Chess variants
Abstract Games magazine Issue 6 (2001) contained no less than two articles about Edgar Rice Burroughs' chess-like game Jetan, introduced in his 1922 novel The Chessmen of Mars (CM). One article was by Kerry Handscomb, the other by L. Lynn Smith.1
The game’s popularity over time is impossible to measure, yet I have a feeling that around the time of the Abstract Games publication, the game was rising in popularity. Smith had just created his own Jetan web site, and he was also moderator of the new Jetan mailing list on Yahoo! There were unofficial Jetan matches at the Edgar Rice Burroughs conventions, Jetan was featured on the new and expanding Chess Variants web site, the second Jetan implementation for Zillions of Games was released that same year, James Killian Spratt was producing his famous Jetan sets, and so on. And Jetan’s popularity was still growing.
But this growth was fated to come to an end. Five years later, the mailing list message volume had passed its peak, updates had ceased at several new Jetan web sites, Spratt stopped making his sets, and a few more years later Jetan was no longer played at the conventions. What happened?
There is no simple answer, but I think one important aspect is this: Jetan was perceived to be too diversified and complicated; there was no generally accepted set of standard rules. Now, Jetan had always been played a little bit differently by players, but looking at older Jetan articles, there was a broad consensus about the most important rules. Those who played wildly different variants were probably very few.
But this growth was fated to come to an end. Five years later, the mailing list message volume had passed its peak, updates had ceased at several new Jetan web sites, Spratt stopped making his sets, and a few more years later Jetan was no longer played at the conventions. What happened?
There is no simple answer, but I think one important aspect is this: Jetan was perceived to be too diversified and complicated; there was no generally accepted set of standard rules. Now, Jetan had always been played a little bit differently by players, but looking at older Jetan articles, there was a broad consensus about the most important rules. Those who played wildly different variants were probably very few.
Smith came around and changed all that. He proposed an elegant and complex nomenclature for Jetan variants, and he proclaimed on his Jetan mailing list, “Jetan is not a game which has variants. Jetan is a game of variants.”2 Smith’s enthusiasm at first raised interest in the game, but I think in the long run that his hardcore insistence on the game’s complexity hurt its popularity more than it helped. As late as 2019, the Wikipedia article “Jetan” began: “Jetan is a chesslike game with unclear rules.”3
Fortunately, even though interest in Jetan waned, research on the game continued. Last year, I tried to sum up all that is known about the rules of Jetan. The result was published in ERBzine,4 the main on-line repository for all things Edgar Rice Burroughs. In that article, I tried to show that Jetan is not really all that difficult. At least no more so than Chess.
.So, in the light of these new findings, how do Handscomb’s and Smith’s old articles from AG6 hold up?
Both Handscomb and Smith put focus on Jetan as a wagering game. For example, Handscomb writes “Jetan is usually played by the Martians as a gambling game” and Smith says “Jetan is designed to be a game of wagers”; also interesting in this context is a letter in AG7, where Mark Thompson suggests a very interesting gambling variant called Contract Jetan. Now, there is nothing wrong with using Jetan with gambling, but I think this intense focus upon the gambling aspect of the game is unwarranted, at least as originally described by Burroughs. In his entire canon, Burroughs only mentions Jetan gambling in passing once, in his rules appendix to CM. Gambling is never mentioned in direct connection with characters actually playing the game, nor is it mentioned in the condensed but complete rules in Chapter 2. Smith’s claim that “Burroughs states this [gambling] often within the novel [CM]” is simply incorrect. The natural assumption must be that gambling is optional, not part of the core game.
Both Handscomb and Smith put focus on Jetan as a wagering game. For example, Handscomb writes “Jetan is usually played by the Martians as a gambling game” and Smith says “Jetan is designed to be a game of wagers”; also interesting in this context is a letter in AG7, where Mark Thompson suggests a very interesting gambling variant called Contract Jetan. Now, there is nothing wrong with using Jetan with gambling, but I think this intense focus upon the gambling aspect of the game is unwarranted, at least as originally described by Burroughs. In his entire canon, Burroughs only mentions Jetan gambling in passing once, in his rules appendix to CM. Gambling is never mentioned in direct connection with characters actually playing the game, nor is it mentioned in the condensed but complete rules in Chapter 2. Smith’s claim that “Burroughs states this [gambling] often within the novel [CM]” is simply incorrect. The natural assumption must be that gambling is optional, not part of the core game.
Both Handscomb and Smith suggest the idea (first proposed, I believe, by Smith) that Jetan is usually played in a series of ten games. This originates from CM, but is a misreading of Burroughs’ words. True, Burroughs does mention a series of ten games, but always in connection with the number of games a criminal can, at worst, be sentenced to in the living Games of Jetan. This seems to be connected with the number of games (apparently two per day during five days) that are played in the annual Jeddak’s Games in Manator, and those games are normally played by different players. In another passage, Burroughs writes, “If serving a sentence the number of games he [the convicted soldier] must play is also indicated [by what he wears].”5 This suggests that the sentence’s length is variable, so that it can be anywhere between one and ten. Hence, there is no rule, or even tradition, that Jetan between two players should be played in a series of ten games.
Handscomb recommends using the so-called “chained” move for the pieces, i.e., a piece always has to move its full count of steps. This is the normal interpretation made by most players, and in fact the only possible one if you read Burroughs carefully. Burroughs states, “Three squares is a Chief’s move—three squares in any direction or combination of directions, only provided that he does not cross the same square twice in a given move."6 For a “free” Chief, it would be pointless to say that the same square may not be crossed twice, since the piece can stop anywhere. This quote, in combination with my analysis of the final move in the Jetan game in Chapter 17 of CM ,4 shows that the variant termed “Chained Wild” by Smith is the one that Burroughs must have intended.
In fact, my opinion is that the term “chained” does not need to be used at all. Since this was obviously the intended application by Burroughs, the so-called “chained” move should be considered standard. Non-standard rules, such as the “free” and “civil” patterns, and others described by Smith, have been used historically and deserve mention, but should be considered as variants, aside from the norm.
Handscomb and Smith, as many writers before them, make the compulsory comment about the Panthan, that it will be useless when it reaches tenth rank. However, I have never yet seen a Panthan reach farther than eighth rank, so that entire discussion appears academic. Since there is no promotion (nor should there be, as indeed both Handscomb and Smith are quick to point out), there is no reason to race toward the end of the board. Panthans tend to remain in mid-board, where they are often used to protect the power pieces, or for short-range attacks on enemy power pieces.
Handscomb remarks about the Warrior that due to the game’s logical structure, “... it is better to disallow diagonal step moves”. While this is accurate, there is an even better reason to stick to the more restricted version preferred by Handscomb and most other Jetan players: the Warrior with diagonal steps in its move is based on a typographic error from the first book edition, as I have shown in my ERBzine article. In the original pulp publication, the Warrior’s description in Chapter 2 matches that in Appendix, and it also harmonizes much better with the other piece descriptions in Chapter 2.
The Thoat’s jumping ability is about the only rule ambiguity that cannot be resolved in any satisfactory way. In Chapter 2, Burroughs says that the Thoat can jump; in the appendix, he says nothing on that subject, implying that the Thoat cannot jump.
Handscomb prefers the jumping Thoat because the Thoat, like the other jumping pieces (princess and flier) is not a foot soldier. That makes sense (although see below about the Odwar). I prefer the non-jumping variant because the appendix is a more formal and detailed set of rules. That also makes sense. We are both in the right, and it comes down to a matter of taste. In that context, it should be mentioned that the Thoat’s jumping is much less important in Jetan than the similar Knight’s jumping in Chess. Probably due to the Jetan board’s greater size and the Thoat’s greater agility, I have the impression when playing that the Thoat’s jumping or not only very rarely makes a crucial difference to the game’s outcome.
Handscomb and Smith, as many writers before them, make the compulsory comment about the Panthan, that it will be useless when it reaches tenth rank. However, I have never yet seen a Panthan reach farther than eighth rank, so that entire discussion appears academic. Since there is no promotion (nor should there be, as indeed both Handscomb and Smith are quick to point out), there is no reason to race toward the end of the board. Panthans tend to remain in mid-board, where they are often used to protect the power pieces, or for short-range attacks on enemy power pieces.
Handscomb remarks about the Warrior that due to the game’s logical structure, “... it is better to disallow diagonal step moves”. While this is accurate, there is an even better reason to stick to the more restricted version preferred by Handscomb and most other Jetan players: the Warrior with diagonal steps in its move is based on a typographic error from the first book edition, as I have shown in my ERBzine article. In the original pulp publication, the Warrior’s description in Chapter 2 matches that in Appendix, and it also harmonizes much better with the other piece descriptions in Chapter 2.
The Thoat’s jumping ability is about the only rule ambiguity that cannot be resolved in any satisfactory way. In Chapter 2, Burroughs says that the Thoat can jump; in the appendix, he says nothing on that subject, implying that the Thoat cannot jump.
Handscomb prefers the jumping Thoat because the Thoat, like the other jumping pieces (princess and flier) is not a foot soldier. That makes sense (although see below about the Odwar). I prefer the non-jumping variant because the appendix is a more formal and detailed set of rules. That also makes sense. We are both in the right, and it comes down to a matter of taste. In that context, it should be mentioned that the Thoat’s jumping is much less important in Jetan than the similar Knight’s jumping in Chess. Probably due to the Jetan board’s greater size and the Thoat’s greater agility, I have the impression when playing that the Thoat’s jumping or not only very rarely makes a crucial difference to the game’s outcome.
While on the subject of the appendix, allow me to dispel a myth about Jetan: Burroughs did not add the rules Appendix for the late 1922 book publication of CM—it was present already in the early 1922 pulp magazine edition, and was at that time identical with the version later published in the book. Hence, there is no way for us to say what version came first. Burroughs may well have written the Appendix before he started writing the book, or he may have added it as an afterthought. My guess is that he formulated the rules as part of writing his worksheets (his normal means of planning his writing, in this case detailing over 70 separate items and said to be “one of the most involved he had ever prepared”7) before starting on the novel itself. The Appendix is probably closely based on those worksheets.
Going back to the Thoat, its order of steps (free order, or orthogonal step first) is another case where there is genuine lack of clarity in Burroughs’ rules, but the latter interpretation nevertheless has a slightly stronger case when you analyse Burroughs’ wording: “2 spaces, one straight and one diagonal in any direction” (Appendix); “may move one straight and one diagonal” (Chapter 2). Both these quotes explicitly put the straight (orthogonal) step first. This is also the preference of practically all rule standards and analyses that do not opt for the jumping variety.
Another popular Jetan myth concerns the Odwar (the Flier in the Manatorian variant of Jetan), which Handscomb (along with many other Jetan scholars) assumes “moves as a Flier but may not jump”, while Smith claims “has the same move as the Flier but cannot jump”. This is incorrect, as I have shown in my analysis of CM Chapter 174: The Odwar has exactly the same jumping ability as the Flier.
An interesting and rarely mentioned quirk in Burroughs’ rules concerns the escape move, which is a ten-space move in any direction or combination. The reasonable assumption (with which Handscomb agrees) is that Burroughs intended for the Princess to be placed on any unoccupied and unthreatened square on the board. Although, even if the Princess is to be moved from one corner to the opposite corner, it will take no more than nine steps. A tenth straight step would take the piece off the board. Burroughs must have forgotten to consider that the Princess is already standing on her first square, so he just gave the maximum size of the board as the escape move’s capacity. Even though Smith tries to give a number of optional interpretations, none of them sound convincingly like something that Burroughs might possibly have intended.
Both Handscomb and Smith mention the possible interpretation that the Princess may not move across a threatened square, even if she does not remain there (called a “Frightened Princess” in Smith’s nomenclature). I find it hard to understand how Burroughs’ text can be thus interpreted. Burroughs clearly states in the Appendix: “The Princess may not move onto a threatened square” (my emphasis). The Oxford Universal Dictionary defines ‘onto’ thus: “To a position on or upon.” This appears to leave little room for any interpretation involving movement through a square.
Smith’s analysis of the variant moves is brilliant, profound and beautiful. Unfortunately, as I have shown in my own analysis of the game, it is insufficiently anchored in the “reality” of the novel text. There is no need for Smith’s elaborate classification system, simply because only the Thoat is truly ambiguous.
It may be true that it will never be possible to make every Jetan player stick to one standard set of rules, and perhaps it is not even desirable. But the opposite view, that there can never be a common standard and that every possible variant is equally relevant, is just as extreme and potentially even harmful. I have experienced several times that interested would-be players have turned away from the game when they realized that the rules can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, and that many different variants will have to be learned if they wish to play.
Both Handscomb and Smith mention the possible interpretation that the Princess may not move across a threatened square, even if she does not remain there (called a “Frightened Princess” in Smith’s nomenclature). I find it hard to understand how Burroughs’ text can be thus interpreted. Burroughs clearly states in the Appendix: “The Princess may not move onto a threatened square” (my emphasis). The Oxford Universal Dictionary defines ‘onto’ thus: “To a position on or upon.” This appears to leave little room for any interpretation involving movement through a square.
Smith’s analysis of the variant moves is brilliant, profound and beautiful. Unfortunately, as I have shown in my own analysis of the game, it is insufficiently anchored in the “reality” of the novel text. There is no need for Smith’s elaborate classification system, simply because only the Thoat is truly ambiguous.
It may be true that it will never be possible to make every Jetan player stick to one standard set of rules, and perhaps it is not even desirable. But the opposite view, that there can never be a common standard and that every possible variant is equally relevant, is just as extreme and potentially even harmful. I have experienced several times that interested would-be players have turned away from the game when they realized that the rules can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, and that many different variants will have to be learned if they wish to play.
Several proposed standards exist. One was created as early as the 1960s for The National Fantasy Fan Federation,8 although as far as I know it was never officially adopted. Most writers about Jetan since then have expressed one preferred rule interpretation, or another. One of the latest was my own suggestion in 2019.9 The interesting thing is that the great majority of proposals share the same ideas, and they just so happen to be the same as mine: Most pieces are “chained”; Chief and Princess are “chained wild”; no backward step for the Panthan; no Panthan promotion; Chief taken by non-Chief is a draw; escape goes to any free and unthreatened square.
Why are they all so similar? Well, for the simple reason that Jetan rules are not random. Even though Burroughs was a bit vague at times, it is perfectly possible to understand what he meant, and as a bit of analysis will reveal, such intuitive understanding can in most cases be supported by facts.
On the whole, Handscomb has the right idea about Jetan. He proposes a standard, and (just like so many other standards before and after him) he hits the right ideas about most things. Smith’s theory about endless Jetan variants, on the other hand, is not only impossible to reconcile with Burroughs’ book, but also potentially stifling to the game’s popularity and growth.
On the whole, Handscomb has the right idea about Jetan. He proposes a standard, and (just like so many other standards before and after him) he hits the right ideas about most things. Smith’s theory about endless Jetan variants, on the other hand, is not only impossible to reconcile with Burroughs’ book, but also potentially stifling to the game’s popularity and growth.
John Gollon’s classic book Chess Variations: Ancient, Regional, and Modern (1968) contains the oldest published Jetan game.10 Each chapter in the book describes one chess variant, and for each variant is one game the author had played. The J. Miller he met here was one of his most regular opponents in these games.
Gollon plays Orange (first move) and Miller plays Black. The setup is unorthodox, with Orange playing from “south” (ranks one and two) and Black from “north” (nine and ten). Gollon suggests a number of other unorthodox rules, e.g., Thoat and Panthan moves, but none of these play any significant role in the game here played.
Abbreviations: T – Thoat, W – Warrior, Pd – Padwar, Pt – Panthan, D – Dwar, F – Flier, C – Chief, P – Princess, + – Princess threatened, e – Princess escape.
Abbreviations: T – Thoat, W – Warrior, Pd – Padwar, Pt – Panthan, D – Dwar, F – Flier, C – Chief, P – Princess, + – Princess threatened, e – Princess escape.
1. T-b4 T-b7, 2. W-a3 W-a8, 3. Pd-b3 Pd-b8, 4. Pt c2-d3 Pt c9-d8, 5. D-c4 D-c7, 6. F-d4 F-d7 (Diagram 2)
7. Dxc7 Ptxc7? (Txc7 would have been better, and would have saved black from Orange’s next move.) 8. Pd-d5! (Diagram 3) 8....F-g8, 9. Pdxb7 Ptxb7, 10. F-g5 Pt f9-f8, 11. Pt h2-g3 Pt h9-i8, 12. D-h4 D-h7, 13. Pd-i3 Pt i9-j8, 14. T-i4 C-f7, 15. Dxh7 Ptxh7 (Diagram 4—All Dwars have now been traded off. Early trades of fliers and Dwars are typical of beginners’ games, since the beginner fails to recognize that the Panthans need to advance.)
16. Pt e2-e3 F-g7, 17. Pd-i5 F-d6, 18. F-e4 Fxg5, 19. Txg5 Cxi5 (Diagram 5—Blinded by the chance for some quick material gains, Black begins his march to doom. Even here, his position is precarious with a Chief far out on the flank and far away from his Princess.) 20. Pt-g4 Cxi2?! (Black risks a draw through Wxi2) 21. P-c1 Cxj1?? (Diagram 6—The Black Chief is now stuck in the corner which he will never leave. He should have retreated instead.)
22. Txh7 (Fxh7 would have been better, forcing the black Flier to leave its spot. Gollon was probably unaware that this was one of his most important moves in the game.) 22....Fxh7?? (Black makes a double mistake: a Thoat for a Flier is a poor trade, and black lets go of the important square d7. This will prove fatal.) 23. Fxh7+ P-c9, 24. Fxi10?! (A pointless move. Orange should have gone immediately for his next move.) 24....T-i7, 25. C-e4!! (Diagram 7—C-f4 would have been even stronger, but even as it is, the black Chief is stuck and cannot do much.) 25....W-i9?, 26. C-d7+ P-f1e (Black had few options, but P-a9 or P-j2e could have taken the game to a draw. The black Princess has nowhere to go after the next move and the game is over.) 27. C-f4+ Resign.
Many have said that Jetan is too easy to draw, since a Chief can go berzerk, killing everything until his opponent feels forced to draw by capturing the rampaging Chief. This game shows that it is not quite as easy as all that: the Chief who eats into his opponent’s ranks will also leave his own forces without protection.
References
Header image: Edgar Rice Burroughs (1922). The Chessmen of Mars. A. C. McClug. [front cover]
All citations of CM refer to the Gutenberg edition.
1. Kerry Handscomb, “Jetan – Martian chess” & L. Lynn Smith, “Commentary on the Rules of Jetan,” AG6, Carpe Diem Publishing, 2001, pp. 6 – 11
2. L. Lynn Smith, “Re: Rule implications of Burroughs’ jetan game," e-mail to [email protected], October 11 2002
3. “Jetan," Wikipedia (the quote in question was added on 2011-10-28 and removed on 2019-12-25)
4. Fredrik Ekman, “Exploring Jetan," ERBzine, 2019 (referenced on 2020-02-21)
5. Edgar Rice Burroughs, The Chessmen of Mars, Gutenberg edition, Ch. 13
6. Edgar Rice Burroughs, The Chessmen of Mars, Gutenberg edition, Ch. 17
7. Irwin Porges, Edgar Rice Burroughs: The Man Who Created Tarzan, Brigham Young University Press, 1975, p. 348
8. George Fergus, “Jetan (Martian Chess)," The Gamesman #1, The Games Bureau, circa 1965
9. Edgar Rice Burroughs (writer) & Fredrik Ekman (editor), “The Rules of Jetan, or Martian Chess," ERBzine, 2019 (cited on 2020-02-21)
10. John Gollon, Chess Variations: Ancient, Regional, and Modern, Charles E. Tuttle Company, 1968, pp. 212 – 213
Header image: Edgar Rice Burroughs (1922). The Chessmen of Mars. A. C. McClug. [front cover]
All citations of CM refer to the Gutenberg edition.
1. Kerry Handscomb, “Jetan – Martian chess” & L. Lynn Smith, “Commentary on the Rules of Jetan,” AG6, Carpe Diem Publishing, 2001, pp. 6 – 11
2. L. Lynn Smith, “Re: Rule implications of Burroughs’ jetan game," e-mail to [email protected], October 11 2002
3. “Jetan," Wikipedia (the quote in question was added on 2011-10-28 and removed on 2019-12-25)
4. Fredrik Ekman, “Exploring Jetan," ERBzine, 2019 (referenced on 2020-02-21)
5. Edgar Rice Burroughs, The Chessmen of Mars, Gutenberg edition, Ch. 13
6. Edgar Rice Burroughs, The Chessmen of Mars, Gutenberg edition, Ch. 17
7. Irwin Porges, Edgar Rice Burroughs: The Man Who Created Tarzan, Brigham Young University Press, 1975, p. 348
8. George Fergus, “Jetan (Martian Chess)," The Gamesman #1, The Games Bureau, circa 1965
9. Edgar Rice Burroughs (writer) & Fredrik Ekman (editor), “The Rules of Jetan, or Martian Chess," ERBzine, 2019 (cited on 2020-02-21)
10. John Gollon, Chess Variations: Ancient, Regional, and Modern, Charles E. Tuttle Company, 1968, pp. 212 – 213
Fredrik Ekman was once a free-lance writer, but changed his career in the early 2000's, and is now a language teacher. He lives in Sweden with wife and two kids, and when work and family permits he loves to play games. Fredrik is an active member of Edgar Rice Burroughs fandom. He regularly submits articles to the fan publication ERB-APA and sometimes to ERBzine.