Chess piece or not?

[dancing_with_volves]

It might not be easy to tell if a single item might be a chess piece. For instance an item that has been frequently listed on ebay: http://www.ivory4u.com/estate2/17cManOnBall.jpg The figure really does look like a chess piece but it might be just a fine individual piece of carved ivory. Here is one more example of the same line: http://www.ivory4u.com/estate2/4511.jpg Some netsukes are designed as chess pieces - in that case, wholes should help to tell. Some okimono figures very much resemble chess pieces. Butrint chessman has been a subject of much discussion. Is it really a gaming piece or just an ornamental detail? http://history.chess.free.fr/butrint.htm Might be a million dollar question :) Ebay item 110052443587 is not a chess figure (although it is a really beautiful piece of ivory IMHO) but what if it had a turned base? Would you buy it as a chess piece in this case? Thins get even more confusing with ancient pieces. Jon collects medieval and earlier gaming pieces (often archeological finds) - maybe he can shed some light on the topic. For instance, what about item 200045952413?

[dancing_with_volves]

Pilgrim badge?

[dancing_with_volves]

Somewhere in these forums is a picture of spillikins resembling chess pieces. I could not find the thread containing it. I think that here is the right place to discuss if these items were used as chess pieces indeed. Chessspy is in the strong opinion that they were not and I am far from disputing his claim. However, one often encounters such items claimed to be chess pieces.

[chessspy]

Hi ,Kristjan. OK I think that is a good idea to discuss these objects here. I wonder if you could put a link to the picture sometime, so we all know what we are talking about, as some members will not have seen these things Briefly my position is. I used to buy in Paris often, and it is quite a common sight to see small groups of these things, sometimes on their own, but often in oblong boxes printed with a manufacturers label saying Jonchette (this is a french childrens game similar to Spillikins, or Mikado) I have a letter from the ivory turner Bill Jones to the effect that his father (Bertram Jones, a top ivory turner in the period 1930-1960)was faking these up into chess sets for a dealer (M.B.) There was even a lot came up at Christies with a certificate of authenticity by him (MB)! The dealers in Paris are well aware that these objects are not chess pieces, but are quite happy to sell then to collectors who think they are. There is a picture of a complete (and beautiful) boxed set in the Hamburg catalogue (Shachpartie durch zeiten und welten) showing the two hooks which are used to play. The lid (which isn't shown has the word Jonchette printed on it)It was bought from a Paris dealer by a well known German collector about 10years ago. There is a set in a Spanish museum labeled as chess (sand set) which clearly still has the hooks with it. The idea that these "sets" were used to play chess with on the sands at Dieppe is erroneous. Hyde refers to a set with spikes on that were used to play on a cushion in a carriage, this would be more like a pegged travelling set. Alan D.

[dancing_with_volves]

Are we speaking about these pieces? http://www.crumiller.com/chess/chess_pages/french/DieppeBonePinPieces.htm By the way, I could well imagine somebody who buys a chess set made up by Jones from genuine antique jonchettes and his own pieces BEING FULLY AWARE of the foresaid fact. I imagine that in 2050 a complete set like that could be sold for a decent price as antique curiosity with full provenance.

[dancing_with_volves]

ne0romantic (68 ) 04/06/07 08:04 AM (#224 of 224) Thanks Vermont John and all for your comments regarding my website and Toy Co. set. I'll endeavor to post this new info about it and change the name to something less likely to 'get Alan's goat' on my next update. I'm with Kristjan not being able to find a locked thread on here with pictures of French spillikins. I see French spillikins in the recent April Newsletter of this group, second picture in the 'chess in the sand' section. Are these the style of pieces you're talking about Alan? I always assumed they were used for chess as well as 'pick up sticks,' and this picture of them in the sand endorsed by the editor of the CCI magazing Jim / acf1515 leads me to continue that belief. If you have good reason to believe pieces like this are not chess pieces, I think it will be controversial. If you're referring to different French spillikins it would be cool if you could locate the thread (just by title at least so we could find it) and/or be more specific, as these pieces are spillikins and they are French and perhaps I am confused. Ty

[acf1515]

Hi all, This is an interesting discussion as I have been looking at these recently as part of an article I am writing. As far as I can see or find, there is NO hard evidence that these "spiked" pieces were used for chess! I believe they are "spillikin" or "Jonchette" pieces, and just because a museum or someone else puts a set together in a sand tray to look like a chess set does not it so. There was a "Compendium" games set sold at a regional UK auction a few years ago which included a spillikin set along with a cushion chess board and they said that the pieces were "dual" purpose. There is also a reference in HJR Murray's book, that one of the many King Louis'of France, during the 17thC! (I think) used a pin cushion set, which I think was a travel type set as Chesspy suggests. Jim

[dancing_with_volves]

By the way, take a closer look at Jon's items and the lot pictured in the newsletter. These things do not look like they could have made to match. Even low-end chess sets are more uniform. I do have an humble opinion that the 18th century Dieppe carvers were quite able to produce 32 pieces that do not look as been assembled :) Speaking about playing chess in the beach - well, everything can be done in the beach with inventary made up right at the place. People play checkers with small stones for instance. It might well be that there really were people who did occasionally play chess on the sand with the spillikins. That does not automatically mean that either forementioned objects were created for these games. Murray might have seen such game himself or spoken to people who had played it sometimes. So what? Since when do we call all objects used to play chess with chess pieces?

[chessspy]

Ah, As usual, my friends you come to the logical point, It is not possible to prove a negative, and I cannot say that a French family on the beach at Dieppe did not buy 4 or 5 Jonchette and use hem to play chess. I can however say that it would be contrary to the French psyche. Now, as to the metaphysical point, If I take a pack of cards ,and st them out, Kings ,Queens, Knaves, etc. and use them to play chess, (don't try this at home children)Does that make the pack a ches sset (1) only for the time i'm using them, and only the cards I use for the game? (2)Or are all packs of cards thus empowered? Think carefully before you answer, Ive discussed this with a very clever man. And I would refer you to a certain "R Mutt" and his "artistic" urinal before you rush to print.

[ne0romantic]

http://www.zelazny.com/gallery_a22.html

[ne0romantic]

I, as an artist, would tend to answer your 'metaphysical' question 'yes,' Alan. If you take out certain cards from a deck to make a chess set, then they are a chess set... you have made a chess set from the cards... If you do like Mr. Zelazny has done above and cut them and glue them glue them and such, you have perhaps made a *better* chess set. Just like if you take some odd pieces of wood and make a chess set from them, you have made a chess set... but if you do like yourself and others do and turn the wood on a lathe and carve some masterful knight heads, you have made a *better* chess set. As far as the Dieppe bone pieces, I guess I appologize for putting words in Jim's mouth (sorry Jim.) I assumed as they appeared as a chess set in the sand in the newsletter and the picture was credited to Jim that he agreed with what it seemed to represent. I would say they *are* a chess set while they're sticking in the sand as such and I kind of like to think of them that way... of course as it appears they *really are* something different and were not made to be a chess set, the 'artist' who sticks them in the sand and calls them a chess set hasn't done much more than R Mutt and his urninal... only the urinal is ugly and the pick up sticks are somewhat attractive... so lets use the cards. That 'artist' is more like you taking a deck of cards and using it for chess, and less like Mr. Zelanzy actually doing some work to *make* a chess set out of playing cards. All this is very 'post modernist' to throw a buzz word in. I think I like a chess set of French pin pieces, but I give much credit to whoever carved them (not for chess) and not much credit at all to whoever assembled a 'chess set' from them. I think this is a good way to look at post modern 'found object' art. What did the artist bring to the work? Inspiration is one thing, and can be everything, but craft can also be an important part of art. And that's what I'm referring to way up there where I said one set is *better* than another. Ok... I'm getting off my soap box for today. Ty

[ne0romantic]

more backpedaling. Ok the passage I was referring to from the newsletter which 'put words in Jim's mouth' is: "if you are interested in a more in depth history of these sets you may wish to contact acf1515 / Jim..." Which actually doesn't say anything about his opinion of them as chess sets or not, just that he's knowledgeable about them. I misrembered this as photo credits the second time... so now I must apologize to real provider of the photograph... which is possible Dr. George or Mrs. Vivian Dean?... but I think credit is only referring to the two photos below the 'Dieppe' pins. Anyway that's what I get for posting when I don't have the newsletter I'm referring to handy. I'll try to do better in the future.

[lichess]

Question. I have taken the thought of the so called "sand set", copied some of the more interesting pieces that could be considered "chess pieces" and then had them carved in camel bone, to my specifications so as to complete a 32 piece "chess set" with spiked points at the bottom, to set in sand or in a cushion. This was specifically designed by me to be used to play chess and for no other purpose. All pieces are figural and none have hooks at the bottom. Are you now claiming what I have had made, "not a chess set"? If so, what constitutes a chess set? Floyd Lichess@aol.com

[dwolf359]

Floyd, I don't know too much about reasoning and logic. But if it looks like a chess set, quacks like a chess set and walks like a chess set...then, gosh darnit, I think yours just might be a chess set! But what do I know? I'm just a wacko with thousands of little figures of plastic, metal, wood, stone and bone who all whisper in my ear "play me". ;) Dan ...and they say that poor dear chesspurr is as mad as "bucket of frogs"...(sorry I had to dredge that up Guy). 😄 Have a happy Easter, y'all! Rrrrbbtt

[knight_knight_zzz]

Hmmm... let's see... who do I agree with (if any at all!): Chessspy? (where I might be able to score some brownie points - but then, does that matter?) OR with Ty of neOromantic and Floyd of Lichess? Well, I think I will have to agree with the ones who make sense. (Sorry, Alan D. and Kristjansander :-)... I still really do like and admire both of you! :-) I really can understand how or why some people (including myself!) are or get somewhat dismayed when a seller calls a piece of whatever a "chess piece" when it does not appear to be in the same or similar mode with which one is familiar. It is especially at least disconcerting (as CHESSPURR has often pointed out), when a seller intentionally misleads or lies about a variety of aspects of chess pieces, age, material, etc... While I can understand an argument being made so as to support the idea that if the original manufacturing or creating of a certain material/product was not meant to be used as a chess set, and therefore the individual pieces are not chess pieces... in the end, all that could be said is that the pieces were not likely INITIALLY made for the purpose of creating or playing chess. But that does not make the subsequent use of those pieces as chess pieces (somehow) less worthy! Geeze... and the claim or implication by someone(s) a while ago was that CCI members are elitist or snooty! Give me a break! I think that the way in which Floyd said/explained it was the kind and mature way of dong it. Let me get a little more heated about it. Ok, let the dark side of me take over. 🙂 (Yes, because you - Kristjansanders and Jon (comutojon) and several others have encouraged the return of Mr. Hyde from Vermont, he is back. So here goes...) Let's take Alan's and Kristjansanders argument a step further... Let's see... let's see if we can get Alan D's "goat" up and running! An elephant tusk (that is, proper ANTIQUE, well over 100 years old - a little redundant here?) is a TUSK - not a chess piece, right? The tusk (a.k.a. ivory) was used in making the chess piece. Well, how can we call it a chess piece if it is merely the result of one placing their hands on it and imagination into something that was not originally meant as a chess piece. The original purpose of the tusk was not for the elephant to play a game of chess with it, was it? (Well now, I guess that maybe I am not all that sure about this because I have seen at least one postcard where an elephant is playing chess with a hippopotamus!) 🙂 Yes, he/she might have use it in battle (like a herculean game of physical "chest" :-), among other uses, etc. etc. etc. Now, I don't think I need to explain further - do I? What makes a chess piece or a chess set? Is it when a person says to himself/herself..."well, I am going to make a chess set. Now, what material am I going to use, and what style shall I make it, how shall I "make" it? (carve, turn, melt, mold, bake, etc. etc. etc. etc." OR might it ALSO be when a person says... "I am going to make a chess set out of objects that were once used as or for something else and arrange or adapt those objects"...? When the original creators of certain games or war plans or symbolic strategizing sat down to think of what they would use, well... what did they use? Obvious answer: the material they had around them... whether it was still in original forms and shapes, or created out of them! If I am sitting at a beach and playing with a recognizable chess set - all but one original missing piece, say a pawn... and I take a small stone and use it as a chess piece... well, does that make it a chess piece? Well, no - as far as it being original to the set. Regardless, it has no less or more "power" than one an original chess pieces. The set may not be as visually pleasurable to play with, but that would not stop me from playing the game. For all practical purposes, and for the purpose I chose, it is a chess piece because I have decided to use it as a chess pieces. Hmmmm. maybe we should be looking at the word "function". But let's save that for another thread, discussion, or day, ok? Alan... try to think a little outside the Carton Pierre box, eh? Is it just the molded/compressed paper and other ingredients in the shape of a square? Must it be used for just chess pieces? Were there other boxes that were used as prototypes, examples, or for other uses? People sometimes look at chess boxes and say... what a nice box for my jewelry. When Tom Gallegos (a CCI member and friend of admirable intellect, researcher, and writer) and I played a game of chess during a banquet at the Northport, Long Island (Western Hemisphere CCI meeting a couple(?) of years ago, did we play on a piece of paper with 64 boxes (not so neatly) drawn on it? Or did we play on a chessboard? Was it a piece of paper or a chessboard? If I just said the name "Gallegos" would you think it was definitely a set of islands? Or could it also be the name of a person? Or both? I could go on and on and on, but I will stop here because if stay awake for most of the night (woops! Too late! 🙂 and I don't get back to bed sometime before 5 a.m. (a new habit that I should so gratefully thank this ebay chess collectors group for!)... wife will divorce me! I really have to get to bed! John, Vermont.

[knight_knight_zzz]

Woops! Sorry I left you out, Dwolf359... I was typing and checking my spelling and correcting for so long (good thing I did not check my grammar too!) you sneaked in a message while I was doing all my babbling. And speaking of sneaking in... I think I may remember seeing you name in at least one ebay item on which I too bidded a year or two ago... It was a chess set where the pieces were of a carved WOODEN "African Safari" theme. Nicer than most such wooden sets of the same theme. But both sides were on the darkish side... not easy to discern one side from the other. But the carving was pretty good! (Oh, sorry, Alan D and Kristjansander... I mean they were ebony wood and perhaps teakwood(?) made to look like chess pieces, but they were really just pieces of wood disguising themselves as chess pieces.) :-) Well, anyway, if that was you, Dwolf, do you remember me sneaking in a bid at the last few seconds? The sniper outsniping the sniper? Was that you? 🙂 And does your ebay name dwolf have anything to do with how you do your bidding? If so, I admire you! 🙂 Glad to meet you, finally! John, Vermont.