Chess Scotland Noticeboard

GN · King Joined: 30 Mar 2007 Posts: 415

I see the Lewis Chess Men are returning to Scotland (see http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Lewis-Chessmen-to-be-reunited.5693623.jp)

I look forward to the news reports of Geoff protesting outside the National Museum Wink

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 10:12 pm Post subject:

The whole thing is a total farce.

"But it is evident, that to serve some purpose, contradictory statements
were circulated by the persons who discovered or who afterwards obtained
possession of these Chess-men, regarding the place where the discovery was
actually made."

From minutes read to the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, llth March 1833.

That is a fact. It's in b/w and is on record.

They wrote that back in 1833.
Sir Walter Scott himself doubted the authenticity of these things.

and if you look at the entry earlier than that (no date available ATM)

They mention Forrest turning up with the 'pieces' in 1826 claiming
they were found in Roxburgh and were part of Bonnie Prince Charlie's treasure.

But these misty-eyed clots refuse to listen.

If they muist go back to their rightful home then re-bury them
in the Viking grave on the Firth of Forth from where they were looted.

Do you know what the BM said when I finally got a contact.

"I cannot prove they NEVER came from the Isle of Lewis."

What a fudd.

I cannot prove they never came from Dundee or Dumbarton
either so therefore........

I'm gonna kick up a right stink about this.

They won't admit they are wrong.

They are wrong.

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

what does carbon dating and the style of the engraving on the pieces point to ?
are they a 12 th century relic or a 19th century fraud ?
I believe similar research was carried out on the Turin shroud to prove it was a fake

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 4:58 pm Post subject:

Carved in some Norwegian village in the 11th - 12th century.

(I have all the names in that article).

This is all well known and accepted.

The Bishop was not introduced to the chessboard till the 15th century.

The game of chess that we play came from spain in the 15th century.

The markings on some of the pieces are very similiar to Viking graves in
Firth of Forth. grave robbing was rife in the Edinburgh area in the 1820's.

The Scottish lads suspected they were loot.

The BM's explanation as to why they appeared in Lewis?

"Some guy in Dublin ordered 4 chess sets from Norway, the ship ran aground.....then you get the different stories about fed up cabin boys
being murdered, people confessing on the gallows and cows digging
up the countryside pulling up chess pieces."

Of course there is no record of anybody ordering 4 chess sets and
it does not explain the non-chess stuff found.

I can point you to a minute in the Scottish records around 1826 that
show Forrest appraoched with The Bonnis Charlie treasue and was told
to beat it.

He comes back in 1828 - just when the Edinburgh London match
had finished with a CHESS SET- coincidence??

Who was the strongest player in Britain at the time - William Lewis.

The pieces are ALL white (Forrest dyed them red with beetroot juice).
The BM admits the pieces they bought were all white and had been
recently died. They also log the fact they have no Rooks.

They could have been dyed Black with charcoal a technique that was
known in the 12th century - they were not meant to be dyed Black.

Unless that guy in Dublin wanted 4 all white chess sets (John Lennon).

They are not chess pieces and they never came from the Isle of Lewis.

The BM know this. They won't admit it.

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

Why would someone want to pretend they came from the Isle of Lewis ?
Surely the Edinburgh crowd would want to claim them as their loot.
The connection between the Isle of Lewis and Mr. Lewis does not make sense. Can you give me some internet links please to historical documents or where I would go to in Edinburgh to investigate this

On another historical note,previously I thought that the earliest record of playing chess in Scotland was by Mary Queen of Scots, since she owned a copy of the Game and Playe of the Chesse, 1474 by Caxton but I have since found the following record:
One of Queen Joan’s attendants when relating the murder of James I at Blackfriars, the royal lodging in Perth, on 20/2/1437 states “ after supper and long into quarter of the night, in the which the Earl of Atholl and Robert Stewart were about the King, where they were occupied at the playing of the chess”

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 2:03 pm Post subject:

Hi Andy - My Lewis coincidence is not the backbone of my claims.
It's just odd that they appeared when the Edinburgh-London match
had just finished and Lewis was about.

That may be a path to follow:

"Where did you get these chess pieces from."

"From Lewis." answer Forrest.

"He says he got them from the Isle of Lewis."

(that would mean we have to drag Lewis into the scam....
....funnily enough, Lewis was bankrupt at the time of the find....)

What you are doing is what the BM did.

They looked for the weakest piece in my argument - concentrated on
that and ignored the real facts. The questions they cannot answer.

"I cannot prove they never came from Lewis." How pathetic is that.

I was put onto this by Ken Whyld after hinting in an old Corner
that they did not look like chess piece.

You can read the old Scotsman reports to see just how big this
was back then. It was being called Scotland v England.

you have to read:

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=172

and

http://textualities.net/geoff-chandler/not-even-from-lewis-mate-2/

And I'm not alone on this but I am making the biggest noise.

There is a lot of the old the minutes on the net.

http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:MynDrnzz--4J:ads.ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/adsdata/PSAS_2002/pdf/arch_scot_vol_004/04_366_369.pdf+Society+of+Antiquaries+of+Scotland+1833+%2B+chess&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Although today I can only get pages 1-4 the real evidence is after that.
(the cover up has started!!) - though they do list what they found.
No Rooks.

If you download the whole PDF it may show it.

For the wrong conclussion when the piece's being dyed red
and the fantastic newly invented tale of the man in Dublin see:

(note suddenly they found Rooks!! and the specualtion that the Vikings
played chess on Red and White boards. It's trash like this has become
taken as fact.)

http://heritage-key.com/world/story-lewis-chessmen

This guy has not read the BM report that the pieces had been
recently dyed red and there were no Rooks.

There are about 6 books on the Lewis men - some are tourist traps
one or two or ask a few awkward questions. They should have them
in the main Glasogow Library.

To date there is not one shred of evidence they came from Lewis.

We have:

An unknown man in Dublin.
An unknown Boat
An uknown disgruntled cabin boy
(who makes three/four trips back to the boat to the get all the pieces).

He is is murdered by an unknown person.
(where is the body).
The unknown murderer buries the pieces in an unknown location.
The unknown murderer confess's on an unknown date to murder
whilst getting hung for an Unknown crime.
(they think he was hung in Shetland).

A named farmer of who no record exists sells them to a Captain
Pyrie (no such Captain exists in records). He sells the to Forrest.
Forrest shows them to the Scots lads.
They say get lost. etc...

I can give you Viking games played with the pieces found.
Viking graves near Edinburgh.

A very dodgy character: Forrest who the Scot's lad mistrust right away.
and was later charged with 'bad dealings' later in life.

This impossible 3 day jounrey to Lewis to find one Bishop.

The BM report about the pieces being all white.

The BM themselves who refuse to display on them on a chessboard.

"because they do not look like chess pieces."

The Bishop was not introduced in Chess till the 15th century.

and books written 50-100 years after they were found saying we
shall never know how they got into the hands of Forrest.

I'm 99& sure thay are NOT chess pieces.

I want them to come from the Isle of Lewis and am willing to accept
that the place is known but they don't want treasure seekers digging
up the place looking for the missing pieces. But no proof.

Forrest bought them from a grave robber - the Scots lads knew
this - that note in the minutes is a save bum clause and they helped
spread the Isle of Lewis theory so no one would suspect they bought
looted treasure.

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

I think it is a mixture of chess sets that were found. It might be a Scandinavian variant but they are still essentially chess pieces, not some other game.

There is a bishop but why could the Scandinavians not have used bishops at that point, ahead of their time ? The rooks are shown as standing wardens. There is no reason why the most wide-ranging piece needs to be the largest piece. The boards could have been made of animal fur or leaves which would have decayed over the 600 years being buried. This is why no boards were found.

It seems that there was a factory in Trondheim which made these pieces. Since they were made from walrus ivory, they are all white. To play a game, you would have to mark half of them by dye to create another colour. Perhaps the factory in Trondheim simply created the white pieces and the players had to dye them themselves. Also the dye may now have worn off.

It is possible they were not found at Lewis but were stolen from Lothian graves. The sellers would not want to admit that this is how they were found if they wished to maximise their sale value.

I am now interested in the reference to Roxburgh & Bonnie Prince Charlie and the first sale attempt in 1826. What is the reference for this?

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 4:39 pm Post subject:

Hi Andy.

I see you have picked up on a few loose ends.
I'm happy to discuss them with you.

'It might be a Scandinavian variant but they are still essentially chess
pieces, not some other game. '

Look at the History of Viking Board games.
They played dozens of different games and often used pieces/idols
in the telling of their saga's.

There are various sites that tell you how to play these games
and make the boards. (I keep getting the names of the games
mixed up).

"You don't need the pieces - you a buy a set of what they laughingly
call the Lewis Chess men." You will happen upon that sentance in your travels.

There is a bishop but why could the Scandinavians not have used
bishops at that point, ahead of their time ?

Ahead of their time? Andy they were 300 years ahead of they time.

Of course how silly of me. It was one chess set and all the extra
Queens & Bishops & Knights were to be promoted pieces.
Even though pawn promotion was not in the rules this Viking carver
was ahead of his time.

This is the sort of thing I would expect from the BM clutching at straws
to make a theory fit.

'The boards could have been made of animal fur or leaves '

Very possible.
Lets ignore the marble, stone and wooden boards that have been
found at other Viking sites with other Viking games.

They played on a board made of animal fur.
Ignore the fact that no such board has ever been found or seen
in engravings of that period.

Suddenly this game piece carver is now an animal skinner who
has the ability to see 300 years into the future.

I like this Andy. This is much better than the Cabin Boy Murder.

Perhaps the factory in Trondheim simply created the white pieces
and the players had to dye them themselves.
Also the dye may now have worn off.

Yup. Every chess set I ever bought came with it's own packet of dye
to colour the Black pieces.

The technique of dying walrus ivory was known then. The BM reports
the pieces were all white and had recently been dyed.

How could the colour have 'worn off' by your own statement you said they
were buried for 600 years.
Nobody knows how long they were buried - if indeed they ever were.

Remember.
Well shall most likely never know how Forrest got his hands on
there pieces. But there is no evidence at all to prove they came
the Isle of Lewis.

When you do some research you will hit this statement all the time
by various authors.

[Why cannot the factory have been producing other Viking Games.
Why make it Chess. The pieces found match with 3 versions of a
Viking game .)

The rooks are shown as standing wardens. There is no reason
why the most wide-ranging piece needs to be the largest piece

The Rooks were the most powerful piece on the board. I grant you
there is no reason why they should be relagated to the smallest piece.

Every other chess set by every other nation from that time has the Rook
as a chariot or an elephant. And is always denoted as the largest piece.

It was this what I saw in the BM in the 1975 that made me first think.

"These are NOT chess pieces."

I shrugged my shoulders and moved on. Over the years I saw
other references to these pieces and got interested.

If I recall, Murray's History of chess mentions there is currently
a debate about their aunthenticity - that was in 1913.

(it's either in the main version of 'add-on'.)

In the HONFI game (most likely spelt wrong) the four Kings guards
are berserkers biting on their shield.

Back in the 1830's they logged the pieces and only called these pieces
Rooks when they challenged Spalding and said this is not a Chess Set.
The Rooks appeared in the records in the 1860's.

The Roxburgh & Bonnie Prince Charlie Minutes were on that site
I mentioned earlier. They mention a jade piece which they kept and that
is mentioned on the minutes you can see.

They do not describe or mention Forrest on the first visit but the
moment he turns up he is mis-trusted.

Take a visit to your main Glasgow library. If no joy there then all
the things I have mentioned are in books in the Edinburgh Library,
including transcipts of the minutes..

I'll pop to the library during the week and see if I can photo copy them.

Forgot to mention - research by that Australin lad failed to find any
mention of the 'find' in the Lewis press from that period.
You would have thought it might have made a few column inches.

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

Geoff
You and Keith must write another book entitled the Darwinian evolution of chess pieces in Scotland. Perhaps it could answer the following :
Were wardens an earlier version of rooks ?
Can you tell me the name of a viking game whcih contained bishops,wardens,knights,pawns, kings & queens ? Without this name we can call them chesspieces
There was a UK economic slump in 1825. Did this create the culture of grave robbing in Edinburgh and create the necessity of the Lewis Chessmen ?
Burke and Hare came on the scene in 1827. Were they encouraged by the 1826 find ?

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

But Andy, we know the Isle of Lewis Chess Pieces exist. They are on sale in the Chess and Bridge shop in London.

I wonder if Peter Woods has them as well? If he does then surely that would end the debate as to whether or not there are Isle of Lewis Chess Pieces as 2 independent retailers have them...

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:32 pm Post subject:

Hi Andy.

Burke and Hare never robbed a grave - they murdered people
and sold the bodies to Dr.Knox.

(their first two 'victims' died of natural causes. The money they got
from Knox impressed them so much they took up murder.

Walter Scott, he is figuring more and more in this,
was the prosecuting officer who offered Hare a deal to grass on Burke.)

There were three major gangs of grave robbers in Edinburgh.
They often attacked each other and stole their 'fresh' bodies.

The law at the time was you could take the body but not any item
buried with the body.

So they dug a hole at the head of the grave. Upon reaching the
coffin they smashed it open, tied a rope under the armpits of the
corpse, pulled it up through the hole , stripped it naked and left.

Soon guards were placed in Edinburgh graveyards so these
gangs spread all over the Lothian area and into Fife.

When the law changed to forbid total grave robbing, they turned their
hand to looting graves leaving the bodies behind. They were soon
caught and hanged.

This site is a good place to start if you are interested in this
part of the story.

http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/burke.html

I'm of the opinion these pieces came from a Viking grave.
There is certainly something sinister about how they fell
into the hands of Forrest.

Glad you pointed out there was a financial slump in that period.
With every finanacial slump their is a rise in forgery and confidence trickery.

During the American Depression of the 1930's the statue of Liberty
was sold about a dozen times.

This Lewis chess piece scam pulled off by Forrest is a work of art.

Even the Scandinavians do not know the actual names of the
all games Vikings played. They do even know the rules of the games
they know they did play. Those published are speculation.
They openly admit this.

For all we know the carved figures could have been idols of worship
or aids for telling their saga's. We simply don't know.
But they certainly are not chess pieces.

I'm serious about going to the Trades Decription dept.

The BM will have to prove beyond doubt these pieces came from
Lewis and they are chess pieces.

A Muir · King Joined: 15 Feb 2007 Posts: 489 Location: Dumbarton

wed 21 oct UWS Paisley Campus 6pm free talk Professor Sam McKinstry on
Sir Walter Scott and the 1825 credit crunch.

I cannot make it but would like the transcript from inspiringpeople@uws.ac.uk

Did you know the 1825 credit crunch made Scott bankrupt and forced him to write several novels ? If it affected him , what effect on a Edinburgh down and out who has found some viking pieces of ivory in a grave ?

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 11:56 am Post subject:

Hi Andy.

I have actually spent many many hours reading the newpapers
from the 1820's both re-searching the Viking Idols and looking
for information about the reporting of the Edinburgh-London match.

I was fair taken how the news of a ship's arrival at Leith Docks
was treated. This was headline stuff.

They would list the docking times, where it had been, the cargo
it carried, who owned it, it's Captain....

Also suprised at the amount of people being killed or badly
injured by horse and cart accidents in the city.

Which Reminds me. Did you know Burke and Hare were making so
much money from murdering people and selling the bodies they
actually bought a horse and cart to transport them to Surgeons Hall.

I Have tried in vain to find the advert placed in the Scotsman asking
for players to start up the Edinburgh Chess Club.

The first minutes of the club report there was such an advert and
how much it cost but so far it has escaped the attetention of both
myself and Dave Archibald.

Down and outs in them days did not sleep in the graveyards.
These places were locked up and guarded.

It was a crime then to be a beggar.
The vagrancy laws are still on some statute books but not employed.

(Just as well because Hamilton C.C. would not be able to field a team) Wink

There were poor houses/work houses and if they did choose to sleep
in a graveyard they would not swim to the islands on the Firth of Forth.

However one can imagine grave robbers who had been forced
to ply their trade elsewhere making a few trips to see what they
could find.

Had an email saying that the Viking presence in the Lothian and
Fife region was sparse and Vikings did not settle there.

A two minute browse on the net will reveal that a lot of the area's
place names are of Viking origin. Tranent, Burnt Island...

http://www.electricscotland.com/books/viking_names.htm

I don't think Scott was involved in the scam but he without a doubt
smelt a rat. All he had to do was nod and the pieces would never have
left Scotland.

I'm popping along to the Chambers St. Museum this afternoon to
view the eleven pieces and fire my opening salvo regarding my
Trades Description act stance.

Next step must be to contact a TV play writer.
I think the whole scam, it's build up and cover up would make good viewing.

They will have to get someone extra handsome to play my part.

By the by. Will be passing Greyfriars Bobby on the way to the Museum.

That's the next myth on my list to be exposed.

It never happened. Again not one shred of evidence bar a letter from
the graveyard keeper asking the head master of Heriots to stop
his pupils from feeding stray dogs during lunch time.

"...I can't get them [the dogs] to leave the graveyard at night."

Alan Bell · Queen Joined: 01 Mar 2007 Posts: 89

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:49 pm Post subject:

Hi Alan.

Read and re-read your post. It is obvioulsy a wind up
but some will not see the joke so I'll answer in serious mode.

Well where do we begin.

The rules were known to all before Pie ran in the Grand National.
The jockey was a young girl and under age.
They tried to cheat and got caught.
No sympathy at all for cheats.

Donald Crisp is an actor it's his job to fool people into believng
what he does is real. He was rather good at it. Certainly fooled you.

First of allI confess I am not the first to chase down the Bobby myth.

The facts are well presented here.

http://vetblog.co.uk/vetblog/canine-myths-and-legends

And that was just the first web siite I found.

A few years ago there was a superb piece of journalstic investigation
by an Edinburgh Evening News writer who uncovered everything
explaining how the legend grew over the years from the first report
(from an Ayrshire newspaper) right up until today.

Walt Disney films are not proof of anything.
Disney and facts often went in different directions.

No shepherd from Selkirk (called Jock!!) and certainly no court case
being granted freedom of the city as in the Disney film.
That just simply did not happen.

I'm afraid when you scratch the surface of these things nothing is real

The real sadness is there are much more interesting FACTS in
Edinburgh's and Scotland's history that has been buried because it
does fit the legend, does not go along with the current theory
or, as in the case of Lewis pieces, to save face. (and make money).

I was at the museum today. You would believe what they have done.
I'll reveal all maybe later on tonight certainly tomorrow on the Corner.

They have not only shot themselves in the foot, they have given
me more ammo than I'll ever need. This is now far too easy.

I'm starting to feel sorry for them.

(Lassie was always played by a male dog and not a bitch.)