Talk:Xiangqi

International Xiangqi Federation

• Where's the link for the World Xiangqi Federation? http://wxf.ca/wxf/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Xiangqi_Federation

Match-fixing scandal

Article should be updated: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202604/1358798.shtml

"Three Chinese Xiangqi players banned for life over match-fixing scandal"

~2026-24618-61 (talk) 21:22, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Emperor Wen's chess massacre

The article says that H. J. R. Murray writes in A History of Chess, p. 120, n. 4 that according to Sima Guang, Emperor Wen of Sui had everyone in a certain inn put to death when he discovered a game being played with a piece called i pai ti, or in pinyin, yǐ bái dì. This is an accurate citation of Murray, but in 2012, someone marked it as "dubious" with the reason "mistranslation," and apparently correctly. The original is at Wikisource.

帝既喜怒不恆，不復依準科律。信任楊素，素復任情不平，與鴻臚少卿陳延有隙，嘗經蕃客館，庭中以馬屎，又眾僕於氈上樗蒲，以白帝。帝大怒，主客令及樗蒲者皆杖殺之，棰陳延幾死。

Murray is evidently indebted for this anecdote and his interpretation of it to Himly, who writes:

Das Thung-kien nun (s. L. S. 48 der Berliner Ausgabe dieses grossen geschichtlichen Werkes²) S. 19b.) lässt den Kaiser Swei-Wön-Ti (581 - 618), das Einkehrhaus der Fremden besuchen, wo er den Mist der Pferde in der Vorhalle (thing Vorhof?) und alle Diener auf der Filzdecke (Fussteppich? Spielbrett von Filz, wie das indische bisât?) thšu-phu gespielt hätten i pai ti „mit dem weissen Kaiser"; der Kaiser sei sehr in Zorn gerathen und habe Wirth, Gäste sammt den Spielern alle zu Tode prügeln lassen. Es ist als sähe man hier den „Sohn des Himmels" vor sich, der die Dienerschaft nicht sein Ebenbild oder eine seinen Namen tragende Figur wollte auf dem Spielbrett herumziehn lassen. Man begreift, weshalb der König im Schachspiel in China zu einem Feldherrn wurde. Aber ein Puffspiel lässt sich auch nicht mit einem „weissen Kaiser" vereinigen; sollte damals schon das Schachspiel in China eingeführt gewesen sein? (p. 465)

The beginning of the Chinese anecdote says that the Emperor placed all his trust in Yang Su, Yang Su in turn acted upon personal feelings, and he bore a grudge against Chen Yan; he happened one day to be passing by the guesthouse for foreign emissaries (whose management fell under Chen Yan's department). Himly construes this sentence as referring back to the Emperor as its subject, with Yang Su playing no further role in this story, although it appears to be about Yang Su using something that he observed at the guesthouse to get Chen Yan in trouble. Himly understands the text to mean, "he noticed a number of servants gambling at chupu on felt mats, using [a piece called] the White Emperor. The Emperor became furious." Chupu was an ancient Chinese game played with dice akin to liubo, and according to Kroll's Student's Dictionary of Classical and Medieval Chinese it is derived from the Indian game of chaupar. Conjecturing that the "felt mats" in question were the cloth board of chaupar rather than simply furniture, Himly understands the 白帝 to be additional equipment for this game. But does not the phrase 以白帝 mean, "he reported it to the Emperor"? These words could, in isolation, mean "using the White Emperor," but Kroll also gives these apparently more pertinent definitions:

• p. 544 — yǐ 以 2f. "preceding the VB-phrase in a transfer-VB construction when the word or phrase for the thing transferred (i.e. the direct object of ~) is deleted; e.g. 必~告新令尹 bì yǐ gào xīn lìngyǐn, you must report it to the new commanding officer; ~告於君 yǐ gào yú jūn, he reported it to the lord."
• p. 7 — bái 白 3a. "say plainly, declare, report, inform; reveal, make evident; esp. communication from inferior to superior; (med.) often a simple indication of statement: to address."

So Yang Su observed the misconduct of the servants, he informed the Emperor, and then the Emperor became angry. But what the Emperor was angry about was the servants gambling on soft rugs while there was work to be done, and that is why Chen Yan, who was responsible for managing the guesthouse for foreign emissaries, was beaten nearly to death. The idea that the Emperor killed the innkeeper and the guests appears to arise from a misunderstanding of the title 主客令 ("Director of Receptions"—Hucker, Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China, n. 1395) in the statement that the Emperor "ordered all those gambling at chupu as well as the Director of Receptions beaten to death," construed as separate words, "as well as the host, the guests, and the director..."

Himly, not Sima Guang, says one can easily imagine the Son of Heaven's fury at his servants moving around a piece named after him on a game board, and you see why the king was renamed a general in China. Ought this to be reframed as a legend about the game popularised by Murray, based on a conjecture by Himly? - Cal Engime (talk) 17:13, 3 August 2026 (UTC)