Lasker's Manual of Chess

Lasker’s

Manual of Chess

by

Emanuel Lasker

Foreword by

Mark Dvoretsky

2010

Russell Enterprises, Inc.

Milford, CT USA

Lasker’s Manual of Chess

© Copyright 2008, 2010

Russell Enterprises, Inc.

First Printing 2008

Second Printing 2010

All Rights Reserved. No part of this book may be used, reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any manner or form whatsoever or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the express written permission from the publisher except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews.

ISBN: 978-1-888690-50-7

Published by:

Russell Enterprises, Inc.

PO Box 5460

Milford, CT 06460 USA

http://www.Russell-Enterprises.com

info@Russell-Enterprises.com

Cover design by Zygmunt Nasiolkowski and Janel Lowrance

Editing and Proofreading: Taylor Kingston, David Kaufmann,

Hanon Russell

Production: Mark Donlan

Printed in the United States of America

Table of Contents

Foreword

Editor’s Preface

Dr. Lasker’s Tournament Record

Dr. Lasker’s Match Record

Preface to the Original German Edition

Book I: The Elements of Chess

Book II: The Theory of the Openings

Book III. The Combination

Book IV: Position Play

Book V: The Aesthetic Effect in Chess

Book VI: Examples and Models

Final Reflections

Analytical Endnotes

Index of Players

Index of Openings

Analytical Contents

First Book

The Elements of Chess

Brief Account of the Origin of the Game

The Chess Board

The Pieces

The Rules for Moving:

a.  the King

b.  the Rook

c.  the Bishop

d.  the Queen

e.  the Knight

f.  the Pawn

Castling

Capturing "en passant"

Pawn Promotion

The Initial Position

Chess Notation

The End of the Game: Mate, Stalemate, Draw

The Function of strategy

On the Advantages of a Plus in Pieces

First Proposition: the Plus of a Rook Suffices to Win the Game

Rook and King vs. King

The Opposition

Zugzwang, or Constraint to Move

Second Proposition: King and Bishop or King and Knight against Bare King make a Drawn Game

Third Proposition: King and Two minor Pieces against Bare King Force Checkmate unless both Minor Pieces are Knights

Major Pieces

Minor Pieces

Illustrations of Propositions Two and Three

Fourth Proposition: the Plus of a Pawn does not always Suffice to Force the Win, but in the Majority of Cases it Does

Illustrations of Proposition Four

Passed Pawn Defined

Square of the Passed Pawn Defined

Peculiarities of the Rook’s Pawn

On the Advantage of the Attack against an Unprotected King

Smothered Mate

Double Check Illustrated

On the Advantage brought about by a Simultaneous Attack upon Several Objects

Interposing Illustrated

Queening Illustrated

Pinning Illustrated

The Fork

The Discovered Check

Illusory Pins

On the Use of Superior Power at Decisive Points

Rule for Determining Which Side has Advantage on a Given Spot

How the Value of the Pieces Affects the Use of Superior Power

Complications Arising through Simultaneous Contending at Various Points

How the Pin Affects the Use of Superior Power

On the Exchange Value of the Pieces

Winning the Exchange

Importance of the Right to Move Illustrated

Pawn Promotion Showing Case where Under-promoted Pawn is Stronger than Queen, Rook and Knight Combined

Rook vs. Bishop and Pawn

Queen vs. Two Rooks

Queen vs. Rook

Second Book

The Theory of the Openings

Some General Principles and a Little History

The Petroff Defense or Russian Game

The Hungarian Defense

Philidor’s Defense

a.  Hanham Variation

The Two Knights’ Defense

The Center Game and Center Gambit

King’s Bishop’s Opening

Max Lange Attack

The Ponziani Opening

The Vienna Opening

The Scotch Opening

The Scotch Gambit

The King’s Gambit

a.  the Kieseritzky

b.  the Allgaier

c.  the Defense of Philidor

d.  the Chigorin Attack

e.  the Salvio

f.  the Muzio

The Cunningham Gambit

The King’s Bishop’s Gambit

The King’s Gambit Declined

The Falkbeer Countergambit

The Danish Gambit

Giuoco Piano or Italian Opening

a.  the Moeller Attack

The Evans Gambit

a.  Declined

b.  Accepted

Four Knights’ Game

Ruy Lopez (or Spanish Game)

a.  Steinitz Defense

b.  Schliemann’s Defense

c.  Berlin Defense

d.  Morphy Defense

e.  Breslau Variation

g.  Exchange Variation

The Half-Open Games

a.  the Nimzovitch Defense

b.  the Fianchetti

i.  Fianchetto of the King

ii.  Fianchetto of the Queen

c.  Alekhine’s Defense

d.  From’s Gambit

e.  the Caro-Kann Defense

f.  the Center Counter (or Scandinavian) Defense

g.  the Sicilian Defense

i.  the Wing Gambit

h.  the French Defense

The English Opening (or Reverse Sicilian

The Close Openings

The Queen’s Gambit

a.  Accepted

b.  Declined

Other Queen Pawn Games

Zukertort or Réti Opening

A Summary of Useful Principles in the Opening

Value of the Pieces in the Opening

Third Book

The Combination

Variation, Definition of

Simple Combinations Illustrated

Capablanca-Yates

Combination Involving a Stalemate

Combination Involving a Smothered Mate

Paulsen-Morphy

The Combination, What It Is and How Carried Out in Practical Play

Various Motifs in Combinations

Motif of the Weakness of a Piece of little or no Mobility

A Faulty Opening in which a Bishop is Deprived of all Mobility

The Geometrical Motif

Motif of Encircling the King

Obstruction of Rook by a Bishop or vice versa

Endings by Troitzky

Obstructing or Pinning an Obstruction Illustrated

Post-Kagan

Ending by L. Kubbel

Motif of Indirect Support Illustrated

Motif Illustrating Passed Pawn Supporting Distant Pieces or Pawns (i.e., Motif of Function

Another Function Motif Illustrated

Steinitz-Hirschfeld

Löwenthal-Mayet

Steinitz-Chigorin

Alekhine-Kubmann

Steinitz-Meitner

Bergen-Schmid

The Motif of Desperado

Forgács-Duras

v. Popiel-Marco

v. Oppen-NN

Tarrasch-Em. Lasker

Bogolyubov, Réti and Spielmann vs. Englund, Jacobson, Nyholm and Olson

Ending by Troitzky (Queen and Bishop vs. Queen)

Intentions in Combinations Make Players Reckon with Them

Threat in an Intended Combination

Tarrasch-Burn

Tartakower-Capablanca

John-Süchting

Prevalent Types of Combinations

Morphy-Baucher

de Rivière-Morphy

Steinitz-Amateur

Em. Lasker-Bauer

Steneberg-Bolte

Motif of Tearing Away Safeguards of Hostile King Illustrated

Steinitz-NN

Boden-Owen

Albin-Steinitz

Kolisch-Paulsen

Typical Attack on Pinned Knight

Typical Defense to Heavy Attacks against King

Zukertort-Steinitz

Em. Lasker-Ed. Lasker

Tartakower-Alekhine

Bird-Steinitz

Schlechter-Salwe

Chigorin-Steinitz

Lasker-Janowski

Steinitz-Lasker

Capablanca-Molina

Caldas Vianna-Silvestre

Bernstein–Znosko-Borovsky

Steinitz-v. Bardeleben

Schiffers-Chigorin

Schiffers-Harmonist

Nimzovitch-Flues

Reggio-Mieses

Przepiorka-W. Cohn

v. Freymann-Forgács

Rubinstein-Em. Lasker

Esser-Davidson

Mackenzie-Blackburne

Tartakower-Em. Lasker

Rubinstein-Spielmann

Zugzwang and Stalemate

Ending by Troitzky

King and Pawn ending Illustrating Losing of a Move

Ending by Weenink

Opposition Illustrated in Ending of King and Pawns

Schelfhout-Muurlink

Ending by Em. Lasker after an Idea of v. Gottschall

Ending by Troitzky

The Promotion of the Pawn

Lindehn-Bergh

Dufresne-Harrwitz

Maróczy-Tarrasch

Hallgarten-Dimer

Ending from Chess Player’s Chronicle

Endings by Leonid Kubbel

Chigorin-Tarrasch

Thomas-Marshall

Ending by Réti

Illustration of the Pawn Break-through

Tarrasch-Em. Lasker

Em. Lasker-Janowski

On Made-up Combinations and on Combinations Arising in the Course of a Hard-fought Game

Fourth Book

Position Play

Position Play as Opposed to Combination Play

The Plan

Plans vs. Ideas

Examples

Metger-Paulsen

Rook and Pawn vs. Bishop and Pawn

Queen vs. Rook and Pawn (Philidor

Forgács-Spielmann

Forgács-E. Cohn

Perlis-Salwe

Vidmar-Spielmann

MacDonnell-Lewis

Marshall-Capablanca

Nimzovitch-Capablanca

Kaufmann and Fahndrich vs. Capablanca

Janowski-Capablanca

The History of Planning in Chess

hilidor on PlanniPhilidor on Planning

Rook and Pawn vs. Rook (Philidor

Rook and Bishop vs. Rook (Philidor

Count Brühl-Phildor

L’ Analyse (Philidor

La Bourdonnais on Planning

La Bourdonnais-McDonnell

Philidor, La Bourdonnais, McDonnell, Staunton, Anderssen, Morphy, Steinitz

The Theory of Steinitz

Steinitz as Analyst

Steinitz, Master of Strategy, Compared with Zukertort

Genius of Combinations

Youth of Steinitz

Hamppe-Steinitz

Anderssen-Steinitz

Steinitz-Green

Steinitz-Mongredien

The Evolution of the Theory of Steinitz

MacDonnell-Boden

Stubbornness of Steinitz

Steinitz and Potter

Anderssen-Steinitz

The Lasting Advantages

a.  Phalanx

b.  Doubled Pawn

c.  Backward Pawn

d.  Blocked Pawn

e.  Isolated Pawns

f.  Blocked Isolated Pawn

g.  the Hole

Zukertort-NN

Bird-Steinitz

Steinitz’s Maxims for Practical Play

Examples of Steinitz’s Play

Steinitz-Sellmann

Zukertort-Steinitz

Steinitz-Zukertort

Negligent Analysis of Games (Bachmann and Schallop on Steinitz-Zukertort

Zukertort-Steinitz

Zukertort-Steinitz

Zukertort-Steinitz

Steinitz Advances his Theory beyond the Needs of Practical Chess and thus Enters the Domain of Science and Philosophy

Balance of Position in Chess

Compensation in Chess

Principle of Attack

Weaknesses and Weak Points as Objectives of Attack

Examples of the Principle of Attack

Mackenzie-Amateur

Salwe-Marshall

Capablanca-Tartakower

Morphy-Anderssen

Teichmann-Bernstein

Berlin-Riga

Duras-E. Cohn

Anderssen-Morphy

Tarrasch-Schlechter

Principle of Defense

Examples of the Principle of Defense

Morphy-Anderssen

Steinitz-Golmayo

Steinitz-Chigorin

Ponce and Chigorin vs. Gavilan and Steinitz

Chigorin-Steinitz

The Declining Years of Steinitz

Steinitz and Dr. Emanuel Lasker

Criticism of and Additions to Steinitz’s Theory

Principle of Cooperation of Pieces

Pawns are Best in the Phalanx

Remarks on the Bishop and Knight

Examples of Co-operation

a.  Queen vs. Bishop and Knight

b.  Bishops of Opposite Colors

c.  Queen vs. Two Knights

The Principle of Justice

Examples of the Principle of Justice

a  Rook and Passed Pawn

b.  King and Pawn vs. Rook

c.  Knight and Pawn

d.  King and Pawn

Aim of Dr. Lasker in Regard to his Pupils

Antagonism of Pieces

Die Blockade (Nimzovitch

Endings of Bishops of Same Color

Distance

Bishop vs. Pawns

Rook vs. Bishop and Pawns

The Value of Points (Weak, Strong, Important, Essential)

Rubinstein-Salwe

Duras-Rubinstein

Attack and Defense in Balanced Positions

The Sacrifice for Position

La Bourdonnais-McDonnell

Pillsbury-Em. Lasker

The Principle of Proportion

Philosophy of Dr. Lasker and the Doctor as an Author

Struggle

Das Begreifen der Welt (Comprehending the World

Die Philosophie des Unvollendbar (The Philosophy of the Unattainable

Hyper-modern School

Examples of the Principle of Proportion

Te Kolste-Torre

Réti-Colle

Te Kolste-Réti

An Enquiry into the Logical Origin and Domain of Application of Steinitz’s Theory

Adequate Compensation for a Pawn Sacrifice Discussed

Fifth Book

The Aesthetic Effect in Chess

Two-Move Problem by Paul Morphy

Anderssen-Kieseritzky (the Immortal Game

Examples of the Aesthetic Effect in Chess

Ending by Comte de Villeneuf

Humorous Ending by an Unknown Author

Ending from Ancient Persian Document

Three-Move Problem by Sam Loyd

Anderssen-Dufresne (Critical Position from the Evergreen Partie

Mason-Winawer

Pillsbury-Em. Lasker

Zukertort-Blackburne

Réti-Bogolyubov

Rubinstein-Teichmann

Bogolyubov-Amateur

List-Hromadka

Endings by Troitzky

Ending by Ratner

Endings by Leonid Kubbel

Endings by Henri Rinck

Sixth Book

Examples and Models

Berger-Gaspary

Tarrasch-Pillsbury

Burn - Znosko-Borovsky

Janowski-Em. Lasker

Schlechter-Süchting

Capablanca-Marshall

Tartakower-Seitz

Coria-Boneo

Dus-Chotimirsky–Capablanca

Bogolyubov-Romanovsky

Tartakower-Mieses

Bogolyubov-Réti

Torre-Yates

Sämisch-Spielmann

Alekhine-Marshall

Nimzovitch-Bogolyubov

Réti-Alekhine

Thomas-Rubinstein

Alekhine-Colle

Bogolyubov-Mieses

Bogolyubov-Réti

Romanovsky-Rabinovich

Morrison-Watts

Torre-Grünfeld

Rubinstein-Chwojnik

Capablanca-Alekhine

Alekhine-Capablanca

Euwe-Bogolyubov

Final Reflections on Education in Chess

Estimated Time Required to Become a First-class Player

On the Future of the Theory of Steinitz

Analytical Endnotes

Index of Players and Composers

List of Other eBooks

Foreword

Can studying the classics be helpful? That depends. Many books that were popular in their day have grown dated, and are now of interest only to lovers of chess history. But Lasker’s Manual of Chess, written by Emanuel Lasker, has not lost its relevance even now, some eighty years after it was first published.

In one of my own books, I analyzed the famous fourth game of the Tarrasch-Lasker match, and examined the desperado theme – that is, a piece which, compelled by circumstance, displays a powerful urge for self-immolation – which was first introduced in that book. While preparing the English edition, I was told that that English language chess literature treats the concept of desperado slightly differently. I went back to the source of this concept, Lasker’s Manual of Chess, where I had first found this idea. And there I discovered that Lasker had not only invented the term, he had isolated and illustrated, by appropriate examples, three possible reasons why a piece might become a desperado. One of them applied to the previously mentioned game against Tarrasch. English-language authors, however, use this term for a different situation, which was only one of the three! As it turns out, this useful idea for practical players is, if not forgotten, then at least understood only in a simplified form.

I could also bring up other important ideas which were worked out in Lasker’s Manual of Chess, but which have been only dimly reflected in contemporary chess literature, such as his conception of how to defend. But such things are not the the chief value of this notable book by the second world champion. That lies in something more general, more universal.

Being constantly in contact with talented chessplayers of varying levels, I have become convinced that only a few of them are able to find on their own the proper responses to general questions that interest them. Why do they constantly make the same errors over and over again? What are the strong and weak points of their game? What habits and techniques should they develop in themselves? What approach should they take to this or that particular chess problem, and where can they find the appropriate study materials, etc., etc. And if they do find answers to these questions, then more often than not, they turn out to be the wrong answers. The overwhelming majority of them naively believe that the key to their success lies in opening preparation, the endless honing of their opening repertoire.

Very few contemporary books help you work out a true chess philosophy; some even disorient their readers. But Lasker’s Manual of Chess is philosophical to its core. It helps you examine different kinds of problems in the most varied positions and it is exceptionally important, both for practical players and for trainers. Many times I have re-read, with great pleasure and great benefit to myself, those portions of the book dedicated to combinations, positional play (here we find accurately laid out the vital principles of the theory of Steinitz, which form the basis of contemporary chess), and chess aesthetics.

The thoughts expressed in his concluding On Education in Chess still resonate today. Here are a few of them:

Education in chess has to be an education in independent thinking and judging. Chess must not be memorized, simply because it is not important enough. If you load your memory, you should know why ... You should keep in mind no names, nor numbers, nor isolated incidents, not even results, but only methods ... He who wants to educate himself in chess must evade what is dead in chess – artificial theories, supported by few instances and upheld by an excess of human wit; the habit of playing with inferior opponents; the custom of avoiding difficult tasks; the weakness of uncritically taking over variations or rules discovered by others; the vanity which is self-sufficient; the incapacity for admitting mistakes; in brief, everything that leads to a standstill or to anarchy.

Throughout the course of my trainer’s work, I have followed this advice; never have I regretted it. Of course, there is a well-known Russian proverb that goes, For every bit of good advice, you need ten more bits to tell you how to carry it out. Thus, Lasker’s ideas, in complete accordance with his philosophy, are not a dried-up end-product, but merely an excellent starting point for working out your own way in chess.

Lasker was both a great fighter and a deep thinker. His book forms the quintessence of many years of exceptionally successful experience, and his thoughts on the same. It teaches you what he considers to be most important, general principles and methods applicable to any situation. Once you have read the Manual, you will become wiser, which is bound to help you later on, both in chess and in life.

Mark Dvoretsky

Moscow

September 2008

Editor’s Preface

Among the many important figures in the history of chess, Emanuel Lasker (1868-1941) stands unique. He had the longest official reign as World Champion, just short of 27 years: May 26, 1894 to April 21, 1921. In his prime (and he had a very long prime) he dominated chess more thoroughly than any other player before or since, winning 12 of 14 tournaments 1892-1924 (placing 2nd and 3rd in the other two), and winning 20 of 21 matches 1889-1916 (the other was drawn). Only Morphy had a higher winning percentage in serious play, but Lasker played many more games against tougher opponents.

Lasker’s chess achievements were great, but they become even more impressive when one considers that, in a very real sense, he played chess just in his spare time. Unlike many masters of his era — Pillsbury, Marshall, Rubinstein, Spielmann and Alekhine are some that come to mind — and even less like today’s chess professionals, Lasker was not obsessed with and focused solely on the game; his wide-ranging intellect had many other interests: mathematics (in which he held a doctorate), philosophy, sociology, history, drama etc. As a polymath, probably no other chess master in history compares.

One can’t help but wonder, then, how could Lasker be so good at chess — a game which for most of us requires deep study and laborious accumulation of knowledge just to rise much above mediocre — while doing it with just one hand, so to speak?

Much of the answer to that question lies, I believe, between the covers of this book. Yes, Lasker had inborn talent, a mental capacity well beyond the norm, ability most of us can only admire and envy. But more importantly, Lasker understood chess more deeply than anyone before him, and more deeply than almost anyone since. And that understanding is something that can be passed on, it is something you can attain. In this book he conveys to you much of that understanding, in a clear, logical, systematic way. If you can absorb even a fraction of that understanding, you will become a much stronger chess player, and a better, clearer thinker in general.

Concerning the book’s instructive value, the experienced teacher Mark Dvoretsky, who wrote this edition’s foreword, is much better qualified to comment than I, but looking at it from the less lofty perch of a club player, several noteworthy themes struck me:

Lasker’s outstanding discussion of the theory of Steinitz. Our modern understanding of chess owes as much to Steinitz as, say, biology owes to Darwin or physics to Newton, but Steinitz himself, Lasker’s predecessor as world champion, did not outline his ideas in a systematic way. Lasker did.

The importance of compensation for material. Inexperienced players often are too materialistic, afraid to part with even a pawn. Time and again Lasker shows how in chess matter can be converted into energy, how positional and tactical compensation more than repay the investment of a pawn or piece.

The importance of targets. Lasker teaches how to see the weak points in the opponent’s position, and how to attack them.

Lasker’s descriptions of combinative vs. positional play, and how in the best players these somewhat discordant tendencies become a harmony.

The principle of proportion. In this connection, his debunking of Réti’s inflated claims for hypermodernism is by itself worth the price of the book.

Our aim here has been to produce a version of this classic in a form more congenial to 21st-century readers. What is different in this edition? The English version of the Manual had remained, even through numerous reprints, virtually unchanged since 1932. In this new edition we use figurine algebraic notation, now standard throughout most of the world, instead of descriptive notation. The chapter on descriptive has been replaced with one explaining algebraic. Some of Lasker’s more awkward or archaic wordings and grammar — English was not his first language — have been improved or modernized, though recalling Fischer’s fury at Batsford’s revisions of My 60 Memorable Games, I have done this sparingly. Besides more diagrams (the old edition was woefully stingy with them), the main additional features here are:

Photos of Lasker and some of his major contemporaries.

Lasker Lore, brief notes highlighting important events in his career, and portraying something of the man and his era.

Computer-checked analysis. Virtually every move and position has been subjected to computer analysis. Even with so fine a chess mind as Lasker’s, the occasional mistake or improvement was found. For minor items, I have added brief comments in italics directly in the text. However, sometimes the new analysis required longer discussion, and sometimes even warranted revision of Lasker’s original text. To minimize disruptions, such notes have all been placed in an appendix, indicated by superscripted numbers (e.g. 44.Bb5 Resigns.⁵²) in the text. In cases where the original text was changed, the endnote shows Lasker’s original analysis, and gives the reasons it was modified. In cases where the original text was left intact, the endnote gives a correction or improvement.

To be frank, not everything in the Manual excites my enthusiasm equally. Lasker’s attempt to find social and political applications for Steinitz’s chess ideas seems far-fetched, and his prediction that his own philosophical writings, now little read, would become the basis for an advanced future society shows no signs of coming true. His prose style is occasionally stodgy or flowery. The book’s discussion of chess openings is of less value now than when it first appeared, because of the exponential increase of knowledge in that area, though it still provides a very good introduction for beginners, for whom the book was intended.

But these flaws are minor compared to the value of Lasker’s teachings. You have in your hands one of the finest books ever written on the art and science of chess. Read it, learn, and enjoy.

Taylor Kingston

Shelburne, Vermont

Dr. Lasker’s Tournament Record

Dr. Lasker’s Match Record

Preface to the Original German Edition

This manual has aimed at system, at giving its object a structure. Is it not the first book of instruction written to represent the object of which it treats in the same way as an architect would try to erect a building? Ordinarily, books of instruction are written with an eye on the student, the student’s wants, views, talents — in short, the student’s psychology, but not with the idea of showing the subject to be taught as a piece of architecture, as a harmonious unit, as a thing that has spiritual beauty in the way its parts are linked together so as to imbue the whole with one meaning. Ordinarily, therefore, books of instruction have no system: they merely put fragments by the side of other fragments; to change the order of these fragments, say in a book of mathematics or law, would do little or no harm. Not so in this manual, unless my purpose has been defeated; there is a sufficient motive for every one of its parts, sometimes for every word, to stand where it stands, to read as it reads.

In a future, not far distant, mankind, I am convinced, will be very parsimonious with things of real value: with his work, with his time, with the substance that he offers to his mind. The man of this future will require that everything brought to his attention for him to retain in his mind should show a systematic structure. Of the books of instruction of the present day none will see that future.

What connects the parts of this manual is the idea of chess, by which I mean that force of mentality inherent in the game which has nourished it with the power of appealing to many people and to many generations, so as to enable it to live through many centuries and to spread and to prosper. This idea is itself a structure of noble design. As if it were a valuable work of art buried among debris, it has here been searched for and laboriously unearthed and brought to light by reviewing the history and reason and the life of the game. This idea is the idea of struggle, also of your struggle.

Emanuel Lasker

Thyrow, October 1925

First Book

The Elements of Chess

The game of chess has a history that at all times has awakened interest but of which very little is known. We know some fables treating of the origin of the game, fables that are true to history only in so far as they lay the place of origin in Asia and the time of origin in a very distant past. Games similar to chess have been discovered on Egyptian sculptures. Written documents, a thousand years old, referring to chess, have been found. The game of chess of those days was not, however, the game that we now know. No doubt, chess has undergone many changes and who knows whether draughts (checkers), or, more precisely, a game related to draughts, was not a forefather of our chess.

The European career of chess began a thousand years ago. At that time it was an admired favorite in Spain, the game of the noble and the learned. In feudal castles and at the courts of princes it was cultivated; it was praised in artistic poems. For centuries it remained the aristocratic, noble, royal game, accessible only to a refined taste. Later, it penetrated through Italy and France, and at last it found a home wherever carried by chess-playing peoples.

Chess, as pointed out, has changed, but in its attire, in its forms only, by no means in its essence, its idea. That has remained unchanged all through the many centuries of its life. To discover this idea is therefore not difficult: at all times chess has had the will, the intent, the meaning of picturing a war between two parties: a war of extinction, conducted according to rules, laws, in a cultured manner, yet without clemency. This becomes evident from the rules of the game almost at first sight.

The Chessboard

The most ancient and most enduring feature of chess is certainly the board, the table upon which it is played, the field of the chess struggle. In consists of 64 parts, every one a small square, in their totality composing a large square. In eight rows and, perpendicularly thereto, in eight lines the 64 squares are ordered. Consequently one can draw a chessboard by halving the side of a big square three times in succession, as shown by these diagrams:

The Square

After Halving

After Halving a Second Time

After Halving the Third and Last Time

The technical process of producing a chessboard is therefore very simple, and the conception, logical; neither is understanding the board complicated. The perception of the 64 squares by the eye is not so easy, but it has been facilitated by the use of color. The squares are alternately colored black and white, so that from time immemorial the chessboard looks as follows:

It is of importance that the student of chess should know the board very accurately; he should be able to visualize each square in its individual position as well as in its relations to its neighboring squares. For this reason the board has been divided into three regions: the middle and the two wings. The left wing is composed of the first and second line to the left, the right wing in the same way by the two extreme lines on the right hand, and the middle is formed by the four remaining lines, the third, fourth, fifth and sixth. (D)

In the center of this middle, four squares are situated, which form the intersection of the fourth and fifth ranks with the fourth and fifth files. These four squares in the center of the board have, for strategic purposes, the greatest significance. [About which more later — ed.]

To describe the events on the chessboard exactly, a name has been given to every one of the 64 squares; formerly a descriptive name, but today, when the science of nature and of mathematics has become so prominent, a mathematical name. This mathematical name reminds us of a system of coordinates in the manner introduced by Descartes. Accordingly, the eight files, running upwards, are successively designated by the letters a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, and the eight ranks, running from left to right, are successively designated by the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, thusly:

The a-file, b-file, etc. is each therefore a certain file; the first rank, second rank, etc. each a certain rank. Since each square belongs to one file and to one rank only, it is unambiguously designated by its file and rank. For instance, b5 is that one square on the b-file that belongs to the fifth rank. According to custom the letter precedes the number; one writes b5, never 5b. Thus this notation has the advantage of naming each square without ambiguity.

In the mathematical notation, the division of the board described above would read as follows: the left wing the a- and b-files, the right wing the g- and h-files, the middle the c-, d-, e-, and f-files, the center the squares d4, d5, e4, e5. The boundary of the board is formed by the a-file, the h-file, the first rank, the eighth rank The corners are a1, a8, h1, h8.

The student should endeavor to acquire the habit of designating the squares and of visualizing their position. There are many chessplayers who fail merely from their incapacity to master this geometrical task, not suspecting its value.

The Pieces

The armies combating each other on the board consist of black and white pieces. The white pieces form the one side, the black pieces the opposing side. The two sides are briefly called White and Black. The coloring of a piece therefore determines its obedience and fidelity, unconditionally. A piece never deserts to the enemy, nor does it ever rebel; it is faithful unto death. True, if it falls in the combat, it wanders from the board merely into a box where the captured pieces are kept until the next game; then it celebrates a merry and hopeful resurrection.

White and Black have equal forces. Each has a king, a queen, two rooks, two bishops, two knights, and eight pawns. Either party, therefore, counts sixteen pieces. The pieces stand on the board until they are captured, each piece on one square, no two pieces on the same square. At the start of the game the pieces are placed in a determined position shown hereafter, and then they are moved, the players moving alternately. Thus a struggle of the chess pieces takes place according to determinate rules, until one side’s king is captured by force or the contestants agree to a draw.

The pieces are usually made of carved wood or molded plastic. The king has the appearance of a crowned monarch, the queen bears a smaller crown, the rooks suggest sturdy castles, the bishops have a characteristic miter head dress, the knights show a horse’s head, and the pawn is like a person without distinction, a face in the crowd, a common soldier.

The move consists in transferring a piece from one square to another. White moves a white piece, Black a black one. Sometimes two pieces are thus put into motion, namely, when a hostile piece is captured, i.e., removed from the board, or in castling, or in queening a pawn, terms which will be explained later. All of this is executed according to fixed rules which the player is constrained to obey.

The Rules for Moving

The king moves from its square to a neighboring square:

The rook on its rank or file:

The bishop moves diagonally:

The queen may move like a rook or a bishop:

The knight jumps in making the shortest move that is not a straight one:

And the pawn moves one square straight ahead:

But such moves are permitted only if the square upon which the piece lands is empty or occupied by a hostile piece. Moreover, the rook, bishop and queen are obstructed in their motion as soon as they strike an occupied square. Thus, a bishop on c1 may go to any square in the diagonal d2, e3, f4, g5, h6:

unless one of these squares is occupied; for example if e3 is occupied, then f4, g5, and h6 are obstructed and the bishop may not be moved there:

However, a knight is not so obstructed — it may leap over an intervening man of either color:

Thus in the above position the knight on g1 may move to f3 or h3, and the knight on g8 to e7, f6 or h6.

The rook, bishop, queen, king or knight can capture an obstruction, provided it is a hostile piece, by putting the moving piece on the square occupied by the obstruction and removing the latter into the box. The pawn, however, captures not in that way, but with a diagonal move forward to a neighboring square: (D)

Thus the white pawn on b4 could capture a hostile man on a5 or c5, while the black pawn on c5 could do the same to one on e4 or g4.

All pieces are subject to capture except the king. Its life is sacred, the player must defend it, it perishes only when no possible resource can save it from capture. Whenever that occurs the game is at an end; the player who cannot save his king from capture is checkmated and loses the game.

These rules are not complete, besides they are too brief so that the reader cannot be expected to obtain a clear conception through them, but they serve as an initial step in that they produce a vivid impression of the chess struggle. We shall now consider them in detail and at length in order to illuminate the various logical consequences that come thereby into play.

The King

The king may move from the square it occupies to any square satisfying the following conditions:

A neighbor to the square it occupies.

Not occupied by a man of its own color.

Not menaced by any hostile piece.

Once during the game the king may violate the first of these rules, namely, in castling, otherwise never. In castling, the king is moved two squares to the right or left, as the case may be, and the rook towards which the king has moved is then placed upon the square which the king jumped over. But this move