This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As the photo I added doesn't show a berzerk rook (just the usual anxious-looking ones) here's a link to a photo in the British Museum's collection, showing him (he's the toothy guy on the right) [1]. Hmm, we curously don't seem to have an article either on berzerk (not the video game) or berzerker. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 16:15, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Reverted to original version. Anyone who reads the article past the first sentence will see why they received the designation "Lewis Chessmen'. The article goes on to describe where they were found. The added text was moreover inserted at the wrong place in the first sentence, almost making it sound as if all the surviving sets were found on the Isle of Lewis! Eilthireach 18:20, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Should it be mentioned that reproductions of these pieces are available, or not, since that is a commercial site? Bubba73 (talk), 16:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
In the third paragraph, it states that "The 93 pieces form parts of..." and then states how many of each type but they don't add up to 93. In addition, 19 pawns is not enough for two complete sets: each side has 8 pawns initially in the modern game.
Agreed. The numbers seem to be simply copied from http://history.chess.free.fr/lewis.htm with no regard to their accuracy, nor a citation. The "93" number comes from including the checker/disc pieces and the belt buckle mentioned on that site: "They are 93 pieces forming parts of four or five sets, two complete. 82 are in the British Museum in London and 11 are in the National Museums of Scotland in Edinburgh. They are 8 Kings, 8 Queens, 16 Bishops, 15 Knights, 12 Warders (Rooks) and 19 Pawns. In addition, they are 14 plain disks for Tabula game (Backgammon ancestor) and 1 belt-buckle." If someone has an authoritative source for these it should be updated. Tofof 11:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I deleted this sentence:
And replaced it with this:
The reason for this is that I own Chessmaster 9000, which also features the Lewis chessmen, so I know they were available before 10th Edition. I wrote "the more recent editions" instead of saying they became available starting with 9000, though, because 9000 is the first Chessmaster I've owned and I have no idea when the series began using the Lewis chessmen.
The numbers for the different types of pieces add up to 78, i think it was, but anyway not 93. Johnbod ( talk) 13:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
This anon edit needs to be checked. 24.177.121.141 ( talk) 07:57, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Since these pieces predate the modern rules of chess, would they be more accurately described as "shatranj" pieces? -- GCarty ( talk) 22:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Are there also any know medieval chess boards that have survived? If so, and if there are Wikipedia articles on one or more of them, it might make sense to link them from this article. Thank you. -- 217.190.216.15 ( talk) 13:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
They're currently in NYC (well, a selection of them is) and the curatorship and display cases are magnificent. I'm wondering if some reference to their travels is appropriate. 96.237.240.126 ( talk) 12:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
The lede says "they may constitute some of the few complete, surviving medieval chess sets, although it is not clear if a set as originally made can be assembled from the pieces." I guess to me that would read more clearly as something like "They may constitute some of the few ... sets, although this is not clear". And then the talk page in the 'inconsistencies' section has a citation which says they form 2 complete sets. -- Richardson mcphillips ( talk) 22:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
regards gangLeri · לערי ריינהארט· T· m: Th· T· email me· 10:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
the current page says there are 67+11 pieces [11 in Edinburgh], but the British Museum website says there are 82+11 pieces. One of the earlier posts on the talk page refers to 93 pieces, so I guess somebody has changed the numbers. Does the British Museum actually lie? [1] 163.1.88.5 ( talk) 07:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC) don knuth [stanford], typing this from borrowed computer while in the UK 163.1.88.5 ( talk) 07:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
References
The abovementioned recently created article about a 13th century Icelandic artists includes a claim that she is the creator of these pieces, but this article does not mention it - it only refers to a general claim of an Icelandic origin. Should this more specific claim be added to this article? In any case I believe at least a "See also" link to the Margret the Adroit article should be added. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 20:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Since the modern chess rules did not exist yet and also other rules varied, is it known (approximately) what rules these pieces were played with? -- 2A03:1B20:3:F011:0:0:0:9D ( talk) 01:03, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-48494885 92.3.51.249 ( talk) 11:29, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
The museum has been open for some time, and has some of the chessmen on permanent display (long-term loan from the British Museum).
The main page should really be updated to reflect this - it still talks about the project in the future tense.
https://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/leisure-sport-and-culture/museum-nan-eilean/museum-nan-eilean-stornoway/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samdeane ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
Back when the Lewis chessmen were made, they used the Old Norse word hrókr for that piece, which meant a hero or warrior. That's why the rooks among the Lewis chessmen, and other medieval Scandinavian rooks, are depicted the way they are. When they are figurative they are warriors. When chess came to Europe, Old Norse was the only European language that had a word similar to rook and actually meant something that gave a meaning in a war game like chess. It wasn't before the 17th century they started to import alternative terms from Central Europe, like tower instead of rook and runner instead of bishop. I know that many refer to the rooks among the Lewis chessmen as warders. They never were. People just use the term Madden invented for these pieces, as he thought they looked like warders. We write an encyclopedia and shouldn't spread this misconception by just copying what Sotheby's and others have copied. Please, just write that the newly discovered piece is a rook. That would be a neutral term, and actually more correct. Alternatively we have to write warrior, but not warder. I suggest just rook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hastein ( talk • contribs) 22:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Game pieces of the Lewis chessmen hoard was copied or moved into Lewis chessmen with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Thincat ( talk) 18:55, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
The Warder Chesspiece that was sold on auction by Sotheby's in 2019 [2], has emerged in the Neue Galerie special exhibit on Ronald Lauder's Private Collection [3], which confirms current ownership of this particular piece. NeverBeGameOver ( talk) 15:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As the photo I added doesn't show a berzerk rook (just the usual anxious-looking ones) here's a link to a photo in the British Museum's collection, showing him (he's the toothy guy on the right) [1]. Hmm, we curously don't seem to have an article either on berzerk (not the video game) or berzerker. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 16:15, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Reverted to original version. Anyone who reads the article past the first sentence will see why they received the designation "Lewis Chessmen'. The article goes on to describe where they were found. The added text was moreover inserted at the wrong place in the first sentence, almost making it sound as if all the surviving sets were found on the Isle of Lewis! Eilthireach 18:20, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Should it be mentioned that reproductions of these pieces are available, or not, since that is a commercial site? Bubba73 (talk), 16:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
In the third paragraph, it states that "The 93 pieces form parts of..." and then states how many of each type but they don't add up to 93. In addition, 19 pawns is not enough for two complete sets: each side has 8 pawns initially in the modern game.
Agreed. The numbers seem to be simply copied from http://history.chess.free.fr/lewis.htm with no regard to their accuracy, nor a citation. The "93" number comes from including the checker/disc pieces and the belt buckle mentioned on that site: "They are 93 pieces forming parts of four or five sets, two complete. 82 are in the British Museum in London and 11 are in the National Museums of Scotland in Edinburgh. They are 8 Kings, 8 Queens, 16 Bishops, 15 Knights, 12 Warders (Rooks) and 19 Pawns. In addition, they are 14 plain disks for Tabula game (Backgammon ancestor) and 1 belt-buckle." If someone has an authoritative source for these it should be updated. Tofof 11:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I deleted this sentence:
And replaced it with this:
The reason for this is that I own Chessmaster 9000, which also features the Lewis chessmen, so I know they were available before 10th Edition. I wrote "the more recent editions" instead of saying they became available starting with 9000, though, because 9000 is the first Chessmaster I've owned and I have no idea when the series began using the Lewis chessmen.
The numbers for the different types of pieces add up to 78, i think it was, but anyway not 93. Johnbod ( talk) 13:41, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
This anon edit needs to be checked. 24.177.121.141 ( talk) 07:57, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Since these pieces predate the modern rules of chess, would they be more accurately described as "shatranj" pieces? -- GCarty ( talk) 22:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Are there also any know medieval chess boards that have survived? If so, and if there are Wikipedia articles on one or more of them, it might make sense to link them from this article. Thank you. -- 217.190.216.15 ( talk) 13:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
They're currently in NYC (well, a selection of them is) and the curatorship and display cases are magnificent. I'm wondering if some reference to their travels is appropriate. 96.237.240.126 ( talk) 12:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
The lede says "they may constitute some of the few complete, surviving medieval chess sets, although it is not clear if a set as originally made can be assembled from the pieces." I guess to me that would read more clearly as something like "They may constitute some of the few ... sets, although this is not clear". And then the talk page in the 'inconsistencies' section has a citation which says they form 2 complete sets. -- Richardson mcphillips ( talk) 22:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
regards gangLeri · לערי ריינהארט· T· m: Th· T· email me· 10:43, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
the current page says there are 67+11 pieces [11 in Edinburgh], but the British Museum website says there are 82+11 pieces. One of the earlier posts on the talk page refers to 93 pieces, so I guess somebody has changed the numbers. Does the British Museum actually lie? [1] 163.1.88.5 ( talk) 07:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC) don knuth [stanford], typing this from borrowed computer while in the UK 163.1.88.5 ( talk) 07:29, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
References
The abovementioned recently created article about a 13th century Icelandic artists includes a claim that she is the creator of these pieces, but this article does not mention it - it only refers to a general claim of an Icelandic origin. Should this more specific claim be added to this article? In any case I believe at least a "See also" link to the Margret the Adroit article should be added. Roger (Dodger67) ( talk) 20:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Since the modern chess rules did not exist yet and also other rules varied, is it known (approximately) what rules these pieces were played with? -- 2A03:1B20:3:F011:0:0:0:9D ( talk) 01:03, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-48494885 92.3.51.249 ( talk) 11:29, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
The museum has been open for some time, and has some of the chessmen on permanent display (long-term loan from the British Museum).
The main page should really be updated to reflect this - it still talks about the project in the future tense.
https://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/leisure-sport-and-culture/museum-nan-eilean/museum-nan-eilean-stornoway/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samdeane ( talk • contribs) 12:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
Back when the Lewis chessmen were made, they used the Old Norse word hrókr for that piece, which meant a hero or warrior. That's why the rooks among the Lewis chessmen, and other medieval Scandinavian rooks, are depicted the way they are. When they are figurative they are warriors. When chess came to Europe, Old Norse was the only European language that had a word similar to rook and actually meant something that gave a meaning in a war game like chess. It wasn't before the 17th century they started to import alternative terms from Central Europe, like tower instead of rook and runner instead of bishop. I know that many refer to the rooks among the Lewis chessmen as warders. They never were. People just use the term Madden invented for these pieces, as he thought they looked like warders. We write an encyclopedia and shouldn't spread this misconception by just copying what Sotheby's and others have copied. Please, just write that the newly discovered piece is a rook. That would be a neutral term, and actually more correct. Alternatively we have to write warrior, but not warder. I suggest just rook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hastein ( talk • contribs) 22:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Game pieces of the Lewis chessmen hoard was copied or moved into Lewis chessmen with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Thincat ( talk) 18:55, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
The Warder Chesspiece that was sold on auction by Sotheby's in 2019 [2], has emerged in the Neue Galerie special exhibit on Ronald Lauder's Private Collection [3], which confirms current ownership of this particular piece. NeverBeGameOver ( talk) 15:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)