The History of Chess. H. J. R. Murray
approval or practice of chess. The great master and historian aṣ-Ṣūlī gave these traditions in text (matn) and chain of authority (‘isnād), and the MSS. AH and C have preserved his work for us. I shall make use of his traditions in this chapter. They contain the germs of the conditions which ash-Shāfi‘ī finally laid down as defining the lawfulness of play. These were four in number, the game must not be played for a stake, and no money must be paid in connexion with the game, the game must in no way be allowed to interfere with the regular performance of prayer or other religious duty, the player must refrain from angry and improper language, and the game must not be played in the street or other public place. It is obvious that these conditions are not compelled by any inherent quality in chess, but are due to the weakness and depravity of human nature. This is b. Sukaikir’s contention, that there is nothing wrong in the game itself, but only in the circumstances of play. He claims, therefore, that common-sense ought to justify the game, while he reluctantly admits that the general consensus of legal opinion is hostile.12
If we omit a very doubtful tradition that ascribes the story given below in connexion with the caliph ‘Alī to the first caliph Abū-Bakr (D. 13/634), the first traditions that connect a caliph with the game relate to ‘Omar b. al-Khaṭṭāb, the father-in-law of Muḥammad (D. 23/643). A widely recorded tradition tells how he was once asked as to the legal status of chess. ‘What is chess?’ asked the caliph. He was told that there was once a queen whose son was slain in battle. His comrades hesitated to tell her the news, and when she asked how the battle had gone, they invented chess and showed it to her. By means of the explanation they conveyed the news of the prince’s death.13 ‘Omar listened to the tale, and then replied: ‘There is nothing wrong in it; it has to do with war.’ The fact that ‘Omar once greeted Hilāl b. Khasīb, a maula (dependent, client) of Sulaiman b. Yasbār (D. 107/725), the great tābi‘of Medina,14 while he was engaged in chess is handed down in a tradition with particularly good’isnad.15
The caliph ‘Alī b. Abū Tālib (D. 40/660), the son-in-law of Muḥammad, is connected with the following story, the genuine nature of which was allowed by the traditionists:
‘Alī once chanced to pass by some people who were playing at chess, and asked them, ‘What images are these upon which you are gazing so intently?’, for they were quite new to him, having only lately been introduced from Persia, and the Pawns were soldiers, and the Elephants and Horses were so depicted according to the custom of the Persians.
It is inferred from this that ‘Alī only objected to the carved chessmen and not to the game itself, and it is in deference to this that the Sunnite Muslims use men of a conventional pattern.
Al-Māwardī (D. 450/1058) quotes traditions that connect several of the ‘Companions’ (aṣḥāb) with chess. Abū Huraira (D. 57/676–7),16 ‘Abdallāh b. ‘Abbās, and ‘Abdallāh b. Zubair are stated to have been seen to play chess, while al-Ḥusain (sl. 68/610), the ill-fated son of the caliph ‘Alī, is recorded to have played with his children, and also to have watched a game and to have prompted the players.
The traditions regarding the tābi‘s are equally trivial in detail, and their main interest consists in the evidence they afford for the practice of chess in the first centuries of Islam. Since some of these early players are said to have played the game blindfold, it is reasonable to conclude that the standard of play must have been fairly high. The cosmopolitan nature of Islam is well illustrated by the nationalities of these chess-players.
The list includes the names of Sa‘īd b. al-Musayyib17 (D. 91/709–10), of Medina, an Arab, who played in public and declared the game permissible provided there was no stake; ‘Alī b. al-Ḥusain Zain al-‘ābidīn (D. 94/712–3), one of the Imams of the Shi‘ites, whose father was, as already mentioned, a chess-player, and whose mother according to legend was Shahr-bānū, the daughter of Yazdigird III, the last of the Sāsānian kings of Persia; Sa‘īd b. Jubair (ex. 95/714), a negro, who excelled in blindfold play; Ibrāhīm b. Ṭalha b. ‘Obaidallāh (D. 98/717), the son of one of Muḥammad’s earliest converts, who had been seen to play chess in public in Medina; al-Qāsim b. Muḥammad18 (D. 101/719–20), by his father a grandson of the caliph Abū-Bakr, and by his mother of Yazdigird, who once rebuked some chessplayers for using figures (sūrun) for pieces (dawābb); ash-Sha‘bī (D. 108/722–3), of Persian descent, who played chess and nard for a stake and forgot the hour of prayer, and played in the street, covering his head so that he should not be known; ‘Ikrima (D. 107/725–6), a Berber; Muḥammad b. Sīrīn (D. 110/728–29), a Persian, who was famous for his interpretation of dreams, and could also play chess blindfold; al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī (B. 110/728), who saw no harm in chess provided there was no stake and no neglect of the times of prayer; ‘Aṭā‘a (D. 115/733–4), a deformed mulatto; az-Zuhrī (D. 124/742), the great lawyer of the Umayyad period; Muḥammad al-Munkadir (D. 131/748–9); Rabī‘a ar-Rai (D. 136/753–4), of Persian descent; Hishām b. ‘Urwa (D. 146/763–4), another blindfold player, whose three granddaughters Safī‘a, A‘īsha, and ‘Ubaida also all appear as chess-players; al-A‘amash (D. 148/765), a Persian; and Abū ‘Aun (D. 151/768), another Persian. Although Mālik b. Anas was so opposed to chess, he numbered among his friends a chess-player, al-Mughīra b. ‘Abdarraḥmān, and his own son Yaḥyā b. Mālik b. Anas, who was a lawyer in Medina, played chess in his home. Finally, the great lawyer, ash-Shāfi‘ī, is credited with skill in blindfold play.
Probably the most interesting in these names is that of Sa‘īd b. Jubair. According to b. Taimīya (Man., f. 10 b), he gave the following curious reason for his playing chess. He had reason to believe that al-Ḥajjāj desired to appoint him qāḍī, and, fearing that the patronage of this noted man would be detrimental to his piety, he took up chess in order to disqualify himself for the post. Chess-playing he regarded as the less of the two evils, and since acts are to be judged by the intention, even a more heinous sin would have been permissible in his necessity. He was only forty-nine when the same al-Ḥajjāj put him to death for taking part in a revolt against ‘Abdalmalik b. Marwān. His murderer is said to have dreamt that God would kill him once for every man he had killed in his ruthless career, but seventy times for the death of Sa‘īd b. Jubair. Other traditions in AH tell us that Sa‘īd had played chess all his life, that he played with equal ease whether he saw the board or not, and that his method of playing blindfold was to turn his back on the board; then he would ask the slave who attended him what his opponent had moved, next he bade the slave ‘move such and such a man’. His name is the earliest one that is associated with play without the use of a material board, but he may have had many followers among the Muslim players. Other references to players who could play blindfold are given later in this chapter, and a Muslim whose name is given as Buzecca or Borzaga is mentioned as the first exponent of the art of blindfold play in Europe. This player visited Florence in 1265.19
The earliest of the Umayyad caliphs who is associated with chess is ‘Abdalmalik b. Marwān (D. 86/705). An earlier caliph, Yazīd I b. Mu‘āwiya (D. 64/683), the hated murderer of the Imām Ḥusain b. ‘Alī, is stated by b. Khallikān to have been a nard-player, and accordingly a man whom it was legally permissible to curse. There are three stories of ‘Abdalmalik in H (ff. 8 a, 11 a, and 14 b). They merely exhibit the caliph as a chess-player, but one brings in the noted poet al-Akhṭal (D. 92/710), and another tells how ash-Sha‘bī, whom we have already heard of as an inveterate chess-player, once asked the caliph if he was not ashamed of playing. The caliph answered by some questions. Was the game ḥarām? or maisīr or ’ansāb? Since ash-Sha‘bī could only answer all these in the negative, the caliph continued to play. AH, f. 12 b, has a curious story, which the later K. al-‘uyūn, a generally trustworthy history of the 5th or 6th c. of Islam (say A.D. 1150–1250, ed. de Goeje in Fragmenta Hist. Arab., Lugd. Bat., 1871, p. 102), repeats in connexion with ‘Abdalmalik’s younger son, the caliph Hishām (D. 125/742), while MS. Brit. Mus. Add. 7320, f. 42 b, which has been identified by H. F. Amedroz as the work of b. al-Jauzī (‘An unidentified MS. by ibn al-Jauzī’, JRAS., Jan. 1907, see p. 865), attributes it to the elder son, the caliph Walīd I b. ‘Abdalmalik (D. 96/714). The caliph was once engaged in playing chess when a visitor,20 a Syrian, was announced. The caliph ordered a slave to cover over