Invented by Palamedes, antecedent to the siege of Troy; its improvements in China, India, &c. &c.

THE

HE author of this elaborate inquiry, supposed to be Mr. Christie, jun. of Pall Mall, commences his research by enquiring, in his first chapter, concerning the Пlerleia, the game of Merrils--and whether the Пta were invented by PALAMEDES?

As to the Petteia itself, the first object is to supply such other information concerning it as Julius Pol> lux and Dr. Hyde have imperfectly given, for the purpose of rendering it more clearly understood. Beginning with Saumaise, his erroneous and inconsistent statement of the game is evinced, the equally contradictory and inconclusive remarks of Meursius, Souter, Bulenger, and Casaubon, are noticed; and, after pointing out an error into which even Dr. Hyde hath been led by the first of these authorities, we are brought to what the author offers from himself.

"We learn from Polybius, that the 7 was a game of which the merit consisted in cutting off, and inclosing, or blocking up.

"This is fully expressed in the following words: For cutting off many of them by detachments, and, like a skilful player at the Heria, inclosing, or blocking them up, Ire, without a battle, destroyed them.'

"I think we need not hesitate to believe, therefore, that it was a game of circumvention; and, in this one respect, like the game called or, in which the object was to inclose, or circumvent, any one piece by two of the other party. This was effected in the Iba by the throw of a dice,

79

and in the Пera by skill in mov

ing We find that when a piece

was put to its shifts, it was compelled to move from the line or mark in the centre of the board:

I will move my pebble from the sacred,' says Suidas; and adds,

And this is said of those who adopt a measure (like this move in the 1877) as their last resource." Not that any auxiliary attack was made, by this move from the sacred, to rescue any piece in distress, bat that danger was avoided by moving from the sacred, and as it were 'out of check.'- Ad periculum evitandum, potius quàm injuriam inferendam.'-P. 7.

"The manner of thus throwing the piece into difficulty, may be learnt from Eustathius, who says,

Since the player who had the worst of it was forced into a middle station between the piece attacking and the sacred mark, which was (T), an extreme boundary beyond it.'—P. 8.

"Nor can' (it is observed in p 9.) be understood of the piece being forced upon the sacred, but being driven up to it."-After obviating objections that might be alledged against this position, the author proceeds to supply the want of the board of Palmedes formerly exhibited at Troy and at Argos; bút for this we must refer to the plate, from not possessing which, we regret that his exemplifications of the game must here be suppressed, since, with what is already given, they will account for every thing relating to the Petteia, excepting what respects the ιερα γραμμή, which is represented by the author as a square in the centre of a board consisting of sixteen squares. Its extension somewhat every way from the central point, he conceives requisite to show its obtrusive pow er upon any pebble that might be

forced

forced by an enemy upon the nearest station to it; and that it was a square he infers from a similiarity which the board of the Pelteia bears to another game, composed of a like number of stations, though differently disposed, in the centre of which such a square existed. The game here alluded to is that of Merrils, well known to the shepherds in our midland counties, the lines of which are often seen cut in turf on sheep-walks, and is stiled by Shakespeare, The Ninemen's Mornice. This game, our author has no doubt, was originally played by the shepherds of the /western parts of Asia, and thence made known by the Celts over all the north of Europe. It has afforded to Mr. Tresham, the subject for well-conceived vignette, though the lines of the diagram are out of perspective.

a

The game of Merrils, known to the Greeks by the name of Brod zor, is conjectured to have been more ancient than the 11, and probably the parent of it; inasmuch as depositing the pebbles alternately must have been more ancient than moving them.

"Dr. Hyde observes, that the oriental name for this central square upon the board of Merrils is, zindân, carcer: Anglice, the pound,' -And quasi pecorum carcer indeed it is very probable, that it was originally intended to represent something of this kind. For as the Eastern shepherds amused themselves by playing with the pebbles whilst they watched their folds, they might afterwards have introduced the figure of the fold itself, as an ornament to the board. This had likewise its use, the pebbles being probably first deposited there, and taken from it, as occasion required, in the course of the game.

"And here I think 1 observe the origin of the sacred mark; for,

as I have no doubt of the Пered having taken its rise from this simple game, the sheep-fold was re

tained in the centre of the board of the П17] also, and stiled by the Greeks, the sheep-fold. But in process of time we find this word accepted in a very different sense. And it came first to signify the square inclosure or railing, within which the images of the gods were placed; and, at last, the temple itself. And thus, from want of discriminating between the ancient and modern sense of the word an, the spade in the centre of the board was called the sacred;' and because it covered the central station, or point of intersection.

"Sophocles, it is true, declares that Palamedes invented the ПisTJe as a diversion in the time of a famine; but as he attributes the joint invention of the ilia and dice to him, which last, as Dr. Hyde proves, were only known at a much later date, this authority is not to be deemed sufficient proof.

"The other tragic writer I allude to (Euripides) has raised a doubt in the mind of Dr. Hyde respecting a passage in the chorus to the first act of the Iphigenia in Aulis. But I do not conceive there can be much difficulty in ascertaining the real meaning of the Greek poet. Thus far, I think, may.be concluded from the passage, that Palamedes was not the inventor. For we find Ajax Oïleus, Ajax Telamon, and Protesilaus, playing at the ; whilst Palamedes, who would be imagined to be particularly interested by the game had he been its inventor, is described as casting the discuss with Diomedes. And as this was during the time that the fleet lay windbound at Aulis, before they had arrived off Troy, this must fix the date earlier than those authors have done, who attribute the in

vention

vention to Palamedes, dùring the siege.

But, further, it is a singular cireumstance that the poet does not represent the game as being played by two, but by three players.

"Here we must either consider it as a tripartite game, which we cannot easily reconcile, or that two played against the third person; or that one of the three was merely a looker on. And I see no reason why the game played by the Gre cian leaders should not have been the 7, as I have described it, which in itself appears to have been a military game; more particularly as no other played with pebbles could have existed at this early period but the 77, or the ruder game of Merrils; every other of the kind requiring the use of dice, and these, as Dr. Hyde has shewn, were not yet invented."-P. 14.

The second chapter is assigned to the Ludus Latrunculorum; and as of this game an account has been transmitted in some ancient verses (whether truly or not) to Lucan or Ovid, these are the grounds on which it is traced, and thence inferred as certain, that "as no mention is made in them of dice, the allusion could be to no ancient game but the Пeria." How far this conclusion be strictly logical, we will candidly submit to the author's reflexion. The discussions of this chapter comprise some very ingenious remarks on a passage of Plautus in Panulo, and others from Ovid, in which not only Dr. Hyde is corrected, but the ile Teid, in its roman form, is exemplified with success; as is also the Alveus, in chapter the third.

In the fourth chapter, the sub-, ject of which is the fixty, its origin is thus traced:

"The ancient game which took its rise from the Merrils, upon the first adoption of the moves, assumed VOL. XIX.-No. 110.

a military appearance; instead of the sports of shepherd boys near their fold, it now appeared to represent their quarrels, which ended in declared hostilities. The parties separated from each other; proper territories were assigned to each; and what before was considered as a sheep-fold, was converted into a mound or barrier against their mutual incursions."-P. 32.

Under this form the Petteia had now arrived at its perfect state; we have since seen it declining in the Ludus Latrunculorum; but its downfall seems to have been completed by the application of the mischievous invention of dice to this game: a system of warfare was not to be carried on by chance; and accordingly we find, that when skill was nearly excluded, the game lost much of its military appearance, and began to relapse into its pastoral state.

"From hence arose a mixed game, called Plinthion, constructed by the orientals upon the foundation of the Petteia, which, from the moves in playing it being directed by the cast of the die, resembled rather the wagers of shepherds than the stratagems of war; notwithstanding which, the object in playing. the game, and even (as may appear upon minute investigation) the very construction of the board and disposition of the pieces shew it to have been but a perversion of the military Petteia, whilst the terms respecting it were purely pastoral."-P 32.

In a learned disquisition, subjoined as a note, the date of this game is assigned to about six hundred years before the Christian epoch. Continuing his investiga❤ tions, the author proceeds to dis cuss with great acuteness the ob, ject of the game, the form of the board, and the disposition of the men upon it, for the purpose of L identifying

identifying the two games of the Plenthion and Petteia; and in these, whilst correcting the positions of Hyde, he displays an equal portion of ingenuity and erudition.

We are brought, in the next division of the subject, to consider the iega papun as a vallum or mound, and thence led to the Scythian origin of the Fetteia. Taking the change of manners in nations for the clue to the variations of idiom in language, he passes on from the sheep-fold to the central mound, or boundary, which, being rendered (as by the Jewish lawCursed be he that removeth his neighbour's land-mark) inviolable, was thence considered sacred, and in the East made the site of temples. (ee Hathed's Gentoo Laws, p. 181.)-Hence,

66

-as the Petteia was originally borrowed from the Oriental Nomades, the transition from the sheep-fold to the temple and mound is but a natural train of consequences, easily to be explained by the manners of the pastoral people, which this game kept pace with, and was ever intended to represent.

"These mounds became, in course of time, objects of defence for whole provinces, which gladly embraced the security they afforded against the incursions of the pastoral tribes. De Pauw has given an account of more than twenty great mounds erected for such purposes in Egypt, Colo-Syria, Palestine, Asia Minor, Media, Tartary, China, Russia, Greece and the Peloponnesus, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Britain, Germany; besides the countries round Bochára and Samarcand, which were fortified by walls: in all which instances we may observe this mode of defence prevailing at a very early period in different parts of the world, widely distant from each other; but more

particularly in countries lying towards the northern and middle parts of Asia; and these were peopled by that numerous race, the Scythian Nomades, from whom the Tartars are descended: it is no wonder, therefore, that so striking a circumstance as the vallum should have had a place in a game which was designed more particularly to represent the manners and way of life of this wandering people."P. 49.

and

The sixth chapter, introducing a new view of the subject, as it respects the Chinese, Indian, Persian, and European chess, begins with the Petteia, as known to the Chinese. This game, in its per fect state, was, as our author has shown, distinguished by some leading particulars, which prevailed more or less in every game derived from it. These were the pentad of pebbles with which the game was played the stations moves, which were upon lines, and not on squares, as in the modern European games-the central mark or boundary, and the object of circumvention, which was forwarded by that mark, either when the piece attacked was obliged to retire, or where there were no means of escaping, by which the game was finished as if by blockade. Such were the characteristics of the Greek game. The Petteia of China had already assumed the military appearance, and that, perhaps, from its first introduction the pebbles being termed ping, or soldiers, of which either party had five. These, as in the Greek game, were stationed and moved upon lines; and the central mark, or boundary, extended so as to touch the sides of the board, was styled the kià-hô, or dividing river, under which name the middle line of the grammai is concealed. Having pointed out in further details the

similarity