Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

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?

I like arachnid is better than acromantula.  I looked through my old D&D monster manuals and was supprised how few items begin with A.  "Apparition" is not great but not terrible.  For more conventional beasts, there is the ferocoius Ant Eater.  There is the Ankylosaurus dinosaur.  And there is a very long list here that I haven't looked through yet:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_legendary_creatures_(A)

Not sure why you say that. Any suggestion from you that starts with 'A' would have been more than welcome. I had to go through a quite large set of mythical beasts before I found anything with an A at all.

Griffon is the commonly used English name for the F-then-R. There is no need to change that, as the name doesn't collide with anything else. If there was an exact translation of the historical name, it could be an argument (but not enough to justify changing a well-settelled name, IMO). But that is not the case here, and Griffon seems as close as you can get. Keeping the untranslated name (as the Spanish did for Alfil, and the English for Rook), would give either Aanca if we follow the Spanish (a bad idea, in view of the confusion sowed by Betza) or the Arabic 'Roc' (which most people would probably reject for being to close to Rook).

Only the W-then-B and N-then-B are in need of new suitable names, and Monoceros seems most suitable for the N-then-B, as it is an exact translation (to Anglicized Greek) of the Spanish name.

[Edit] Considering the lack of acclaim for Acromantula: I would also be perfectly happy with a fable animal of my own design for W-then-B. E.g. an Antigryph (or Apogryph?). Which is the opposite of a Gryphon (compare Contra-Grasshopper): A lion's head and fore-legs on an eagle's body.

OK, I understand. The idea should not come from me. Btw, the ferz-then-rook has also an 8-leg move. Good luck with your spiders, starting with A or not.

Why not my suggestion of Monoceros, ...

Because it does not start with an 'A'.

Besides, 'Monoceros' is just Greek for Unicorn. If we use those two names for different pieces, how should the Greeks distinguish them? As there seemed to be opposition against calling the Grant Acedrex N-then-B by its original name Unicorn, because we already associate that name with another piece, I think we should make Monoceros the English name of the N-then-B. This also sounds more like the originally intended Rhinoceros (which unfortunately was also already taken).

And note that I already have a piece called Unicorn in Team-Mate Chess. I tend to use this name for an augmented (or a royal) Knight (in this case WN), because XBoard has a piece image for it, and it is one of the most knight-like pictograms there that is not actually a Knight. I don't want two different pieces in Team-Mate Chess to have names that are just each other's translation in some other language. (Even though the move patterns are rather similar, the Acromantula just being a sliding version of the leaping Unicorn.)

I have the same so-so feeling than Fergus about inserting Harry Potter's here. Why not my suggestion of Monoceros, it is  a fantastic beast recognized in WP, it has a link with the Unicorn. As Unicorn is the N-then-Bishop in Alfonso's description, why not Monoceros for W-then-Bishop? The difference between the 2 moves is thin, so is the difference between the 2 names.

I am not so sure about that. I had no idea what a Kirin, Wyvern or a Manticore was before I looked it up. I doubt whether many people in the street where I live would know what a Griffon is. I think it is a safe bet that more contemporary people have read Harry Potter or seen the movie than that have read the Odyssee.

I don't see any difference between Harry Potter stories or other contemporary fantasy litterature and ancient myth.

My main concern with names from Harry Potter is that they are not going to be recognized as easily as names from folklore, mythology, or zoology. Although I've read Harry Potter now, I was already an adult when it came out, and I've already forgotten most of the monsters and magical creatures from it that I wasn't already familiar with.

Naming chess pieces after Harry Potter?  yuck

The name of the individual spider was Aragog. But when I Googled for that name, most references immediately mention that Aragog was an Acromantula. E.g. https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Muggles%27_Guide_to_Harry_Potter/Characters/Aragog . Since I am sold to an 'A', it is the name I will use in Team-Mate Chess.

If you want horns, Triceratops comes to mind. But I don't see why arachnids should be discriminated against.

I read the whole Harry Potter series last year, and I think I know what you're talking about, but I don't remember the name Acromantula. The piece does have a movement pattern that is suggestive of a large spider, though. Based on similar reasoning, I used the name Spider for the Alfil/Dabbabah compound in Interdependent Chess. I guess the name Acromantula is supposed to suggest an acrobatic tarantula, though that wouldn't account for the m in the middle. Arachnid would be a more familiar name for most people, though it's also pretty generic. Ultimately, the choice will be up to whoever uses it in a game.

Hmm, I'm not a fan of the spider, even a monstruous one. The link with Rhinoceros/Unicorn is too remote. We need an horn :=) But also because Musketeer Chess has proposed and is even selling a Spider already, even though I don't like at all the definition he used.
What about the Monoceros, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monoceros_(legendary_creature) I'm pretty sure that it was never used in CVs (I'd be surprised) and there is an obvious parenthood with Unicorn.

How about 'Acromantula', then? In the Harry Potter series this is a monstrous men-eating spider. I like the spider connection, because spiders have 8 legs, and the W-then-B moves along 8 rays.

And it keeps me happy that it also starts with 'A', as the Fairy-Max implementation of Team-Mate Chess uses this piece with A as ID, and changing that would break backward compatibility with the previously saved games.

To Greg Strong: 

you wrote: "As Chess evolved the elephant was enhanced from leaping diagonally to sliding diagonally.  It was at a later point that the English name (and maybe other languages) was changed to bishop while other languages, such as Spanish and Russian retained the existing name."

As the matter of fact, no, it didn't happen that way, they didn't change the name after the move was changed. The name was changed much before.

Old chess, similar to shatranj, was transmitted to Christian countries and reached England about 1050. The "Fil" was soon called Bishop there and in other Scandinavian lands. For example, the famous Lewis set has pieces depicting Bishops. The modern move for that piece (although it had some forerunners in Grant Acedrex or in Courrier Chess) has been adopted about 1475-1500. So, during almost 500 years the piece called Bishop in English was played like the one we call Alfil in our chessvariants.com pages.

Btw, same thing for the Queen, called a Queen and played as a Ferz during 500 years.

Interesting discussion. I don't want to push for my choice of Eagle for F-then-R as Gryphon is more popular in CV community. Eagle is just my personal choice in the frame of Metamachy as it has some resonance with the Lion, carrying some heraldic meaning. Btw, my use of Lion, and also Elephant is also personal and I don't push. 
In the case of Aaca by Betza it is primarly the result of a wrong reading of Murray. There are more examples in that page that demonstrate that Betza read it very very quickly, the least to say. So, we shouldn't keep what is really a mistake.
N-then-B is exactly the Unicorn, drawn as a Rhinoceros by the medieval artist in the original codex. I don't see the need for another word, but if you believe so, why not Hippogrif. Finding another mythic animal for W-then-B is a good idea. Maybe one with a big horn.

Well, I suppose it depends on whether one considers it more important how the piece moves, or that it stayed in the array. The problem I see with the latter is that I consider Courier Chess as an important milestone on the evolutionary path of modern Chess, and consider the Bishop as a descendant of the Courier rather than the Alfil. But it is clear that I am outvoted here.

I still dislike Eagle for F-then-R, though. If a more bird-like name is desired, I would go for Harrier. This at least also exists in a chimeric (or should I say cyborg?) version that is able to take on Elephants...

As to the Alfil: the move was changed without changing the name. Betza changed the move of the Aanca, but kept the name. Sounds like it is the same thing.

Here's the difference. Players of Chess were using certain equipment with certain piece names, and while doing this, they changed some of the rules, including how some pieces moved. Ralph Betza read in a book about a game that was not played by anyone he knew. The description of the game gave Spanish and English names for the pieces. He got an idea for a piece similar to one of the pieces in the game, and he decided to name it after the Spanish name for the piece it was similar to. This would be like reading about Chinese Chess, learning about the Cannon, coming up with the idea for a diagonal moving counterpart to the Cannon, and calling it a Pao after the Chinese name for the Cannon.

As to the Alfil: the move was changed without changing the name.

You have that backwards.  As Chess evolved the elephant was enhanced from leaping diagonally to sliding diagonally.  It was at a later point that the English name (and maybe other languages) was changed to bishop while other languages, such as Spanish and Russian retained the existing name.

Using Unicorn or Rhino for other pieces than the N-then-B is exactly the same as hijacking the name Aanca for W-then-B.

No, it isn't, because people have used the name Unicorn for other pieces without borrowing it from another Chess variant where it was used for a different piece. Unlike Aanca, which is a word Betza came across only in Murray's description of a particular Chess variant, people far and wide know of unicorns and rhinos. This is one of the reasons I put a Unicorn piece in the logo. I knew people would recognize it even if they weren't familiar with games that use it.

I like the name Hippogryph, but I think it should be used for the W-then-B.

The name seems more appropriate for a piece with some kind of hippogonal move.

Previous time this subject came up I proposed to rename the W-then-B to Ancaa.

I don't really like the name Eagle for the Griffon. And Eagle is an ortdinary bird, not a mythical monster. In that sense Griffon is much closer: a large mythical monster that can fly. OK, it doesn't really prey on Elephants, but who does? Arakis Sandworms, I suppose, but these cannot fly. If we want to be purist, we should keep the Arab name Roc.

Renaming the Grant Acedrex Unicorn is just as bad as renaming the Aanca. Unless we would rename it to Rhino, which was what the Alfonso Codex really meant. Using Unicorn or Rhino for other pieces than the N-then-B is exactly the same as hijacking the name Aanca for W-then-B.

I like the name Hippogryph, but I think it should be used for the W-then-B.

As to the Alfil: the move was changed without changing the name. Betza changed the move of the Aanca, but kept the name. Sounds like it is the same thing.

I used the name Aanca for apothecary chess modern and griffin too (I thiught that is the correct spelling at the time). So I don't see any problem with these. Anyway nobody can expect total consistency as one name for 1 piece over all chess variants.

Since the name Unicorn is already in use for other pieces, the piece he describes as moving like a Knight, then a Rook, could be called a Hippogriff, which I just learned is the offspring of a Gryphon and a mare. The hippo- root in the name means horse, which fits with a Knight move.

Actually, I think Manticore is an excellent name.

Betza wrote:

Not described there is a piece which makes a one step Rook move and then continues outwards as a Bishop. For lack of a name, I'll call it the Aanca (13th century Spanish for "Gryphon"). Although the Aanca is not described, one can suppose that the same mind who conceived the Gryphon and the Unicorn probably also considered the Aanca.

This is really irresponsible. Lacking a name for the Gryphon's orthogonal/diagonal counterpart, he just borrowed another name used for the piece called a Gryphon. The Aanca was described. It was described as being the same piece as the Gryphon. What wasn't described was a piece that Betza should have found a more appropriate name for. I don't have sufficient knowledge of Arabic or Spanish, but Gryphon seems like a fitting name on the basis that this piece is sort of a hybrid of Rook and Bishop, and the Gryphon is a mythological hybrid animal. With that in mind, it would be appropriate to use the name of another mythological hybrid for the corresponding piece, such as Chimera or Manticore.