions to the discussion on the origin of xiangqi, and especially on the origin of chess in more general terms. One of the most interesting is that of Josten. (10) Other 3 useful contributions and discussions have been recently emerged thanks to the “Initiative Group Königstein”. (11) However, no universally accepted reconstruction does yet exist. There are various kinds suggested, which are indicated as particular “theories” in the following. The word theory will not be written in inverted commas later on; however, its meaning here is that of a work hypothesis instead of a real theory, ver- ified and accepted. Two key suggestions for the origin of xiangqi There are many theories about the origin and the early development of chess, and of xiangqi in particular. Many chess writers in the Western world have debated the topic, with a lot of different opinions. However, only very few of these authors were renowned experts of ancient Chi- nese history and literature! Unfortunately, no local tradition has been kept in China about the early stages of our game. The first quotations in the Chinese literature of a game that can surely be identified as a form of xiangqi only come from the 8th century AD. Earlier documents may refer to other games; in particular, due to the use of a different character for indicating this kind of board games, typically xi instead of qi, or simply with just qi – used without any further specification – for indicating any board game. Most of the early quotations for qi games are vague and the board game of liubo is first mentioned. Then we find weiqi as the game intended, even when it was not explicitly mentioned in full. For centuries weiqi remained the preferred game of the literati, also after that xiangqi had encountered the favor of common people. This may explain why there are several theories on the origin of various chess forms in China. Let us focus our attention on just a couple of these hypotheses, both suggesting that the very first form of chess was introduced in China and did not arrive there from India, as often assumed by Western experts. As for the particular event of chess birth, Joseph Needham (12) maintained that it was to be positioned exactly in the year 569 AD, with the introduction by Emperor Wu-Ti of a new kind of divination, in which the various pieces (the same that were to become chessmen later on, but which originally represented planets) were placed onto the board that just represented our Earth. Curiously enough, the date of this event is either too early or too late to agree with other references. On the one 4 hand, the document is centuries earlier than any other Chinese reference to xiangqi; on the other hand, it appears to be too late for allowing chess to transform into a game with its known military character and to spread toward the West in time to agree with the early Indian and Persian quotations. What is certain is that xiangqi (or a very similar Chinese game set) was indeed intended in the past both as a tool for divination and a tool for a pastime consisting in the simulation of a battle. The year 569 can thus be seen in two different ways. If we consider this date as relatively late for a chess quotation in China, we have to conclude that it marked a successive new utilization of already existing chessmen. This would however proceed in an unusual direction: historically, it was the inverse trend that occurred; namely, starting from a traditional method of divination, in the course of time a common game was slowly obtained. For instance, detailed evidence for this general process was collected and discussed by Culin, in a long research that started with tribes of Amer- ican natives and was extended to many populations of other places and times. (13) The second key theory has been advocated in great detail by David Li in his bulky book. (14) In this case, the origin suggested for xiangqi (which is here intended as that for any form of chess) is much earlier, many centuries before any explicit quotation in the old Chinese literature. In this case, however, the environment of the origin appears to be more appropriate to the known spirit of the game: it was General Han Xin, in the year 204 BC, to invent chess, in order to keep his troops occupied and trained during the winter, when real battles were not possible. (By the way, a rather similar theory of battles early simulated on a board − related to the first Han Emperor and the year 202 BC − had been independently proposed on the basis of another quotation in Need- ham’s fundamental work.) (15) Summary of other theories There are further possibilities. The question of the origin of chess has been discussed several times by Chinese literati, in various times. No generally accepted conclusion was found, and several different theories have been supported by various experts; in particular, Zhang Ruan listed seven different theories of xiangqi birth in his book, including the 5 two theories already mentioned, which happen to correspond to the two most recent dates. They can be summarized as follows. 1 - The inventor was Huangdi (Yellow Emperor), a legendary ruler ancestor of the Chinese nation, who approximately lived from 2800 to 2600 BC. One legend reports that he lived for 133 years. According to Chao Bozhi (1053-1110): “Xiang Xi was a game of war. When Huangqi was fighting against Chiyou (a rebellion legendary figure of remote an- tiquity), he lined up wild beasts in the front.

Load more