Edward Winter
Philip Walsingham Sergeant
The
Sphere, 21 August 1921, page 181
Surrey Advertiser, 22 October 1952, page 2
Jeremy Gaige (1994)
From page 16 of A Century of British Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1934):
‘I went up [to Trinity College, Oxford] in Michaelmas Term, 1890, and at once joined the University Chess Club, where the chief exponents of the game were G.D. Madgavkar, the brilliant Indian player, with his astonishing sight of the board, which enabled him to leave his own game and wander round, looking at others and passing acute comments on their prospects; and R.G. Lynam …’
On page 299 Sergeant wrote that Madgavkar was ‘now Sir Govind Dinanath Madgaonkar, Judge of the High Court in Bombay, and Acting Chief Justice when he retired in 1931’.
The above is from C.N. 3193. See Two Indian Chess Figures.
Philip Walsingham Sergeant (frontispiece of his book A Century of British Chess)
C.N. 654 quoted from a review of Modern Ideas in Chess by Richard Réti in the BCM, September 1923, page 338, written by P.W. Sergeant:
‘On page 141 Breyer is quoted as saying that after 1 P-K4 “White’s game is in its last throes”. But this is scarcely hyper-modern, for H.E. Atkins made a similar joking remark to the present reviewer if his memory is not at fault, 25 years ago.’
The same page of the BCM, the item being a review by P.W. Sergeant of Réti’s Modern Ideas in Chess, referred to Réti discussing ‘the school of the Hyper-moderns’ and also contains the remark ‘But this is scarcely hyper-modern’.
Richard Réti
From page 81 of P.W. Sergeant’s Championship Chess (London, 1938):
See Breyer and the Last Throes and Hypermodern Chess.
From page 72 of Championship Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1938):
‘Blackburne showed how a chessplayer could drink, poor Mason, on the other hand, how one chessplayer would drink.’
See Chess and Alcohol.
From Duplication of Chess Games:
The opening moves of two games played on adjacent boards in the fifth round of the Hastings, 1922-23 tournament (30 December 1922):
1) Rubinstein v Condé: 1 d4 d5 2 Nf3 e6 3 e3 Nf6 4 Bd3 Bd6 5 O-O Nbd7 6 Nbd2 O-O 7 e4 dxe4 8 Nxe4 Nxe4 9 Bxe4 Nf6 10 Bd3 b6 11 Bg5 Bb7 12 Qe2 Be7 13 Rad1.
2) Yates v P.W. Sergeant: 1 e4 e6 2 d4 d5 3 Nc3 dxe4 4 Nxe4 Nd7 5 Nf3 Ngf6 6 Bd3 Nxe4 7 Bxe4 Nf6 8 Bd3 Be7 9 O-O O-O 10 Qe2
Two distinct openings have led to identical positions one after 13 moves but the other after 12.
Below is the full text of C.N. 1054 (entitled ‘Crass’), written in 1985:
One book we most certainly shall not be reviewing in full is Grüenfeld Defense, Russian Variations by Eric Schiller, published by Chess Enterprises.
Grüenfeld is the novel spelling on the front cover. The back cover and spine prefer Gruenfeld. The Preface gives Grünfeld. The bibliography has Bruenfeld.
Ah yes, the bibliography, with its reference to the 1946 edition of Modern Chess Openings by ‘Griffith, P.C. & E.W. Sergeant’. P.C. Griffiths cannot be meant, since in 1946 he was not writing, he was being born. Presumably Mr Schiller was not sure whether the co-author was E.G. Sergeant or P.W. Sergeant, so he took one initial from each.
All this, though, is a mere antipasto, leading in to our tentative nomination for the most crass couple of sentences of 1985:
‘Dedication
To Harry Golombek, a friend and mentor, whose vast knowledge of chess, arbitin, and foreign languages I hop to someday acquire. May my writing retain its vitality as long as his has!’
As printed ...
In response, Walter Korn (San Mateo, CA, USA) wrote to us on 21 December 1985 (C.N. 1103):
In 1952 Walter Korn brought out the eighth edition of Modern Chess Openings. A year or two later, bizarrely, a company in Göteborg published a Swedish translation of the fifth edition, which had been written back in 1932, by P.W. Sergeant, R.C. Griffith and M.E. Goldstein. The Swedish book had 1954 on the dust-jacket and 1953 on the title page and imprint page.
(10142)
James J. Barrett (New York, NY, USA) writes:
‘P.W. Sergeant died in 1952. An almost insultingly brief “obituary” appeared in the BCM for November of that year (page 324). No mention of his long connection with the BCM. No mention of Morphy’s Games of Chess. Half a sentence skirts the subject of his considerable non‑chess publications. No mention of his date of birth or death. The only book mentioned is his A Century of British Chess – and, oh yes, “helping R.C. Griffith with two editions of Modern Chess Openings”. The whole tone of this small paragraph that serves as an obituary is cold and unfeeling, and there was no follow-up. There must be a story here. Did he have a falling‑out with the BCM? And I could not find even a mention in CHESS.’
The worst case of brevity must surely be the BCM’s obituary of Réti (July 1929 issue, page 258): seven lines.
(1268)
Louis Blair (Knoxville, TN, USA) points out that four passages on page 36 of William Steinitz, Chess Champion by Kurt Landsberger (Jefferson, 1993) repeat, almost word for word, material in the Preface to Championship Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1938). However, whereas Sergeant wrote that Steinitz ‘did not claim any title when he defeated Anderssen in a match in 1866’, Landsberger asserted, ‘When Steinitz defeated Anderssen he announced that he was the world champion’.
See Copying.
A comment of ours in Chess: The Greatest:
In writing a book about Morphy, P.W. Sergeant could give queen odds to Chris Ward.
(Chess Café, 1997)
It is notable how often the ‘art conceals art’ quote crops up in connection with Capablanca. For example:
‘Capablanca had that art which hides art to an overwhelming degree.’ (H. Golombek, A History of Chess (1976), page 187.)
‘During the last 20 years, Capablanca has contested in successive tournaments and his games form a series of classics, noted chiefly for their grace and simplicity. This simplicity is, of course, the result of that art which conceals art …’ (B. Winkleman, Modern Chess (1931), page 198.)
‘[Capablanca] makes the game look easy. Art lies in the concealment of art.’ (P.W. Sergeant, Chess Pie, issue 1, 1922, page 6.)
(Chess Café, 2000)
Earlier we gave the Sergeant quote in C.N. 1370.
Eugène M. Antoniadi’s first notable incursion into chess history and literature was an article entitled ‘Souvenirs inédits sur Paul Morphy’ on pages 289-292 of the October 1916 La Stratégie, in which he presented C.A. Maurian’s reminiscences, on the basis of conversations and correspondence between the two men in 1911, the year before Maurian died.
On page 20 of the January 1922 issue Antoniadi wrote a complimentary review of Capablanca’s Chess Fundamentals, but the alleged faults he listed must give rise to doubts about his judgement. For example, demonstrating ignorance of British vocabulary he complained with regard to the game between F.F.L. Alexander and Sir George Thomas that Capablanca was mistaken in his use of the word ‘brackets’ (‘A la page 98, l’auteur confond les crochets avec les parenthèses.’). Such a criticism would have been worthlessly petty even if it had been factually correct.
Controversy resulted from a long general article ‘Considérations sur les Grands Maîtres de l’Echiquier’ on pages 125-134 of the June 1922 La Stratégie. To defend Morphy’s reputation Antoniadi felt obliged to attack not only Staunton (‘We have no praise to offer for either the strength or the character of Staunton, who had none of the qualities of the English nation’) but also three authors of Morphy monographs (Falkbeer, Maróczy and Sergeant), whom he accused of being jealous of Morphy and of trying to belittle him.
The article prompted a mild set of strictures from Gustave Lazard on pages 178-181 of the August 1922 La Stratégie, which Antoniadi answered on pages 230-231 of the October 1922 issue, but the real fireworks were across the Channel. P.W. Sergeant (whose book on Charousek had also been criticized by Antoniadi) defended himself vigorously in the BCM (August 1922, page 307 and September 1922, pages 348-349). Antoniadi and Sergeant clashed on pages 395-396 of the October 1922 BCM, with Sergeant being accorded the last word: ‘M. Antoniadi’s vituperative language offends my taste rather than my peace of mind.’
Sergeant wrote again about the Antoniadi dispute on pages 33-34 of his book Morphy Gleanings (London, 1932), adding in a footnote: ‘As M. Antoniadi (who was a fine player, if a bad controversialist) is dead, I will say no more about this.’
It is unclear why Sergeant considered Antoniadi already deceased at that time, but that was still the belief in chess circles in the 1980s. Page 11 of Jeremy Gaige’s 1987 book Chess Personalia gave, in Antoniadi’s death-line, ‘c1930? FRA’, although the 1994 edition (not sold commercially) revised this to ‘c1944 FRA’.
E.M. Antoniadi
(2799)
G.H. Diggle wrote the text below in the June 1982 Newsflash. It was reproduced on page 82 of Chess Characters (Geneva, 1984):
It is curious that the two English writers who have paid Staunton the most attention were Presidents of the Guildford Chess Club (though with an interval of 30 years between them) – P.W. Sergeant (died 1952) and R.N. Coles, of whom the Club (and indeed the chess world) have just been sadly deprived. Both achieved sterling work on Staunton, though each viewed him very differently. “P.W.S.” scrupulously struggled to be fair to him, but it was “R.N.C.’s” imaginative sympathy that really brought the great English player to life.’
For the full text by Diggle see The Chess Historian R.N. Coles.
In 1989 Dover reprinted Charousek’s Games of Chess by Philip W. Sergeant, though with freshly prepared diagrams. Sergeant included all the game-scores available to him, but he was working at a difficult time for research (the First World War). The reprint has been enhanced by Fred Wilson’s nine-page appendix listing ‘additions and corrections which were made by Philip W. Sergeant in his copy of the first edition as notes for a second edition which was never published’, though Dover could perhaps have gone even further by including extra Charousek games from other sources (such as the Blackmar Gambit win over Exner on pages 33-34 of Bruce Hayden’s Cabbage Heads and Chess Kings).
(1928)
Regarding Pillsbury’s Chess Career by P.W. Sergeant and W.H. Watts (London and New York, 1923) see Harry Nelson Pillsbury.
The young Morphy’s well-known ‘devilish bad games’ disparagement of Staunton did untold harm to the Englishman’s reputation in the twentieth century. As G.H. Diggle pointed out in C.N. 1932, P.W. Sergeant gave currency to the gibe in three of his books (Morphy’s Games of Chess, Morphy Gleanings and A Century of British Chess).
(2885)
For the full text of C.N. 2885, as well as C.N.s 10293 and 10353, see Paul Morphy.
Which chess author wrote a book on ghosts?
The answer is P.W. Sergeant, whose 288-page volume Historic British Ghosts was published by Hutchinson & Co., London in 1936. Chess received a mention on page 262, with the following footnote regarding poltergeists:
‘I have only come across one alleged instance, very trivial. A well-known chessmaster among my friends appeared to be troubled at one time with such a visitant. The books on chess in his library would be found lying on the floor, would fall out of the shelves at night; always and only chess books, though there were more books on other subjects. And a photograph of some chess celebrity fell from the wall, with its glass broken. There was no explanation. A selective cat could hardly be blamed. The manifestation did not last for more than a very few weeks.’
(3162)
See Chess and Ghosts.
From Chess Grandmasters:
P.W. Sergeant wrote a general historical article about the use of titles on pages 72-73 of the third issue of Chess Pie (1936).
Of the games involving P.W. Sergeant that we have reviewed, one of the most interesting is this loss, given in C.N. 3190:
Singapore (J.B. Elcum, W. Craig, S. Rosembaum and P.A.
Reutens) – Hong Kong (P.W. Sergeant, T.H. Reid, M.J.
Dannenberg, E.J. Moses and P.C. de Souza)
Telegraph game, 1902
King’s Gambit Declined
1 e4 e5 2 f4 exf4 3 Nf3 g5 4 h4 g4 5 Ng5 h6 6 Nxf7 Kxf7 7 d4 f3 8 gxf3 Be7 9 Bc4+ d5 10 Bxd5+ Kg7 11 O-O g3 12 f4 Nf6 13 Nc3 h5 14 f5 Ng4 15 Kg2 Bxh4 16 Rf4 Nf2 17 Qf3 Qg5 18 e5 Nc6 19 f6+ Kg6 20 Ne4 Nxe5 21 Nxg5 Nxf3 22 Bf7+ Kxg5
The Singapore team now telegraphed the unusual seesaw line 23 Rxf3+ Kg4 24 Rf4+ Kg5 25 Rxf2+ Kg4 26 Rf4+ Kg5 27 Rf1+ Kg4 28 Bc4 Re8 29 f7, and Black resigned.
Source: La Stratégie, 17 September 1902, pages 277-278. The magazine took the score and notes by J.B. Elcum from the Singapore Free Press.
[Addition on 25 October 2010: Olimpiu G. Urcan (Singapore) writes:
‘I believe that “Rosembaum” should read “Rosenbaum”. This little-known player made a few appearances in local championships, and his name was invariably given as “S. Rosenbaum”. By 1905 he was referred to as the head of the Belgian Consulate in Singapore. The two-game match began in late March 1902, and the Straits Times of 24 March 1902 (page 5) had “S. Rosenbaum”. This particular game had finished by 19 July 1902; the chess column in the Singapore Free Press of that day (page 3) published it with the notes by Elcum which were subsequently given by La Stratégie.’]
See The Chess Seesaw/Windmill.
In 1939 P.W. Sergeant dedicated to Elaine Saunders his book An Introduction to The Endgame at Chess, as follows:
‘Dedicated to Miss Elaine Zelia Saunders because she doesn’t (at present) like the Endgame.’
We wonder if any other chess book has been dedicated to somebody as young as 13.
(3817)
See The Chess Prodigy Elaine Saunders.
Hong-Quang Vo (Arcueil, France) writes:
‘I am surprised not to have found a French edition of Znosko-Borovsky’s book The Middle Game in Chess. I assume that the original text was written in Russian, but can you confirm that is correct?’
No French edition would appear to have been published. Douglas A. Betts’ Annotated Bibliography (page 228) specified, regarding the first edition (London, 1922), ‘translation from the French revised by P.W. Sergeant’, although we see no reference to French in the book itself. Znosko-Borovsky’s Preface on pages vii-x thanked the publisher, G. Bell and Sons, for taking an interest in the work of ‘a foreign chessplayer living in exile’ and stated:
‘While writing my book I communicated the various parts of it to that fine Russian chess master, Dr O.S. Bernstein, who was very much interested in it and urged me to continue it. The translation has been revised by Mr P.W. Sergeant.’
In 1938 Bell brought out a new edition, altogether different, translated by Julius du Mont:
Znosko-Borovsky, incidentally, appears to have settled in France in 1920. From page 130 of the June 1920 issue of La Stratégie:
‘Nous avons eu la visite du maître russe Eugène Snosko-Borowski. Il compte, dit-il, se fixer définitivement à Paris, dès son retour de Gothebourg où il va prendre part au Congrès-Jubilé de la Société d’Echecs de cette ville.’ [He did not, in fact, take part in the Göteborg tournament.]
(5397)
Philip W. Sergeant contributed a biographical introduction on pages vii-xi of Znosko-Borovsky’s The Art of Chess Combination (London, 1936).
(5527)
This photograph, featuring P.W. Sergeant, was published on page 228 of the April 1894 Chess Monthly. However, the caption needs to be compared with what had appeared on page 236 of the magazine’s April 1893 issue:
It will be noted that a mix-up occurred in identifying Sergeant and B.L./D.L. Secretan (or D.L./J.L. Secreton, according to pages 176-179 of the April 1893 BCM).
(5342)
From our article on F.D. Yates:
Yates died at the age of 48. On page 525 of the December 1932 BCM P.W. Sergeant presented the facts in a way that seemed to preclude any possibility of suicide:
‘The circumstances of his end were tragic. On the night of Tuesday, 8 November he gave a very successful exhibition at Wood Green, only dropping one half-point in 16 games. On the following night he was in the company of a chess friend until fairly late, and then went back to his room in Coram Street, Bloomsbury. He was never seen alive again. It was not until Friday morning that anxiety was felt at Coram Street as to what he might be doing; for he was in the habit of secluding himself for many hours at a stretch when busy with work. On Friday, however, when no answer could be got to knocks on the door of his room, which was locked, and a smell of gas was noticed, the door was at last broken open, and he was found dead in bed.
It came out at the inquest before the St Pancras coroner on 15 November that, though the gas-taps in the room were securely turned off, there had been an escape from what a gas company’s official described as an obsolete type of fitting attached to the meter in the room. The meter, it appears, was on the floor, and the fitting must have been accidentally dislodged. A verdict was recorded of Accidental Death; and the coroner directed that the gas-pipes from the room should remain in the custody of the court. The body was conveyed to Leeds for burial on the morning of 16 November.’
Yates’ financial circumstances had unquestionably been piteous, and a dispute about the lack of support for British chessplayers broke out in the Chess World (1 January 1933, pages 185-186; 8 March 1933, pages 275-276; 8 April 1933, pages 313-315; May-June 1933, pages 363-364). For instance, his friend W.H. Watts, the chess writer and publisher, noted that the death was ‘purely accidental’ but wrote on page 185:
‘... we were so infatuated by our own pettifogging antics over the chess board that we failed to see our Champion was starving. We could not see that poor timid Yates was literally dying in our midst, too proud to tell us so himself. The very name Yates will be for ever a shameful memory in the annals of British Chess.’
An extract from C.N. 5590:
The following appeared on pages 68-69 of A Century of British Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1934):
‘Cochrane had gone back to India, and in 1848 we hear of him, as president of the Calcutta Chess Club (in the foundation of which he was largely instrumental), still seeking for opponents out East capable of testing the skill which he had so worthily proved in the West. One was at last found. A member of the club in the autumn of 1848 heard of a Brahman in the Mofussil – up country, as we might say – who had never been beaten at chess. He found an opportunity of meeting him, played him, and lost. It was stated that the man, “Moheschunder Bonnerjee, a Brahmin”, of about 50, hardly knew the European rules of chess; yet his play was presumably under European rules.
Delighted with his find, the Calcutta member took him back with him, and passed him on to Cochrane as an opponent. Cochrane beat him, but was sufficiently impressed with his skill to have him engaged as “a paid attaché” of the Chess Club, where he improved wonderfully. In the [Chess Player’s Chronicle] for 1851 are published some games between Cochrane and Moheschunder; and “the Brahmin” figures as a player in various collections of games. The Indian Defences by P-KKt3 coupled with P-Q3, or P-QKt3 coupled with P-K3, were largely taught to European players by the example of Moheschunder and other Indians, to whom the fianchetto developments were a natural legacy from their own game. The fondness for them of the present Indian champion of British chess, Mir Sultan Khan, is well known. But they are now so widely popular that Dr S.G. Tartakower was able to declare, some years ago, that “today fianchettos are trumps”. A sequel hardly to have been anticipated from the discovery of Moheschunder in the Mofussil.’
Sergeant’s information was largely based on a letter from a member of the Calcutta Chess Club on pages 318-319 of the 1850 Chess Player’s Chronicle, which included the following:
‘The only player here who has any chance whatever with Mr Cochrane, upon even terms, is a Brahmin of the name of Moheschunder Bonnerjee. Of this worthy, Mr Cochrane has himself remarked that he possesses as great a natural talent for chess as any player he ever met with, without one single exception.’
See John Cochrane.
‘One of the quietest in the whole of chess history, both in this country and elsewhere’ is how P.W. Sergeant describes the year 1893 in his fact-packed book A Century of British Chess (page 219). It was indeed a year of a handful of minor matches and tournaments. No wonder the journalists of the day had so much time and space for the three p’s: poetry, polemics and pap.
(246)
Centre background: Colonel Nawab
Sir Umar Hayat Khan
Back row (left to right): C.D. Locock, R.H.S. Stevenson, P.W.
Sergeant, C. Wreford Brown, Sir Ernest Graham-Little, M.P., R.C.
Griffith, F.D. Yates, J. du Mont, A. Rutherford, J.B. Whieldon
Next row: Miss Joseph, Mrs Latham, Mrs Arthur Rawson, V.
Menchik, A. Alekhine, Mrs Stevenson, J.A. Seitz.
Foreground: S. Basalvi, Aziz, Mir Sultan Khan.
The photograph came from the February 1932 BCM, and the magazine’s key has been given. Page 71 explained the occasion:
‘Colonel Sir Umar Hayat Khan arranged one or two receptions at his residence in honour of Dr Alekhine, the champion of the world. On each evening a dinner followed, characterized by all Sir Umar’s well-known hospitality. On 15 December after full justice had been done to the repast, speeches were made by Sir Ernest Graham-Little, MP, J. Whieldon, C. Wreford Brown and R.C. Griffith; Miss Vera Menchik and Dr Alekhine himself responded to the good wishes and thanks accorded them by the company.
The group photo we give as frontispiece was taken by Malik Ghulam Mohammed Khan, one of the most trusty of Sir Umar’s entourage and a warrior of great distinction. The small photo hanging on the wall to the right of the mirror (behind R.C. Griffith and F.D. Yates) shows Sir Umar in his official robes as Herald of the Princes at the great Durbar.’
(5602)
See Sultan Khan.
From Chess and British Royalty:
An article entitled ‘The Prince Regent and Sir Walter Scott’ appeared in the Chess Player’s Chronicle, 1842, pages 238-240.
P.W. Sergeant wrote a biography George, Prince and Regent, published by Hutchinson & Co. (London). The book itself was undated, but page 171 of the April 1935 BCM recorded that it had been published in February of that year and had been ‘very favourably received’. Incidentally, among Sergeant’s other (non-chess) books were Rogues and Scoundrels and Liars and Fakers.
C.N. 3190, an item no longer online, listed the non-chess books by P.W. Sergeant in our collection. One title acquired since then has been added below, and we believe that the list is now complete.
The list does not include recent reprints; the most common of these is Witches and Warlocks, of which a paperback edition was published by Senate, London in 1996.
(5943)
From a full-page advertisement for Bell books in the 1922 issue of Chess Pie:
Philip Walsingham Sergeant
(6557)
Noting that Diego was the forename of several members of Paul Morphy’s family, Gilles David (Chatou, France) asks which of them edited this 1840 dictionary:
We note the following entry on pages 365-366 of Les écrits de langue française en Louisiane au XIXe siècle by Edward Larocque Tinker (Paris, 1932):
‘Diego Morphy, né à la Nouvelle-Orléans, fils de Diego Morphy, consul d’Espagne à la Nouvelle-Orléans et de sa femme Mollie Creagh; demi-frère du juge Alonzo Morphy, père de Paul Morphy qui, à son époque, était le champion du monde pour le jeu d’échecs. Est nommé, en octobre 1813, vice-consul d’Espagne et devient plus tard professeur de langues; épouse Eulalie Dubord, fille de Don Lorenzo Troisville Dubord et d’Eulalie Beaumont de Livaudais; enseigne jusqu’en 1852 et meurt de la fièvre jaune quelques années plus tard. Compose un dictionnaire à l’usage de ses élèves.’
He is marked in red on the family tree reproduced from page 112 of Morphy Gleanings by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1932):
(6558)
Morphy Gleanings was re-issued by Dover Publications, Inc in 1973 under the title The Unknown Morphy.
From C.N. 6650:
P.W. Sergeant, when referring to H.J.R. Murray’s article on page 18 of Morphy’s Games of Chess (London, 1916):
The famous short story ‘The Thinking Machine’ by Jacques Futrelle (1875-1912) was mentioned by P.W. Sergeant in the first paragraph of his article on Deschapelles on pages 117-119 of the April 1916 BCM:
‘Some years ago the late Jacques Futrelle, who was one of the Titanic victims, wrote a book called The Thinking Machine on the Case, describing certain exploits of a “famous scientist” who out-Sherlocks Sherlock Holmes in the detection of mysteries. In one of the stories in the series we read how the Professor after one hour’s instruction in the game of chess, hitherto unknown to him, defeats the Emmanuel [sic] Lasker of his day, using his logical faculty to supply the place of experience in the game. Now Jacques Futrelle, it need hardly be said, was no chessplayer. But there was a chessplayer flourishing a century ago who apparently asked the world to believe about him the same marvel as Futrelle puts before us in the imaginary case of The Thinking Machine. And this player was no other than Deschapelles.’
A website dedicated to Futrelle has the full text of the short story, and below we reproduce from page 7 of his anthology The Professor on the Case (the title of the British edition of The Thinking Machine on the Case) a passage which has intrigued chess enthusiasts:
Alain C. White discussed Futrelle in his article ‘Chess in Detective Stories’ on pages 305-309 of the August 1911 BCM, and regarding the game which Professor Van Dusen (having only just been introduced to chess by Hillsbury) won against the champion Tschaikowsky, A.C. White wrote:
‘It must have been a remarkable game, though; and anyone who could reconstruct it from the graphic description would confer a lasting favour on lovers of “brilliants”.’
Decades later another eminent figure raised the reconstruction question. From page 205 of the June 1948 BCM:
It needs to be considered whether 14 Rd4+ could be a discovered check.
(6652)
A group photograph at Margate, 1923, shown in C.N.s 4046 and 4126:
This detail was given in C.N. 7899:
Left to right: G.C.A. Oskam, E. Colle, P.W. Sergeant
Michael Clapham (Ipswich, England) draws attention to a passage on page 58 of Championship Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1938):
(In the first paragraph the chronology is confusing, the Pasadena tournament having taken place in 1932.) As regards the comment about Kashdan, Fine and Flohr at the end of the second paragraph, we add the following from page 477 of the November 1933 BCM:
‘United States. – Dr Alexander Alekhine, before leaving New York for Europe on 5 [sic] September, told an interviewer that he regarded as specially likely future opponents Kashdan, Fine and Flohr, with the first-named the most probable. “America’s chances of possessing the next champion”, he said, “are excellent”.’
A correction appeared on page 527 of the December 1933 BCM:
‘In our first paragraph under the heading United States last month (page 477) the words “the first-named” should have been “the two first-named”, as Dr Alekhine included Reuben Fine with Isaac Kashdan in his choice of most probable future challengers for the world championship. He is said, indeed, to have described Fine as “a real threat” for the title.’
More information about the interview is sought.
Around the same time, Alekhine was interviewed by Kashdan himself, on pages 9-10 of the September 1933 Chess Review (see C.N. 5631). Alekhine was asked about US masters, but no names were mentioned in his reply:
‘We wanted to know what he thought of the American players, and how they compared with the younger European stars. “Your double success in the International Team Tournaments has put America in the first rank among the chessplaying nations. No other country has so many promising young masters. In New York City alone you have at least a dozen young men who have nothing to fear from the leaders of any country in Europe. I predict many new successes, and you have enough talent developing to keep in the top flight indefinitely.”’
(7259)
Eduardo Bauzá Mercére (New York, NY, USA) has found this game on page 3 of the Brooklyn Daily Eagle, 28 August 1919:
The moves are garbled at the end of the first column. Our correspondent suggests that the most likely missing move is 16 h3, which gives the following:
José Raúl Capablanca – Philip Walsingham Sergeant
Simultaneous exhibition, City of London Chess Club, London, 6
August 1919
Three Knights’ Game
1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Nc3 Bb4 4 Nd5 Ba5 5 Bc4 Nge7 6 O-O d6 7 c3 Nxd5 8 exd5 Ne7 9 d4 f6 10 dxe5 dxe5 11 b4 Bb6 12 a4 a6 13 a5 Ba7 14 Ba3 Bg4 15 Qd3 Nc8 16 h3 Bxf3 17 Qxf3 Nd6 18 Bb3 O-O 19 c4 Bd4 20 Rad1 Kh8 21 Qd3 Qd7 22 Bc2 g6 23 Bc1 Rae8 24 Kh1 Nf5 25 Qf3 Nd6 26 Qe2 f5 27 Bh6 Rf7
28 c5 Nb5 29 Qc4 Na3 30 c6 Qd6 31 Qb3 Nxc2 32 Qxc2 Qxd5 33 cxb7 Qxb7 34 Qc4 Rd7 35 Be3 Qb5 36 Qxb5 axb5 37 Rfe1 Red8 38 Bg5 Rf8 39 Rxe5 Bxe5 40 Rxd7 Kg8 41 Rd5 Re8 42 Rxb5 Bd6 43 g3 Re4 44 Rb8+ Kf7 45 a6 Resigns.
The newspaper stated that the game-score had been supplied by J. Walter Russell. The report of the séance on page 298 of the September 1919 BCM provides the information that Black was Philip W. Sergeant.
(7541)
Page 71 of our 1989 monograph on Capablanca gives the score of Capablanca v Sergeant, London, 13 October 1913, a simultaneous game won by Sergeant. His notes were included, from page 500 of the Times Literary Supplement, 30 October 1913.
Below is the news item quoted in C.N. 7904 from page 221 of the June 1921 BCM:
The text appeared in the ‘Colonial and Foreign News’ section, of which the Editor was apparently P.W. Sergeant (see page 396 of the October 1922 BCM).
(7927)
See The Gibaud-Lazard Gamelet.
This extract from C.N. 8055 shows Harry Golombek’s review of Championship Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1938) on page 205 of the May 1938 BCM:
(8055)
An extract from C.N. 9116:
Concerning P.W. Sergeant’s Championship Chess (London, 1938), Reinfeld brought out updated editions (New York, 1960 and 1963), with extra games but without revising Sergeant’s annotations.
In C.N. 8185 Olimpiu G. Urcan gave the handwritten applications to the Royal Literary Fund of G.H.D. Gossip and B. Horwitz. Now he adds the submission by P.W. Sergeant.
C.N. 5943 listed the complete set of Sergeant’s non-chess books in our collection. They scarcely look like money-spinners.
(8259)
Our Stalemate article has a remark by Capablanca at Nottingham, 1936 that the stalemate rule is illogical. Another comment, made in 1919, was reported by P.W. Sergeant on page 457 of the December 1929 BCM:
‘To take the case of stalemate alone, during the Victory Congress at Hastings I had a discussion with Señor Capablanca, who argued that the old rule that the player who could make no move should lose is far more logical than the present rule, and should be restored.’
(9121)
A few jottings on a colourful old phrase.
From page 181 of How To Get More Out Of Chess by F. Reinfeld (New York, 1957):
(There was no ‘Best’ in the title of Sergeant’s book, as Reinfeld should have known, given that, also in 1957, he contributed an Introduction to a new Dover edition.)
The ‘someone’ who made the Damascus blade remark was Sergeant himself, at the end of Game LXXIX (Morphy v the Duke and Count) in Morphy’s Games of Chess (pages 149-150):
That Reinfeld was aware of this is shown by the conclusion of his article about the game on page 45 of the February 1956 Chess Review:
(9448)
Page 68 of the May 1907 issue of the Chess Player’s Scrap Book gave the bare score of Morphy v the Duke and Count with the following introduction by Lasker:
‘This is a great game, played against a weak combination. On the eighth move White could have won the QKt pawn, which would have been good enough to win the game, or played BxPch, followed by QxKtP. But that would have been a butcher’s method, not an artist’s.’
Lasker’s butcher/artist remark has often been quoted sourcelessly (e.g. in P.W. Sergeant’s first monograph on Morphy) with reference to 8 Bxf7+, and not also 8 Qxb7.
(10503)
From page 260 of the October 1897 American Chess Magazine, in a report on that year’s international tournament in Berlin:
‘Charousek possesses indomitable courage, of which it is said he gave evidence while he was learning chess. Unable to procure the German Handbuch during his college days, he borrowed one and copied it – to those who are acquainted with the magnitude of that monument of German industry his task will be apparent.’
Page xix of Charousek’s Games of Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1919) quoted from Armin Friedmann in Pester Lloyd, 20 June 1898:
‘At Kaschau he copied out Bilguer’s gigantic compendium, because of his pecuniary inability to secure the work.’
On page 11 of Chess Comet Charousek (Unterhaching, 1997) Victor A. Charuchin stated that after Charousek finished high school his mother gave him the sixth edition of the Handbuch.
There was a contribution on this subject by Ton Sibbing in K. Whyld’s ‘Quotes and Queries’ column on page 218 of the April 1997 BCM. It indicated that Charousek was given the Handbuch by his mother and that he copied some chapters, according to a letter written to a friend on 19 November 1891. The BCM item referred to ‘an unpublished biography (including 359 games), written in English by two Dutchmen, Marten [sic] de Zeeuw and the late Menno Ploeger’.
(8296)
From a biographical note on Rudolf Charousek on page 322 of the Chess Monthly, July-August 1896:
‘He learned the game of chess accidentally only five years ago at college in Kaschau, and this short apprenticeship was sufficient to advance him to the rank of master. Considering that there is not a single amateur of note at Kaschau – to our knowledge – it will be conceded to be rather remarkable that Charousek should have attained such a high degree of excellence solely from the study of the theory. With the latter he is thoroughly imbued. Not being rich enough at college to procure the German Handbuch, he set to work to copy one that was lent to him by a schoolfellow from beginning to end, a Herculean task which is to be hoped has not interfered with the curriculum of the college.’
(10107)
A report from Nuremberg dated 13 August 1896 on page 29 of the Westminster Budget, 21 August 1896 is pointed out by Neil Blackburn (Redditch, England) in connection with this paragraph about Charousek:
‘From the very first day he impressed me with the notion of an extraordinary genius. But for his impetuosity and temerity he would certainly have taken a higher place. He only learned the game five years ago at college, and a single instance will suffice to measure his enthusiasm and perseverance – viz, he copied the German “Handbuch” from beginning to end because, as he tells me, he was not rich enough at school to indulge in the luxury of procuring one.’
(10581)
From Janowsky Jottings:
Part of page 73 of Championship Chess by P.W. Sergeant (London, 1938):
Under the title ‘New Light on the “Falkbeer”’, P.W. Sergeant discussed Rudolf Spielmann’s ‘From the Sickbed of the King’s Gambit’ article on pages 433-434 of the December 1923 BCM. The magazine had two follow-up articles (January 1924, pages 1-2, and February 1924, page 59).
(10265)
C.N.s 3366 and 3368 (see pages 218-220 of Chess Facts and Fables) presented parts of ‘Some Chess Players I Have Met’ by James Mortimer from pages 173-178 of the May 1905 BCM. On pages 293-297 of the August 1905 issue he contributed ‘Some More Chess Players I Have Met’.
Below is a profile of Mortimer by P.W. Sergeant on pages 155-160 of the April-September 1910 edition of the English Illustrated Magazine:
(11249)
An explanatory note by Sergeant in the Preface to his Morphy games collection (page v):
‘In the annotation of the games I have made full use of all the recognized authorities in my possession or within my reach, including the books of Löwenthal, Lange and Maróczy, and the scattered criticisms of Zukertort, Steinitz, Lasker, etc. Where I have been able to trace the original source of an important note, I have usually acknowledged it; but the habit of so many analysts of borrowing without acknowledgement makes it impossible to do this in many cases.’
(11485)
An extract from the comments by John Townsend (Wokingham, England) about James Mason in C.N. 11908:
‘P.W. Sergeant was evidently perplexed by Mason. On page 172 of A Century of British Chess he remarked:
“But James Mason was not an American, either by birth or, apparently, even by naturalisation, since in 1901-2 he played for Britain in the cable-matches. He is one of the most enigmatic characters in the history of British chess.”
Sergeant implies that American citizenship would have prevented him from playing for Britain. Yet American citizenship is precisely what he declared to the 1901 census; if it was not true, then it is hard to understand why he said it. Sergeant does not comment here on the extent to which birth in Ireland, as opposed to America, may have assisted his eligibility to represent Britain in international matches. He also made the point that, on his arrival in 1878, Mason was not received as one returning to Britain:
“... and, though he was, in a sense, like Bird, an exile returned, he was not recognised as connected with the British Isles. He was received as Mr Mason, the American master.”’
Below are some of our observations in C.N. 12283 about The Real Paul Morphy by Charles Hertan (Alkmaar, 2024):
The book ends with a cursory ‘Index of Names’ (pages 378-384); there is no index of players or openings. Among the defects are the misspelling of Journoud’s name (multiple times throughout the book), numerous inconsistencies and Hertan’s unawareness of how accents work in French and Spanish. The index also reveals curious imbalances, such as fewer entries for Philip Sergeant, a Morphy scholar, than for Willy Hendriks.
Sergeant’s two Morphy books are in the unordered ‘Bibliography’ (pages 375-376), with his forename misspelt both times. Immediately before that, the two editions of F.M. Edge’s book on Morphy are listed, but regarding the UK edition there is a misprint in the title, and the wrong publisher is named. Overall, a hypothetical proof-reader would have made at least 20 or 30 amendments to the index and bibliography.
Clare Hopkins (Archivist, Trinity College, Oxford, England) writes:
‘I have checked Philip Sergeant’s results in the University Calendar. In Hilary Term 1893 he achieved a First in the Part One Honour Moderations examination. In Trinity Term 1895 he was awarded a Third in his finals.’
It is the custom at Trinity that every new undergraduate writes an entry in his own hand, according to a fixed formula that has changed over the years. Sergeant entered Trinity in October 1891, as a scholar. To win a place in the scholarship examination was a valuable award, and his tuition fees and accommodation were paid for four years. At that time all the scholars read Literae Humaniores, which was the subject now called Classics, comprising Latin and Greek literature, philosophy, and history.’
Courtesy of the President and Fellows of Trinity College, Oxford we reproduce Sergeant’s handwritten entry in the Admissions Register, 1891:
(12284)
To the Archives
for other feature articles.
Copyright Edward Winter. All rights reserved.
