The genealogy of chess (Paperback)

~ (Author) "Producing a work about games in olden days required not only time and resourcefulness, but also courage - and even guile..." (more)
Key Phrases: maneuverability ratio, pieces representing foot soldiers, various playing pieces, Xiang Qi, Sun Tse's The Art of War, New York (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Review

David Li's book should be of interest to all people who like anything to do with chess history.

The author's brief is to put China fair and square as the birthplace of chess. To this end he has gone through, almost without exception, all authorities that have ever published material about the origin of chess. He is scathing in his criticism of those who have advocated India as origin, exposing the seemingly threadbare and misleading evidence on which this view has been based (Murray in particular is much criticised).

The layout of the book is first class. It is well written and is compelling reading. One can hardly put it down. The book is written with much passion, and will without doubt invoke much discussion. It is an important book, and I recommend it to readers. -- Variant Chess (UK) Spring 1998

From their appearance, Chinese and Western chesses seem similar yet different. Have you ever wondered if these two chess games are related? Which was invented first -- the Chinese or the Western chess? The Chinese Chess was first developed, the Western Chess followed. From there, the whole series of questions as to who? where? when? why? and how? arise. You can get all your answers from the newest book called "The Genealogy of Chess" by David H. Li, published in 1998. ...

The author did a superb job in explaining the historical accounts and the connection between the Chinese and Western chess games, and thereby proved beyond any doubt that chess was invented in China. He did a comprehensive study supported by 130 references in Western languages and 54 references in the Chinese language. -- Chinese American Forum (Missouri) April 1998

Product Description

A definitive study of the origin of chess -- that is, proto-chess. Part 1 of the book surveys the history of chess as written in western literature, beginning with Cessolis in the 13th century and continuing through 1996. Practically anyone who had ever written on the subject of "History of Chess" is covered -- over 30 in total. In Chapter 1 (Western Literature to 1694), in addition to Cessolis's Libel de Moribus Hominum, Thomas Hyde's De Ludis Orientalibus (1694) is treated with depth. Chapter 2 (1765-1801) covers Robert Lambe (The History of Chess, 1765), Daines Barrington (1789), William Jones (1790), Eyles Irwin (1793), Hiram Cox (1801), and James Christie (An Inquiry into the Antient Greek Game, 1801). Chapter 3 (1847-1870) covers N. Bland (1847), Duncan Forbes (The History of Chess, 1860), H. G. Hollingworth (1866), and Karl Himly (1869, 1870, et seq). Chapter 4 (1874-1899) covers Antonio van der Linde (Geschichte und Litteratur des Schachspiels, 1874; Quellenstudien zur Gerschichte des Schachspiels, 1881), Z. Voppicelli (1888), Brunet y Bellet (El Ajedrez: Investigaciones sobre Su Origen, 1890), Herman Jacobi (1896), A.A. Macdonell (1897 and 1899), F. W. Thomas (1898), and Ernst Windisch (1989). Chapter 5 (1st half of 20th century) covers Stewart Culin (1898), John G. White (1898), Willard Fiske (1900), H.J.R. Murray (A History of Chess, 1913), and Louis Gray (1913). Chapter 6, the last chapter in Part I, covers Joseph Needham (Science and Civilisation in China, 1962), Pavle Bidev (1951 et seq) A. S. M. Dickens (1973), Harry Golombek (Chess: a History, 1976), Isaak Linder (Chess in Old Russia, 1975), Hugh Myers (1984), Panduranga Bhatta (Origin and Genesis of Chess, 1982 and 1994), G. Ferlito and A. Sanvito (1990), Jurij Averbach (1996), Egbert Meissenburg (1996), and Manfred Eder (1996).

Part II presents the author's thesis that chess was invented in China. Chapter 7 covers antecedents to Chess in the Chinese environment, beginning with a 5-page discussion on the characteristics of chess, and exploring two Chinese games which served as chess's antecedents -- Weiqi (commonly referred to as "Go" in the west, invented in China circa 23rd century BCE), and Liubo (a chance-dictated game invented in China circa 16th century BCE but disappeared in 5th century CE). Chapter 8 explores the Who? When? and Where? of chess invention, giving the inventor as a Chinese general in 203 BCE. Chapter 9 explores the Why? and How? of chess invention, tracing the design of the playing board and the type of playing pieces to I-ching (the Book of Changes), the most ancient of Chinese classics/philosophy, the contents of which were alluded to by western chess historians such as Bidev (but unable to go far due to unfamiliarity with the Chinese language). Chapter 10 further discusse! s the invention process, tracing the number of playing pieces and their placement to Sun Tse's the Art of War, another Chinese classics on warfare which our inventor, an all-winning battlefield general, mastered. Chapter 11 gives experiments the general conducted (games he played with himself) to improve its playability in terms of guidelines he set for the game, while Chapter 12, the last chapter in Part II, gives the rules of the game after it has been refined by the inventor.

Part III traces the development and dissemination of the game since its invention. Chapter 13 gives its acceptance, dormancy, revival, and modifications in China in the next millennium, while Chapter 14 gives early game scores, including those in the literature, that played by a general who later became king, as well as a composition by another highly regarded general. Chapter 15 gives a comprehensive coverage of experiments, by Chinese nationals, that did not survive the test of time (size, form, number of playing pieces, 3-handed, 7-handed, etc.) Chapter 16 traces the dissemination of the game westward, first to Persia and then to India, via the famous Silk Road, beginning in the 2nd century BCE -- the chapter ends with an appendix comparing the Chinese game with the Persian games, including a medieval Shatranj composition. Chapter 17 traces the game's dissemination eastward, first to Korea (at one time a part of China) and then to Japan -- the cultural differences affec! ting the Chinese and Korean games (at one time the two were identical) are explored, and the development of Shogi from the Chinese game, along with a comparison of playing pieces are traced to ancient Japanese literature.

Chapter 18, the book's concluding chapter, further refutes two commonly held misconceptions on which the chess-was-invented-in-India thesis was based -- that China did not have elephants (there were bronz ceremonial vases with the likings of elephant in the 22nd century BCE in China), and chess was brought to China by Buddhist pilgrimmagers (journals kept by Yuan Zhuang, for his travels in India and back to China, 629-645, praised even by Indians for its value in preserving Indian history, was completely silent on this point).

The book includes an epilogue, a bibliography (showing some 130 references in western languages and some 50 references in Chinese), and an index.

A year after its publication, in 1999, the book was honored as the "1998 Book of the Year" by a chess periodical.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 383 pages
• Publisher: Premier Pub. Co (1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0963785222
• ISBN-13: 978-0963785220
• Product Dimensions: 8.9 x 6 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.8 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,274,931 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

16 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A New Player Shakes Up the Chess-History Game, June 25, 2002

By	Jeffrey A. Tannenbaum (New York, NY United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

As many an enthusiast knows, or thinks he knows, modern chess is a direct descendant of a game played in India about 1,400 years ago. Many junkies will be too busy playing to worry much about the game's roots, but others surely will be fascinated by David Li's finding--or contention--that those roots actually can be traced back an additional thousand years.
In "The Genealogy of Chess," Mr. Li exposes serious flaws in much of the prevailing research on the origins of chess, a game played worldwide for centuries but still largely a mystery in many ways. And he builds an intriguing case that traces the game's ancestry to a Chinese army commander named Han Xin, born about three centuries before Christ.
Talmudic in tone and filled with footnotes, Mr. Li's work invites--indeed, cries out for--close scrutiny by open-minded scholars. I'm not sure I agree with Mr. Li that past researchers have sometimes had "an agenda"--that is, a hidden agenda beyond their ostensible mission of getting the story straight. But he also argues, somewhat more persuasively, that past researchers have often lacked the foreign-language skills and other assets needed to do their job right.
I'm not in any position to confirm or refute Mr. Li's work, but I enjoyed learning about the complications of chess historiography.

17 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Good Overview of Chess Historiography, January 8, 2000

By	George R Dekle "Bob Dekle" (Lake City, FL United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

Li gives an exhaustive study of seemingly all authors who have ever written on the origin of chess. His critiques are comprehensive, but a little too dismissive of the scholarship of others. He gives a thought provoking analysis and makes a good argument for chess as a descendant of an ancestral version of Xiang Qi, the modern Chinese game. He's a little too skeptical of authorities positing an Indian origin for chess and a little too accepting of authorities finding a Chinese origin of chess. His greatest false step is his argument that chess migrated from China to Persia, skipping India. He cites to no historical documents supporting this contention and ignores the Persian tradition that they got chess from India. The best section of the book is his comprehensive description of ancient Xiang Qi variants. Li's argument doesn't quite carry the day in proving a Chinese origin for chess, but it does cause one to be more accepting of the idea. Both chess and Xiang Qi descended from a common ancestor, but whether that ancestor was an Indian or a Chinese game will probably never be conclusively settled.

6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Possibly has merit, but incredibly biased and arrogant., October 10, 2006

By	Prometheus - See all my reviews

This book has to be the worst written book I've ever read on any subject - not in terms of the author's writing skill, but in terms of the fact that he seems unable to discuss the issue with any level of dispassion. The author may have a very strong case, but it's impossible to tell given the fact that he seems more interested in deriding the work of other chess historians and his critics. Clearly the Chinese claim to the invention of chess should be studied seriously and fairly, but Mr. Li is surely the worst person to bring such studies to the general public. He appears arrogant in the extreme, biased and prone to emotive and emotional language. He might have a great case, but this book will surely turn away readers who become offended by the very tone of the book before the author gets down to any specifics. I would like to see a more logical and scientific approach based on actual first-hand evidence, rather than Mr. Li's appalling and disrespectful hack-job.

As to what the book should be about, I'm very interested in finding out whether Mr. Li's assertions have merit, but I find it impossible to do so given the book's apparent unwillingness to cite any sources or to use standard methods of proof. Mr. Li seems to think that the weight of his outrage shgould carry the reader along to his conclusions. I'm sorry Mr. Li, but that's not how history works. I'm very willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I fear I'll have to do my own research to prove your case.