III. _That such skill is derived from innate capability_;

IV. _That those endowed by Nature with this talent, must bring

their gifts to perfection, by intelligent study_.

So abstruse are the processes of this greatest of all professions, that

comprehension of it has been evidenced by eleven men only, viz.:

Epaminondas, Alexander, Caesar, Hannibal, Gustavus Adolphus, Turenne,

Eugene, Frederic, Washington, Napoleon, Von Moltke.

Comprehension of this system can be attained, only by innate capability

brought to perfection by intelligent study of the words and achievements

of these great Captains.

For life is so short and our memories in general so defective, that we

ought to seek instruction only from the purest sources.

None but men endowed by Nature with the military mind and trained in the

school of the great Captains, are able to write intelligently on the acts

and motives of generals of the first order. All the writings of mere

literati relative to these uncommon men, no matter how excellent such

authors may be, never can rise to anything more than elegant phraseology.

It is of enlightened critics, such as the former, that the youthful

student always is first in need. Such will guide him along a road, in

which he who has no conductor may easily lose himself. They will correct

his blunders considerately, recollecting that should these be ridiculed

or treated with severity, talent might be stifled which might hereafter

bloom to perfection.

It is a difficult matter to form the average student, and to impart to

him that degree of intelligent audacity and confident prudence which is

requisite for the proper practice of the Art of Strategetics.

To secure proficiency, the student from the beginning must cheerfully

submit himself to a mental discipline, which properly may be termed

severe; in order to make his faculties obedient to his will.

Secondly, he must regularly exercise these faculties, in order to make

them active and to acquire the habit of implicitly conforming to the laws

of the Art; to make himself familiar with its processes, and to establish

in his mind that confidence in its practice which can come only through

experience.

The student daily should exercise his mind in the routine of deployments,

developments, evolutions, manoeuvres, and operations, both on the

offensive and on the defensive. These exercises should be imprinted on

the memory by closely reviewing the lesson of the previous day.

Even with all this severe and constant effort, time is necessary for

practical tactics to become habitual; for the student must become so

familiar with these movements and formations that he can execute them

instantly and with precision.

To acquire this degree of perfection, much study is necessary; it is a

mistake to think otherwise. But this study is its own sufficient reward,

for the student soon will find that it has extended his ideas, and _that

he is beginning to think in the GREAT_.

At the same time the student should thoroughly instruct himself in

military history, topography, logic, mathematics, and the science of

fortification. With all of these the strategist must be familiar.

But his chief aim must be to perfect his judgment and to bring it to the

highest degree of broadness and exactness.

This is best done by contemplation of the works of the Great Masters.

The past history of Chess-play, is the true school for those who aspire

to precedence in the Royal Game. It is their first duty to inform

themselves of the processes of the great in every age, in order to shun

their errors and to avail of their methods.

It is essential to grasp that system of play common to the Masters; to

pursue it step by step. Particularly is it necessary to learn that he who

can best deduce consequences in situations whose outcome is in doubt,

is the competitor who will carry off the prize from others who act less

rationally than himself.

Especially, should the student be wary in regard to what is termed chess

analysis, as applied to the so-called “openings” and to the mid-game.

Most chess analysts are compilers of falsities occasionally interspersed

with truth. Among the prodigious number of variations which they pretend

to establish or refute, none may be implicitly relied on in actual play;

few are of value except for merely elementary purposes, and many are

fallacies fatal to the user.

The reason for this is: whenever men invited by curiosity, seek to

examine circumstantially even the less intricate situations on the

Chess-board, they at once become lost in a labyrinth abounding in

obscurities and contradictions. Those, who ignorant of the synthetic

method of calculation, are compelled to depend upon their analytic

powers, quickly find that these, on account of the number of unknown

quantities, are utterly inadequate.

Any attempt to calculate the true move in Chess-play by analysis, other

than in situations devoid of unknown quantities, is futile.

Yet it is of such folly that the mediocre mind is most enamoured.

Content with seeing much, it is oblivious to what it cannot see; and the

analytical system consists merely in claiming that there is nothing to

see, other than what it does see.

This is that slender reed upon which the so-called “chess-analyst” hangs

his claims, oblivious to the basic truth that in analysis, unless all is

known, nothing is known.

Many delude themselves to the contrary and strive to arrive at correct

conclusions without first having arranged clearly before their minds all

the facts.

Hence, their opinions and judgments, being founded in ignorance of

all the facts, are to that extent defective; and their conclusions

necessarily wrong.

Through action taken upon incomplete knowledge, men are beguiled into

error; and it is to such unreason that most human catastrophes are to be

attributed.

* * * * *

Most of those who attempt to write on Strategetics, and whether applied

to Chess-play or to Warfare, very quickly are compelled to seek refuge in

vague phrases; in order to conceal their uncertain grasp on the subject

discussed. The uninformed believe in them, because of their reputation,

and are satisfied that the thing is so, without understanding _WHY_.

Words intended to convey instruction, should not be used except in their

proper meaning. Each word should be defined for the student and its use

regulated. The true use of words being established, there is no longer

danger from a play upon them; or, from different and confused ideas

annexed to them, either by the persons who read, or who employ them.

By means of this warning, the student easily may detect the empty

mouthings of enthusiastic inexperience, and equally so, the casuistries

of the subtle expert; who often uses language merely to conceal from

youthful talent, knowledge which if imparted, might be fatal to his

domination.

As the student progresses toward proficiency, he, sooner or later, will

come to realize, that of all disgusting things, to a mind which revolts

at nonsense, reasoning ill is the worst.

It is distressing, to be afflicted with the absurdities of men, who,

victims of the fancy, confound enthusiasm with capability and mistake

mania for talent. The world is full of such people, who, in all honesty

thinking themselves philosophers, are only visionaries enamoured of their

own lunatic illusions.

The true discipline for the student who aspires to proficiency at

Chess-play, is, in every succeeding game, to imitate more closely the

play of the Great Masters; and to endeavor to take his measures with more

attention and judgment than in any preceding.

Every player at Chess has defects; many have very great ones. In

searching for these one should not treat himself tenderly, and when

examining his faults, he should grant himself no quarter.

Particularly should the student cultivate confidence in and rigidly

adhere to the standard of skill, as interpreted by that immutable System

of Chess-play, of which Morphy is the unapproachable and all-sufficient

exponent.

Observing the lack of method displayed by the incompetent

Chess-commander, the student of this system will remark with

astonishment, the want of plan and the entire absence of co-operation

between the various Chessic corps d’armee, which under such leadership

are incapable of a general effort.

How dense is such a leader in the selection of a project, how slow and

slovenly in its execution; how many opportunities does he suffer to

escape him and how many enormous faults does he not commit? To such

things, the numerically weaker but more skillful opponent, often is

indebted for safety and ultimately for success.

One who is opposed by such blockheads, necessarily must gain advantages

continually; for conduct so opposite to all the laws of the Art, is, in

itself, sufficient to incur ruin. It is for such negligence on his own

part that one often has cause bitterly to reproach himself. But such

errors, especially on the part of great players, are exemplary lessons

for the student, who from them may learn to be more prudent, circumspect,

and wise.

* * * * *

Those who make a mere pastime of Chess, who have no desire for the true

benefit of the game, do not deserve information.

Such people are more numerous than may be supposed. They have few

coherent ideas and are usually influenced by mere chatter and by writers

whose sole excuse is enthusiasm.

These players at the game cannot benefit by example. The follies

of others afford them no useful lesson. Each generation of such

“wood-shifters,” has blindly followed in the footsteps of those preceding

and daily is guilty of errors which times innumerable have been fully

exposed.

It is the darling habit of such folk to treat the great things in Chess

with levity and to dignify those insignificant matters which appertain to

the game when used as a plaything.

Such people are merely enthusiastic; usually they are equally frivolous.

They do everything from fancy, nothing from design. Their zeal is strong,

but they can neither regulate nor control it.

Such bear about their Chessic disabilities in their character. Inflated

in good fortune, groveling in adversity, these players never attain to

that sage contemplation, which renders the scientific practice of Chess

so indescribably beautiful.

There is another class of Chess-players who from mere levity of mind are

incapable of steadily pursuing any fixed plan; but who overturn, move by

move, even such advantages as their good fortune may have procured. There

are others, who, although possessed of great vivacity of mind and eager

for information, yet lack that patience necessary to receive instruction.

Lastly, there are not a few whose way of thinking and the validity of

whose calculations, depend upon their good or ill digestion.

It is in vain that such people endeavor to divine things beyond their

understanding. Hence it is, that among those incapable of thought, or

too indolent for mental effort, the game proceeds in easy fashion until

routine is over. Afterward, at each move, the most probable conjecture

passes for the best reason and victory ultimately rests with him whose

blunders are least immediately consequential.

* * * * *

Understanding of high art is dispensed only to the few; the great mass

neither can comprehend nor enjoy it. In spite of the good natured

Helvetius, all are not wise who wish to be so and men ever will remain

what Nature made them. It is impossible for the stream to rise higher

than its source.

“The progress of human reason,” writes the great Frederic, “is more slow

than is imagined; the true cause of which is that most men are satisfied

with vague notions of things and but few take time for examination and

deep inquiry.

“Some, fettered by prejudice from their infancy, wish not, or are unable

to break their chains; others, delighting in frivolity know not a word

of mathematics and enjoy life without allowing their pleasures to be

interrupted by a moment of reflection. Should one thinking man in a

thousand be discovered it will be much; and it is for him that men of

talent write.

“The rest naturally are offended, for nothing so enrages the mediocre

mind as to be compelled to admit to itself its own inferiority.

Consequently, they consign book, author, and reader conjointly to Satan.

So much easier is it to condemn than to refute, or to learn.”

* * * * *

The early success of many young students does not permit them to observe

that they often have departed from the rules of the Art. As they have

escaped punishment for their errors, they remain unacquainted with the

dangers to which they were exposed. Constant good fortune finally makes

them over-confident and they do not suspect it necessary to change their

measures, even when in the presence of an able foe.

Thus, the youthful tyro, inconsiderate, inconsistent, and turbulent, and

oblivious to the innumerable dangers by which he is surrounded, plays

his pieces hither and thither, as fancy and inclination dictate, culling

bouquets of the most gorgeous flowers of the imagination; thoughtless of

the future and perfectly happy because he cannot reflect.

To reason exactly, the student first must rid his mind of all

preconceived notions; he must regard the matter under consideration

as a blank sheet of paper, upon which nothing is to be written save

those things which by the processes of logic and demonstration, are

established as facts.

There is much difference between the Art of Logic and mere conjecture.

The calculations of arithmeticians, though rigorous and exact, are never

difficult; because they relate to known quantities and to the palpable

objects of nature. But when it is required to argue from combining

circumstances, the least ignorance of uncertain and obscure facts breaks

the chain and we are deceived every moment.

This is no defect of the understanding, but error arising from plausible

ideas, which wear the face of and are too quickly accepted for truth.

A long chapter can be written on the different ways in which men lose

themselves in their conjectures. Innumerable examples of this are not

wanting, and all because they have suffered themselves to be hurried away

and thus to be precipitate in drawing their conclusions.

The part that the General, whether in Chess-play or in Warfare, has

to act, always is more difficult because he must not permit himself

the least mistake, but is bound to behave with prudence and sagacity

throughout a long series of intricate processes. A single false

deduction, or a movement of the enemy unintelligible to a commander,

may lead him to commit an irremediable error; and in cases wherein the

situation is beyond comprehension, his ignorance is invincible.

For however extensive the human mind may be, it never is sufficiently so

to penetrate those minute combinations necessary to be developed in order

to foresee and regulate events, the sequence, utility and even existence

of which, depend upon future contingencies.

Incidents which are past, can be explained clearly, because the reasons

therefor are manifest. But men easily deceive themselves concerning the

future, which, by a veil of innumerable and impenetrable secondary

causes, is concealed from the most prying inspection.

In such situations, how puerile are the projects even of the greatest

Strategist. To him, as much as to the tyro, is the future hidden; he

knows not what shall happen, even on the next move. How then may he

foresee those situations which secondary causes later may produce?

Circumstances most often oblige him to act contrary to his wishes; and

in the flux and reflux of fortune, it is the part of prudence to conform

to system and to act with consistency. It is impossible to foresee all

events.

* * * * *

“It is not possible,” writes the Count de Saxe, “to establish a

system without first being acquainted with the _principles_ that must

necessarily support it.”

In corroboration of this is the opinion of Frederic the Great:

“Condemned by my unfortunate stars to philosophies on contingencies and

on probabilities I employ my whole attention to examine the _principle_

on which my argument must rest and to procure all possible information on

that point. Deprived of such precaution, the edifice I erect, wanting a

base, would fall like a house of cards.”

Everyone who does not proceed on principle, is inconsistent in his

conduct. Equally so, whenever the principle on which one acts is false,

_i.e._, does not apply to the existing situation; all deductions based

thereon, if applied to the existing situation, necessarily are false.

“Those principles which the Art of Warfare prescribes, never should be

departed from,” writes Frederic the Great, “and generals rigidly should

adhere to those circumspections and never swerve from implicit obedience

to laws, upon whose exact observance depends the safety of their armies

and the success of their projects.”

Thus the student will clearly see that all other calculations, though

never so ingeniously imagined, are of small worth in comparison with

comprehension of the use of Strategetic principles. By means of these

latter, we are taught to control the raging forces which dominate in the

competitive arts and to compel obedience from friend and foe alike.

“To the shame of humanity it must be confessed,” writes Frederic the

Great, “that what often passes for authority and consequence is mere

assumption, used as a cloak to conceal from the layman the extreme of

official indolence and stupidity.

“To follow the routine of service, to be busied concerning food and

clothing, and to eat when others eat, to fight when others fight, are the

whole warlike deeds of the majority and constitute what is called having

seen service and grown grey in arms.

“The reason why so many officers remain in a state of mediocrity, is

because they neither know, nor trouble themselves to inquire into the

causes either of their victories or defeats, although such causes are

exceedingly real.”

In this connection, writes Polybius, the friend and biographer of

Hannibal:

“Having made ourselves masters of the subject of Warfare, we shall no

longer ascribe success to Fortune and blindly applaud mere conquerors,

as the ignorant do; but we shall approve and condemn from Principle and

Reason.”

To the Chess-student nothing can be more conclusive than the following:

“My success at Chess-play,” writes Paul Morphy, “is due to rigid

adherence to fixed rules and Principles.”

* * * * *

_“Chess is best fought on Principles, free from all deception and

trickery.”--Wilhelm Steinitz._

Chess Generalship, Vol. I. Grand Reconnaissance · 第 16 / 222 题