The Parable in Nathan as a Gambit

NotesGotthold Ephraim Lessing, Sämtliche Schriften, eds. Karl Lachmann and Franz Muncker (leipzig: Göschen, 1886–1919), 15: 364–366 and 416–417. See p. 365 for the reference to betting. The chess fan will recognize at least one name, also on p. 365: Ruy Lopez, noted by Lessing as his favorite. Subsequent references to this collection are to L-M, volume and pages. References to the Nathan in volume 3 are by act, scene, and line, e.g., 2.6. 56–75.See H. J. R. Murray, A History of Chess (Oxford, 1913), pp. 736–55. For specifically German references see pp. 739, n. 6; 742; 748, n. 24; 750 and n. 29; 753; 754. The specific passage in Wolfram's Parzival is to be found in Book 8, where Gawan and the King’s sister defend themselves by hurling chess-pieces at their besiegers.The scene enclosing the use of the word Abschach is worth noting for its own sake, since H. J. R. Murray gives a particularly interesting documentation of this term as meaning “discovered check.” He notes its continuity from the Middle Ages to Lessing’s time by referring to the line in Nathan mentioned above. His other source is the Tristan of Heinrich von Freiberg (ca. 1300), which contains a chess game between the king (Mark) and the queen (Isolde). The similarity of this passage to the game between Saladin and Sittah in 2.1 is arresting and gives weight to my later interpretation of “Abschach” in relation to the encounter between Saladin and Nathan. The passages in question are quoted below, since only simultaneous reading will show the great similarity between them:den kiinic und die künegingar minneclichen vandersitzen bi ein ander,dö sie ein schachzabel zugen;ir ougen blicke lieplich vlugenClearly the use of chess terminology by Freiberg is a symbolic–not to say ironic–comment on the personal relations between Mark and Isolde. Instances of using chess games and chess terms in this way abound in medieval literature, including Wolfram's Parzfral. Must we not assume the same of Nathan?Murray (pp. 736–737) referring to the thirteenth-century romance Gavin de Montglane. Murray also notes that some of the Moslem prohibitions against playing chess were based on its ability to excite passions beyond itself (p. 190).To justify the surmise that Lessing had a Fool’s Mate in mind, we must be able to assume two things: 1) that he could have been acquainted with the maneuver, and 2) that he envisioned a European rather than an Islamic board and pieces.The first assumption is confirmed by Murray in footnote 2 of page 707, where he notes that the Fool’s Mate appeared in Gustavus Selenus’ Das Schach oder König-Spiel in Leipzig in 1616.The second assumption appears to find a contradiction in Saladin’s reference to the “glatten Steine” (2.1. 52). In Lessing’s time, however, Europe had only scant and distorted knowledge of the older Islamic game. Even the above reference may be inaccurate rather than cryptic, since the Arabic pieces had different shapes, but were not recognizable as creatures or human beings, i.e., “graven images.” Further, Lessing’s other brief use of chess terminology reflects the European game (der Springer, die Königin) since the queen in the Arabic game was called by a name closer to its original designation, firzan (“vizier”) and the knight or faras was a “bold horsernan,” whose oblique move resembled that of a European bishop. (For these references, see Murray, pp. 221–24.)Al-Hafi is a symbolic figure of great importance to the play. Evidence that Lessing was unable to express Hafi’s full significance in the dervish’s limited appearances in Nathan may be found in the fact that he planned yet another play entitled: Der Derwisch, ein Nachspiel zum Nathan (L-M, 3: 495). See also letters to and from Lessing: L-M, 18: 305, 308–09, 314, and 21: 247, 253.That Lessing’s fondness for Al-Hafi was tempered by a perception of his weakness, i.e., that Lessing approves of Saladin’s return to form, is indicated in a fable titled Die Hunde (L-M, 202–203, translated from Claudius Aelianius, Historia animalium), in which a “gereister Budel” says of India: “da giebt es noch rechte Hunde,” who are not even afraid to attack lions. (Dare we note that Saladin is also called the “lion”?) The local hunting dog who hears this remark asks if the Indian dogs overcome the lion and, upon hearing that the poodle’s admiration is only for their courage, not their prowess, replies: “besser als wir, so viel wie nichts–aber ein gut Theil dümmer.”Lessing’s last noted correction to this short tale in 1759 is some twenty years before Nathan. May we nonetheless suppose that Al-Hafi’s “am Ganges,/ Am Ganges nur giebts Menschen” is but a latter-day echo of “In ... Indien ..., da, da giebt es noch rechte Hunde”? That is: “One man’s meat is another man’s poison,” or, Al-Hafi’s unqualified admiration of his Parsee tutors’ ascetic devotion to truth is similar to the poodle’s admiration of courage. Neither quality can cope with the world by itself

Art · Art history · German · Linguistics · Literature · Meaning (existential · Queen (butterfly · Historical, Literary, and Cultural Studies · History · Linguistics and language evolution · Philosophy