Talk:Chaturanga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Strategy games, an effort by several users to improve Wikipedia articles on strategy games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	SG Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
Strategy games To-do: edit  Create: Close Combat: The Russian Front • Close Combat: Battle of the Bulge • Close Combat: Invasion Normandy • List of units and buildings in StarCraft Expand: HeroQuest (board game) • Boku (game) • Qubic • Death Stacks • Entropy (board game) • Fitchneal • Five Field Kono Copyedit: Crossings (game) • Gonnect • Quoridor • Company of Heroes • Dark Reign • Myth (computer game) Cleanup: Abalone (board game) • Age of Mythology • Battle Realms • Outlive • Stronghold (2001 game) • Fleet Command • Combat Mission (computer game series) Cite Sources: Colonization (computer game) • MacHack (chess) Update: List of strategy video games More...

Contents 1 History 2 Elephant move 3 Indian Chess (Chaturanga) 4 References 5 Reverted major edit 6 Kraaijeveld paper: phylogeny of chess 7 Misleading

[edit] History

Was it ancestor of Shatranj or was Shatranj an ancestor of Chaturanga??? im confused, the articles say diffrent things :|

Chaturanga was the ancestor of Shatranj. The elephant went from moving one square diagonally or one forward to leaping exactly two sqares on the diagonal. This move lasted until mad queen chess developed in Italy. Also check was introduced with Shatranj. In Chaturanga you would capture the king. Jake 23:32, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The reference to the knight move for the king seems like something from Shatranj, an early form of the king's leap. I'll have to look it up. Jake 23:32, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Knight's leap for the king was introduced much later, in middle ages. Then it was replaced by castling as it known today. Andreas Kaufmann 07:05, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Elephant move

An article on Chaturanga on chessvariants.com gives another rules for elephant movement: "The elephant moves two squares diagonally, but may jump the intervening square." Pritchard's Encyclopedia of Chess variants says the same. Shouldn't we correct this? Andreas Kaufmann 18:17, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Actually elephant movements were not established yet at that time... Andreas Kaufmann 4 July 2005 22:01 (UTC)

Now I updated the article to reflect existing uncertainty in Elephant moves. Andreas Kaufmann 07:05, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Indian Chess (Chaturanga)

Hi! to Everybody. I like chess very much. My father was very good chess player. In my childhood he used to say there are two ways in playing chess (one Internation method and another Indian method). As far as i know about the names and moves of the pieces in Chaturanga(Chess), i try to present some information before you.I am from Andhra Pradesh, so i put even Telugu Names along with Original Sanskrit ones for more information. (I am not here to argue that Chess originated in India like that, just to present what I know, thats all.)

• Rāja(Raju) --> King
  
• Mantri(Mantri) --> Queen
  
• Ratha(Śakatam) --> Bishop
  
• Aśva(Gurram) --> Knight
  
• Gaja(Enugu) --> Rook
  
• Sainika(Bantu) -->pawn
  

So, Their movements are desined accordingly in the Chaturanga (Indian Chess) also.

• Rāja -->One Step to a Square in any Direction (Vertical/Horizontal or Diagonal)
• Mantri-->Any number of Steps to a Square in any Direction (Vertical/Horizontal or Diagonal)
• Ratha-->Any number of Steps in Diagonal Direction.
• Aśva-->Normal "L" Shaped Jumping Step.
• Gaja-->Any number of Steps in Vertical/Horizontal Direction.

(Here when I mention about Step, I actually mean one Move.)

It really Stuns us the way the position and movements of pieces (Anga) were there, as they correctly suits to the reality of Indian warfare situations.

• Actually Rāja(King) is the most powerful, but often won't come into action unless required. The Knight-move of a King(Rāja) resembles the escape of a King for safer location in most-crutial time (Āpaddharma kāla) in a warfare.
  

• Mantri(Queen) is the next Most Powerful person in an Indian Empire/Kingdom. Though King only passes the decrees, Actually it the Prime minister who actually decides all kinds of acts and stratagies that are required for the welfare of King/Kingdom. (In Sanskrit, Mantri means Prime Minister.)

• Ratha/Śakata(Bishop) is known For their famous Zig-Zag movements while attacking. Often the opponent doesn't takes into consideration the presence of Chariots which inturn give stunning, often devastating blows in an Indian Warfare. (Actually Śakata is also an Sanskrit word meaning Chariot.)

• Aśva(Knight)is known for its irregular jumping movements which often keeps the opponent in a dilemma for a movement. Interstingly, even in the game it is the Aśva(Knight) that has highest number of moves than any other piece. (In Sanskrit, Aśva means Horse.)

• Gaja(Rook) is known for Straight forward devastating attacks. Often opponent knows its advance but cannot escape. In olden days Gaja(Rook) played an very important role in scattering the army of an enemy, thereby making them to deviate from their stratagical movements. (In Sanskrit, Gaja means Elephant.)

The above four constitute the premier forces of a king in Indian warfares. Interestingly, even the game is also named as Chaturanga, which means four limbs (of a King). Since (Sainika) Pawns are infantry, they are also called as Padāti(in Sanskrit) and Kālbantu(in Telugu).)

Anybody wants any clarifications regarding sanskrit (or any indian) terms,please contact me.
-Krishna Chaitanya 7.09PM 10,October,2006 IST(UTC)

[edit] References

It's quite clear that this article needs references — it's full of weasel words which makes it look like it contains only speculations. I note however that a lot of the weasel words are put in by User:Roylee, whose edits are currently screened by several editors over at User:Mark Dingemanse/Roylee because of a worrying tendency to edit self-referential fringe theories and original research into Wikipedia. I have mostly removed his additions, but the article still needs to be backed up by some solid references. — mark ✎ 2 July 2005 23:04 (UTC)

I added two references for this article. The current content of the article is more or less in line with these sources. Andreas Kaufmann 4 July 2005 22:01 (UTC)

[edit] Reverted major edit

Article largely replaced by a link to an external site by an anonymous editor with no history. Nothing in wikipedia policy to justify this change (that I can see) and nett loss to wikipedia by the edit. Reverted. If this was a good faith edit please justify here before repeating.--Shoka 20:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting this! This is already second time when this article was partly damaged and link to http://www.chaturanga.net added. Previous IP of probably the same user was 86.144.176.182. I think the reason is that software sold on chaturanga.net favors Cox-Forbes theory of origin of chess and what they call Chaturanga is more commonly called Chaturaji (4-player version of Chaturanga). Andreas Kaufmann 22:29, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kraaijeveld paper: phylogeny of chess

Alex Kraaijeveld wrote two papers on the phylogeny of chess, using population genetic methods to find the evolutionary relationships between different chess/chaturanga variants. It would seem to fit well as a reference for this article.

Variant Chess (1999; 32: 56-58).

Board Games Studies (2000; 3: 39-50).

See his web page. - Samsara _contrib ^talk 03:18, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. This has already been mentioned in origin of chess. - Samsara _contrib ^talk 11:05, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Misleading

Is the board at the lead showing chess or Chaturanga? If it is chess, it shouldn't be there, it's very misleading! Mandel 17:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

It's clearly intended to be chaturanga, because the board is not chequered and chess has the king and queen the other way around. Using modern chess symbols for chaturanga is somewhat misleading, but commonly done. --Zundark 20:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

It is not clear at all, because a chequered board and inverse king/queen position will be noticed by a prudent chess player, but certainly not by someone who does not play chess. I'm not sure using modern chess symbols are as common as you claim. For example chaturanga has elephants, this chart inexplicably uses bishops instead, and has queens for counsellors. Look at http://www.chessvariants.org/historic.dir/chaturanga.html, the explanation is infinitely clearer. Mandel 15:19, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The use of bishop symbols for elephants is explicable by the fact that bishops are derived from elephants. Similarly for queen symbols. But if you want to use different symbols, then go ahead. --Zundark 15:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I've added a table of pieces at the start of the article (and changed the caption on the first board) to clarify that this is not chess. --Ant 00:00, 21 August 2006 (UTC)