I do hope that Ernst Strouhal will not be upset that I have copied from his book!
At the time I purchased the book (jan 2000) I had contact with Ernst, but I lost all information how to reach him.
So I do not know how to ask him permission at the moment.
But maybe it triggers people to get a specimen of one of the best books on chess pieces ever made.
The language is German, but even if you can't read that, it is a must have book!
There are 3 or 4 editions, but only 2 are good enough quality, as Ernst Strouhal told me:
- Strouhal 1996, acht x acht ~ Zur Kunst des Schachspiels, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-211-82775-7
- Strouhal 1996, Schach ~ Die Kunst des Schachspiels, Nikol Verlag, ISBN 3-933203-25-2
Best quality is the original from Springer Verlag, but I have seen it only once offered.
The other is offered quite a lot, and achievable for a low price.
And much better as Keats, which makes many mistakes when it comes to these sets.
To start with: in a note on page 22 he says:
In 19th century French design was advertised as Régence, however the St.George name has become accepted as a name for this design.
I think he was mixed up with the "old English" pattern.
In the book of Strouhal you will find a nice series of 6 pictures (nbrs 111-116) of French chess sets!
Ernst Strouhal tells us that these sets were made in several workshop in Paris, Lyon and Rouen.
It starts with a set very alike the set in Encyclopedie d'Alembert.
Here is a thumbnail of the design sheet:
In this set the bishop is the smaller piece with cut edges on top collar.
That way it has been described in Encyclopedie d'Alembert, although in the design sheet (see above) they do not follow our normal convention, but have: King-Queen-Knight-Bishop-Rook-pawn.
I do not know how to call this set: I always thought that this type was meant with "Directoire set", but obviously it isn't; it is older anyway.
It is related to the Régence, could be a predecessor of it.
It could be called "Early Régence" (or "Predecessor Régence").
But a better naming convention is welcome!
Next is a Régence set with abstract knights.
Here is where all discussions start!
Of course also a Régence set with headed knights.
Certainly of later date as the sets above.
We would love to know when the heads have been inroduced!
This is type-1 Lyon set. Although the picture shows a less common example.
Note that King and Queen of this one do not have discs, or even trace of that!
This is type-2 Lyon set.
It looks like later Mexican wooden/bone sets have been inspired with these.
Keats, on page 225 (nr 271) list one as Mexican, derived from the St.George bulbous design. 3 mistakes here in my opinion!
He ends with the set, discussed earlier with the Darlow book.
http://www.tykroll.com/darlowdiagram.jpg
In literature these sets are described as having the "cleft-headed" knights.
See Keats figure 140, Mackett-Beeson fig 17 or the picture below from Strouhal.
Note that Keats refer to it as "Lyon", again a mistake I believe.
His number 141 set, is probably a Danish set. But I'm not sure about that.
Interesting that Darlow is the only one telling otherwise:
- the larger piece with cap is the knight and
- the smaller piece with that shielded finial ("cleft-headed"), is the bishop
Who can/should be believed here?
For time being I assume Darlow is wrong and the next picture is OK.
With thanks to Ernst Strouhal, Joost van Reij
At the time I purchased the book (jan 2000) I had contact with Ernst, but I lost all information how to reach him.
So I do not know how to ask him permission at the moment.
But maybe it triggers people to get a specimen of one of the best books on chess pieces ever made.
The language is German, but even if you can't read that, it is a must have book!
There are 3 or 4 editions, but only 2 are good enough quality, as Ernst Strouhal told me:
- Strouhal 1996, acht x acht ~ Zur Kunst des Schachspiels, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-211-82775-7
- Strouhal 1996, Schach ~ Die Kunst des Schachspiels, Nikol Verlag, ISBN 3-933203-25-2
Best quality is the original from Springer Verlag, but I have seen it only once offered.
The other is offered quite a lot, and achievable for a low price.
And much better as Keats, which makes many mistakes when it comes to these sets.
To start with: in a note on page 22 he says:
In 19th century French design was advertised as Régence, however the St.George name has become accepted as a name for this design.
I think he was mixed up with the "old English" pattern.
In the book of Strouhal you will find a nice series of 6 pictures (nbrs 111-116) of French chess sets!
Ernst Strouhal tells us that these sets were made in several workshop in Paris, Lyon and Rouen.
It starts with a set very alike the set in Encyclopedie d'Alembert.
Here is a thumbnail of the design sheet:
In this set the bishop is the smaller piece with cut edges on top collar.
That way it has been described in Encyclopedie d'Alembert, although in the design sheet (see above) they do not follow our normal convention, but have: King-Queen-Knight-Bishop-Rook-pawn.
I do not know how to call this set: I always thought that this type was meant with "Directoire set", but obviously it isn't; it is older anyway.
It is related to the Régence, could be a predecessor of it.
It could be called "Early Régence" (or "Predecessor Régence").
But a better naming convention is welcome!
Next is a Régence set with abstract knights.
Here is where all discussions start!
Of course also a Régence set with headed knights.
Certainly of later date as the sets above.
We would love to know when the heads have been inroduced!
This is type-1 Lyon set. Although the picture shows a less common example.
Note that King and Queen of this one do not have discs, or even trace of that!
This is type-2 Lyon set.
It looks like later Mexican wooden/bone sets have been inspired with these.
Keats, on page 225 (nr 271) list one as Mexican, derived from the St.George bulbous design. 3 mistakes here in my opinion!
He ends with the set, discussed earlier with the Darlow book.
http://www.tykroll.com/darlowdiagram.jpg
In literature these sets are described as having the "cleft-headed" knights.
See Keats figure 140, Mackett-Beeson fig 17 or the picture below from Strouhal.
Note that Keats refer to it as "Lyon", again a mistake I believe.
His number 141 set, is probably a Danish set. But I'm not sure about that.
Interesting that Darlow is the only one telling otherwise:
- the larger piece with cap is the knight and
- the smaller piece with that shielded finial ("cleft-headed"), is the bishop
Who can/should be believed here?
For time being I assume Darlow is wrong and the next picture is OK.
With thanks to Ernst Strouhal, Joost van Reij
I got two nice pictures from Dermot
This is an example of a set alike the set in Encyclopedie d'Alembert:
Next picture of an old Spanish set, like the one of Jon, but now in bone:
