Talk:Abu-Bakr Muhammad ben Yahya as-Suli

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Given the dates, wouldn't as-Suli have played shatranj rather than chess? --Camembert

No response, but I'm pretty sure I'm right (I don't think chess existed when as-Suli was alive), so I've changed references to chess to references to shatranj. This paragraph:

One of his most prominent achievements is his book, "Kitab Ash-Shatranj" (Book of Chess), which was the first scientific book ever written on chess strategy. It contained information on common chess openings, standard problems in middle game, and annotated end games. It also contains the first known description of the knight's tour problem.

is still a bit of a problem. I'm not sure how to resolve all the "chess"es in there. They might be OK, as the article says shatranj is an ancestor of chess, but still, it seems odd that he should have written about chess openings when he didn't even play chess... --Camembert

It's hard to say when modern "chess" was invented, but the game was close enough to the modern game as to be recognizable, and some of the material contained in the work (such as the knight's tour) is as applicable to modern chess as it was to shatranj (The main differences between shatranj and Chess are that both the Queen and the Bishop are weaker in shatranj, all the other pieces have the same standard moves in both games). Also a lot of the early European chess books were based (i.e with large sections being copied wholesale) on the work of as-Suli with modification being made to adapt to the changes that occured in the European version, so the distinction becomes even more blurred. --Imran

The problem I have with that paragraph, I think, is that it seems rather misleading to say he wrote about "common chess openings" and have the link go to a page full of openings that as-Suli certainly wouldn't have recognised. But it's probably OK in context. --Camembert