Talk:Bishop (chess)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is part of a WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's articles related to chess. Please participate by editing this article or portal or visiting the project page or its discussion page.

how easy is it to win with a King and Bishop versus a King? Kingturtle 01:43 Apr 14, 2003 (UTC)

It is impossible to checkmate with a king and a bishop versus a king, even if both players cooperate to try to set up a checkmate position. --Fritzlein 23:08 12 Jul 2003 (UTC)

[edit] "Bishop" <-> "Ship" Question

Is it true that the bishop was a ship (diagonal travel)in the beginning of chess? They then have been replaced by bishops on behalf of the church (they had no representation on the board until then). I heard this somewhere and i suspect this is just a rumor .... but better to put it here. -- 62.46.48.93 19:20, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't know that the bishop was ever a ship. I think it was originally an elephant. You can see in Chinese chess and Korean chess even today they have an elephant where chess has a bishop. Also I believe that in Europe the elephant was first called a "fool" because the word sounded sounded vaguely like the Persian for elephant, and the piece was represented by a jester's cap. But then someone thought the jester's cap looked like a bishop's mitre, and that's how the piece was converted to being a bishop. I haven't researched any of this; I just think I read it somewhere once... --Fritzlein 02:59, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what i though initially too (and which is mentioned in the Chess page. ......Ok, i've found this source (not the one i refered to above though), but they also claim that "The rook or castle was originally an elephant, with a fortified chamber, tower, or castle on its back. [...]" Which is a bit strange since the asian chess had a rook AND an elephant if i'm not completly wrong. (you can see the non-asian images in a german pdf file) --80.109.73.21 16:19, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm no expert on chess history, but I've read a fair bit, and my copy of the Oxford Companion to Chess (I don't have anything better to hand just now) confirms our initial thoughts: the bishop replaced the fil, which took its name from the Persian for "elephant". The rook takes its name from the Persian rukh, "chariot". There is no mention of ships.

The misconception that the rook used to be an elephant seems to be a common one; I'm not sure why. Maybe it's just because in modern novelty chess sets the rook is sometimes represented as a war elephant. If somebody can check H.J.R. Murray's History of Chess or some similarly respected source, there may be more detail; perhaps there will even be mention of ships (I doubt it, but you never know). A source such as Murray I would trust; dodgy-looking webpages I find hard to trust. --Camembert

Thanks for the feedback. :) I have no such trustworthy source reachable, that's why i initially put the question here. And i do not trust ANY online content at all (includes wikipedia ;) ). The above link was just an example (the first thing i found with google), and i'm trying to 'eliminate' these rumors .. if they are rumors. Finally, as you said, it would be best if s/b who has one of these books could search a bit there. It would be greatly appreciated. --80.109.73.21 15:38, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Time to correct the rumour I spread as well then, I guess. The ship idea makes snese none the less, what with sailing against the wind and all...

According to A short History of Chess by Henry Davidson, (McKay, ISBN 0-679-14550-8) the bishop was an elephant (page 34). There is a controversy over whether a bishop was a ship or a chariot. Neither is entirely satisfactory, but the chariot is slightly better, according to Davidson, page 44. Bubba73 (talk), 15:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)