8/2/2014 Hagbard wrote:
I've attempted to deduce logically what can be seen in the Oslo board fragment.
Here's my interpretation of the Oslo board:
Premises.
1. The board is size 15x15 and has no marked corner squares; it has no marked edge squares at all.
2. More than a quarter of the board is visible, and from this the rest of the board is also known.
3. A few squares are marked in one of three ways: with an * or a + or an X. The very center square is not marked.
4. The board is dated from the Middle Ages and is therefore some hundreds years earlier than the Saami board, but not a thousand years earlier.
5. The visible part of the board, rotated four times, gives this board:
Code: Select all
- - - X X X - - -
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
X - - - * - - - X
X - - + - + - - X
X - - - * - - - X
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -
- - - X X X - - -
(the center 9x9 part; rest of the board are unmarked squares)
On the photo only one * and one + are visible. The lost squares are for the present marked symmetrically with * and +.
Interpretation.
6. No marked corner squares means win by edge escape. No marked edge squares means win by escape through any edge square.
7. If the * and + in center were to mean the starting points of special pieces in addition to the king, the defenders would have to have three types of officers (with the X squares possibly even yet one more type). There are no marking at all in the attackers' area, so this would mean that the attackers have no special pieces, and the defenders three or four.
This is not very probable. Instead the marked squares can be squares with special properties, or for help when setting up pieces or navigating through the board.
8. The center square itself is not marked, but its four neighbouring squares are marked. These four squares (together with the enclosed center square) happen to be the very area in the Saami tablut where many rules differ from rest of the board. The markings of the two visible squares (* and +) differ only in order to decorate this important board area, the king's castle, so fourfold rotational symmetry applies.
9. The X-squares happen to indicate the edges of a 9x9 smaller board within the large board, and the XXX-rows happen to mark the initial set up of the outermost attackers in Saami tablut.
15x15 is a very large board, and especially for such a large board you would also want to have a smaller board for a quicker variant of the same game.
10. The Saami game and the Oslo board are not far apart in time and geographical distance, and there's nothing in the Oslo board to contradict that the middle 9x9 part of the board is meant for the game Saami tablut described by Linné.
11. Since the 9x9 and the 15x15 games are played on the same board, the game for the larger 15x15 board is expected to be a larger scale variant of the same Saami game.
The outermost lines of the large board are unmarked, indicating the king's escape through any edge square.
So, presuming that the 9x9 and 15x15 games are versions of the same game, the king's escape through any edge square should apply also for the 9x9 game (which is assumed to be Saami tablut), even if some of those edge squares are marked on this board as well as on the Saami board observed by Linné; those decorations are merely a help for the initial set up of pieces.
12. When it's assumed that the same Saami rules are to use for both the sizes 9x9 and 15x15 on this board, this means that the rules are scalable and could also have been used on 11x11 and 13x13.
The 11x11 version is the same as tawlbwrdd except for one thing: the latter has no throne square and thus must lack all the special king's castle rules in the board middle. I would say that this property of tawlbwrdd is a simplification, and that tawlbwrdd at some point in history lost the king's castle and the special rules there. I would say that the board with the king's castle is the more original version.
Especially in the cross set ups, like the one which is used in Saami tablut, the throne is nearly indispensable. Because without the special protection in the center, the king is easily captured in his start position: two opposite white neighbours move away, two blacks move in and voila, the king is captured from two sides.
13. Of course the game name in those times in Oslo was not "Saami tablut". But perhaps "tafl" in Norwegian, "tablut" in Saami, same word.
14. On even larger boards like 19x19, the king escapes through the corners instead of through the full edges.
It's true that the capture-from-4-sides corner escape variants have their very own qualities and give interesting games. But the most original version might be the capture-from-2-sides - Saami style.