Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Of course the real Viking Chess has nothing to do with Xiangqi, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tafl_games.
How would Semedo have done in 40-square contest, http://www.chessvariants.org/40.dir/winners.html, won by Philosopher's in 2000? Rocket, R, is first use of a bomb, now popular, done first here at least the 1600s. Imaginative for the period, Pawns are ''not straight line,'' Frolov quotes his recent Russian reviewer. Since gunpowder is taken to be 10th Century invention/(or obscenity in light of what it leads to), I disagree this game could be so early, unless they changed the names on way.  ''...Early stages of transformation of ancient Indian chess by Chinese people'' is not likely. Maybe someone will locate Hide's book, as only Frolov's reviewer of Hide has. If Hide says, ''Kings don't attack,'' that must mean 'capture'. Does Hide call this Viking Chess? That is strange in itself out of east Asia. Here is another Viking Chess of 37 with unclear rules -- how would this Viking chess have done in a 37-square contest, though the first contest appears to have been 38 in 1998?:... http://www.chessvariants.org/small.dir/vikingchess.html.

Hide did not called this 'Viking chess', 'Viking chess' is just another game with unknown rules, i compared my page with this page - http://www.chessvariants.org/small.dir/vikingchess.html . So, semedo and viking chess have nothing common, article did not tell anything about viking chess, it was just my excuse for posting game with unknown rules. I changed text of page, so now it's clearer.

Sorry that i told 'don't attack'. I just did not find right english word: maybe, better translation is 'don't go at his foes', 'don't go to attak'... This might mean that it don't move at all.

Thanks for comment, especially about gunpowder! This game is, most probably, only small Xiang-qi variant, or small variant of another chess game, played in China. But it's still interesting to know something about it's rules.

Here is my reconstruction of this game:
King cannot move, but there are bare facing rules: at least one piece must be between kings.
Knights moves as in Xiang-qi.
Scientists moves 1 diagonally. They are not restricted.
Bombs moves as cannons in Xiang-qi.
Pawns moves 1 horizontally and vertically forward, captures in same way (i don't see river here), they don't promote.

Hey! In Cazaux's http://history.chess.free.fr i saw description of ancient Chinese game:

'The eldest undeniable
reference for the Xianqi is the Xuanguai lu (‘Tales of the obscure and
peculiar’) writen by the Tang Minister of State Niu Sengru (779-847), a
collection of tales of the supernatural. One is telling the of  Cen Shun
dreaming of a battle to come (which was supposed to occur in 762 AD.):
'the celestial Horse springs aslant over three, the Commanders go
sideaways and attack on all four sides, the baggage-waggons go straight
forwards and never backwards, the six men in armour (or the men armed with
six weapons) go in file but no backwards... On both sides stuff was
unpacked, stones and arrows flew across.' To make it absolutely clear,
these moves can be deduced from the text, but not with certainty. Since the
source is unique the greatest prudence is recommended. There is just
another mention in poem from Niu's contemporary and friend Bo Juyi
(772-846) which explicitly evoke Soldiers and Charriots.'

Statement that commander go sideways perfectly suits Hide's statement that semedo king 'don't go to attack'! Description of baggage-wagon resembles shogi lances, but hide's description of vessel resembles it (remotely) to! Knight might be able to leap ('springs').
So, semedo and this game might be one game, or related!

If someone knows more about one of these games, please, let us know!

http://www.shogifdr.ru/lev_kisluk_japanese_game_heroes.htm

ученый