The bishop and the religious tracing in modern society: separation of church and state is never
The queen piece in chess was originally a minister and developed to its prestigious power over time. The bishop piece was a limited elephant that has grown through years. The religious tracing is obvious and demonstrates the failing division between church and state.
Historically, chess represented the king’s battlefield strategy. Where the bishop is placed was an elephant. Given that bishops not only did not exist but also clergy did not participate in battle. War was for soldiers not for sages. Yet in Frankish society, bishops and abbots participated in war. Appearing in the Courier chess game in the 1200s recognised the bishop as a clear player on the battlefield. While there may be some church intervention, the use of the bishop instead of other clergy denotes that actual battle experience. Ironically, in Indian chess the elephant transitioned to a camel and Russian and Lithuanian it is a military officer. Different cultures adapted the pieces differently. It is not clear the chronology. Did the elephant change to the cultural bishop independently or around the same time. Though christian Europe made the elephant change at behest to the church or to the battlefield. At this point, the queen had entered the board but the game had yet to change its purpose. It was still the king’s battle company. If anything looking at a chess board fuels medieval monarchies. The bishop is not the only piece but the knight as well though other nations call it a horse for good reason.
Inaugurating the bishop only provided the two spaces diagonally that the elephant moved. The moves expanded with the queen’s growth. Basing such a theory on the church’s power would seemingly undermine given the decreasing power of the church at the onset of the modern age. The change could be seen as a defensive tactic to re-empower the church’s following. Also a testament to those past fighters even if bishops no longer fought extensively alongside the king in battle. Though the paradigm shift may have much more to do with this change. Both pieces more powerful abilities were progressed in the industrialised colonisation. Bishops kept their name but no longer stood for the same swordsmen they once did. Bishops were more figurative than literal. Their reflection in society was more intensive than on the battlefield. Its long range archery gives it lethal execution. It is just below the rook. Yet it can things a rook cannot do with range. If the modern expansionism says anything it is societal indoctrination. The game is no longer a war game but a game of society. Citizens play and articulate the battlefield of life. No church influence, purely an innovative game with a technologically persistent push.
Till this day the bishop remains on the board. Democratic countries with little power of the church involved. Bishops are ordinary members of society. Their piece still remains. Only in certain gameplays. Eurasian countries do not. They hold to their traditional cultural models. Away from the church and to their military equipment. For westerners, the church remains a constant storm. Despite the separation of church and state, this piece remains wholesome in the game. Little attempt has been made to alter the name. The islamic elephant was usurped by the christian bishop. There is no democratic sergeant or treasurer. The lack of updating since the medieval age may reflect the globalisation of chess. When it was solely amongst the elite, it could be swapped for political purposes but once it had been disseminated to the public such change was not as simple. The printing press spread it far and wide. Technically, an announcement could be made today but there is a certain candour for tradition. Though ironically, it is usually the laymen who have more respect than the elites. Still, the bishop is a piece on the board no one actually paints them as the church playing. The pieces were moulded by medievals and applied to the modern west. As much innovation many are kept to this day.
The bishop’s continuity has little to do with reasonable church power. It is more retained religious dogma from past. The inclusion of church and state is at times evident. Two examples quickly come to mind. NJ’s blue laws close all stores on Sunday for religious reasons. A more blatant example is the abortion case. Basing life at conception is a religious argument not scientific. The former is ingrained in the routine. Little pushback is retaliated. An annoyance that is parcel of the county’s life. Yet the latter is clearly motivated. There is no routine, no acceptance. Secularists deny and oppose.
No comments:
Post a Comment