(1) It is a straight-line descent from Burroughs to contemporary Joyce in short-range projects ongoing. I think there is a correct interpretation of the original Jetan rules-sets properly attributable to Burroughs. As an exercise helpful to us, in another Jetan article Larry Smith aptly describes more or less extreme alternative interpretations possible. Further, to simplify, ask, what would sci-fi writer Burroughs acquiesce in if able to be pressed by experts to clarify the rules, inadequate they are but for his Martian story line? Published 100 years ago, the fact is Jetan acquired widely-assorted imitators and acceptance within its own new genre -- being one of just few dozen Chess clusters of all time outstanding, if we ever were able to become honest about proliferation in rules-set developments (as pure artwork) and the consequences. As such archetype, there must needs be a main line of original Jetan rules-set making, howsoever retroactively arrived at and reasonably subjectable to emendation occasionally by cultural consensus. At still today the core idea from which the copycats, well-intentioned improvements, and subvariants of Jetan all devolve, let's again stab and stab again, to sharpen understanding to pierce the veil. Keep on stabbing and slicing til we get it right, what he may have bloody well meant. The Martian chronicle chess game. ///// (2) In the aggregate of imperfect and substandard knowledge of prior art, there predominate CVs repeating without end passe styles and themes sans attribution of sources or making really silly claims of ''re-inventions'' sometimes 100 years after the fact. Of course, referred to equally as guilty and negligent are chess designs in fields other than particular Jetan class, derivatives in general of some seminal creative work, 10, 100 or Carrera-style 400 years ago, defining one or another strict genre across the board. ///// (3) Take the Flyer, or Odwar. Three squares diagonally, mandatorily meaning not one or two. Burroughs does not (always) use ''jump'' the way we usually do now; he must mean passing by. Remember the jumping pieces at turn of 20th century were but Camel, Zebra, Knight, and suppressed Dabbabah and Alfil. From d1 forward to the right, Flyer can go d1-e2-f3-g4; d1-e2-f3-e4; d1-e2-f3-g2; d1-e2-d3-e4; d1-e2-d3-c4; d1-e2-d3-c2; d1-e2-f1-g2. Notice g2 is two-path. Notice the ''jumping'' intended or attempted to describe by Burroughs is over the opposite-colour squares Flyer passes en route but not actually enters. Say from d1 to e4 along either of two pathways, Flyer appears to jump something happening to sit on e3. It is mixed leaping and following a pathway by this correct interpretation. Or if you will, notional leaping for those less spatially practiced. Flyer can be blocked from e4 by pieces foreign or domestic on d3 and f3, making the move impossible; but when it is clear, in a sense he just jumps there across the other squares irrelevant. [Burroughs nowhere says a piece cannot be blocked, but instead says this or that may ''jump.'' Also, short-range project pieces acquire effectiveness with moderate weakening in keeping with others of their kind. Thus too, program and preset may or may not be implementing optimal Jetan rules correctly.] If pressed, Burroughs would acquiesce in this way as logical re-interpretation from his real intent, somewhat confusedly and incompletely expressed in the two rules-sets written text and appendix of 'Chessmen of Mars' (1922).