🕸Fergus Duniho wrote on Tue, Apr 14, 2020 04:15 PM UTC:
Like the Murray Lion, the Betza Unicorn may have been created through a misreading. The Unicorn described in Murray's account of Grande acedrex is not a bent rider. The description of the Gryphon says "A move compounded of one step diagonally, followed by any number straight." If the Unicorn were also a bent rider, its description should say something like, "A move compounded of a Knight leap to an empty space, followed by any number diagonally." But it doesn't say anything like that. Instead, it says "First move = Kt (but cannot capture), afterwards = modern B." This is saying that on its first move, it moves as a Knight without capturing, and on each subsequent move, it moves as a Bishop. Of course, it is possible that Murray bungled the description. But based on Murray's description, the Unicorn is not a bent rider.
I found a translation of the Alfonso document. This translation uses the name rhinoceros or rhino, and it says this,
The rhino’s move is composed of two different steps. First, like leaps like a knight. It may remain on
that square if it wishes or may also continue to any square on the diagonal(s) of that square,
maintaining its movement in a forward direction from that square.40
However, the footnote says, " Again, I thank Jean-Louis Cazaux for his help with my translation of the rhino’s move." For all I know, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, he based his understanding of the Rhino's move on Betza's understanding of the piece. Since he was just criticizing this article, maybe he got it from a source that got it from Betza. Anyway, that would put us in a vicious circle of not knowing for sure how Alfonso actually described the piece. That translation is too recent for Murray to have used. Is there a copy available of the translation or resource that Murray used to learn about this game? Or could Jean-Louis elaborate on why the original text supports this translation?
Like the Murray Lion, the Betza Unicorn may have been created through a misreading. The Unicorn described in Murray's account of Grande acedrex is not a bent rider. The description of the Gryphon says "A move compounded of one step diagonally, followed by any number straight." If the Unicorn were also a bent rider, its description should say something like, "A move compounded of a Knight leap to an empty space, followed by any number diagonally." But it doesn't say anything like that. Instead, it says "First move = Kt (but cannot capture), afterwards = modern B." This is saying that on its first move, it moves as a Knight without capturing, and on each subsequent move, it moves as a Bishop. Of course, it is possible that Murray bungled the description. But based on Murray's description, the Unicorn is not a bent rider.
I found a translation of the Alfonso document. This translation uses the name rhinoceros or rhino, and it says this,
However, the footnote says, " Again, I thank Jean-Louis Cazaux for his help with my translation of the rhino’s move." For all I know, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, he based his understanding of the Rhino's move on Betza's understanding of the piece. Since he was just criticizing this article, maybe he got it from a source that got it from Betza. Anyway, that would put us in a vicious circle of not knowing for sure how Alfonso actually described the piece. That translation is too recent for Murray to have used. Is there a copy available of the translation or resource that Murray used to learn about this game? Or could Jean-Louis elaborate on why the original text supports this translation?