<A NEW OPPONENT TO MORPHY

Mr. Kolisch, an eminent metroplitan practitioner, has circulated among provincial chess-payers the following resolution, agreed to at a meeting held on the 12th of April in the St. George's Chess Club, London: -

"Mr. Kolisch having intimated to several members of the Metropolitan Chess Clubs his willingness to play a match with Mr. Paul Morphy, it was considered most advisable, in order to bring about so interesting an event, that a committee should at once be formed.

"The following gentlemen having been appointed: Lord Arthur Hay, N.Strode, Esq., Thomas J. Hampton, Esq., St. George's Club, Herr J.Löwenthal, St. James Club ; George Maude, Esq., London Chess Club; it was resolved that the above-named gentlemen be requested on behalf of the undersigned to promote and carry out the necessary arrangements for inviting Mr. Paul Morphy to play a match at chess with Herr Ignace Kolisch."

[Here follow the signatures of the distinguished London chess-players who co-operate with Mr. Kolisch in his undertaking. The list includes the names of Lord Lyttelton and Mr. Mongredien (the presidents of leading chess societies), Viscount Cremorne, Sir John Trelawny, &c.]

The comittee has already resolved upon the form and substance of a letter to be sent to Mr. Morphy, and will shortly forward it to that gentleman. In forwarding the circular, Mr. Kolisch states that he would be glad to have a preliminary skirmish with players of the Birmingham or any other chess club that will arrange for his paying them a brief visit.>

First - two corrections to my previous post.

(1) "The Sunday New York Herald of 1889-09-01 contains Kolisch's obit:" should read

<The Sunday New York Herald of 1889-09-29 contains Kolisch's obit>

The link is correct, but the date is the 29th of Sept, 1889.

(2) Next, "den (?)" should almost certainly read "défi" - i.e. challenge, from the French verb défier.

* * * * *

Thanks <thomastonk> for those information glimpses into the past. Your biographical prowess is impressive.

(Do you have professional library tools - or do you use your own indexing system? Whichever it is, it seems to work well).

I'll have more to say later, right now I'm rushing through. But note that both articles date from 1861, whereas the intro above, and most other affirmative sources, indicate the challenge dated from 1863. Curious.

Next, as for Morphy's editing responsibilities, Bill Wall offers the following:

<While in New York, Paul was offered to co-edit the Chess Monthly, edited by Daniel Fiske (1831-1904). Morphy was to provide annotated games.>

<Whichever it is, it seems to work well> The sources I quoted have no relation to my archive. When I read your quote from the NY Herald, I remembered that there is something in "The Chess Monthly" and I found it. Thereafter I did an online research and found the "Birmingham Daily Post". That's all. Done in my break after dinner.

I think the old-fashioned way is useful - especially since it maps well into the creator's organizational bents (ie tendencies).

I did try to find the Birmingham Daily Post online, but arrived here instead:

http://go.ggimg.com/blcsGoAway/

The url part "blcsGoAway" telling me to go away is rather humorous.

* * * *

RE: Morphy -- Kolisch Match

The articles you quote aren't in contradiction with the one I quoted really. The editor of LIN is reporting hearsay, otherwise it wouldn't need qualifying ("We believe"). CM then just entertains the speculation.

Having Morphy as co-editor doesn't mean much in such speculation. It's likely he never saw it, but it would be nice to know the exact date of publication. There was much political unrest at the time, and Morphy was practicing law or traveling largely.

The BDP article is believable as well, as Kolisch was emerging as one of the best, if not, the best, player of the time. The article never says a letter was delivered to Morphy with the challenge. In fact, Kolisch seemed more interested in using this challenge to engage and introduce himself to the club, as the last paragraph shows. More investigation is needed (as always).

What is also in need of investigation is this reference in the NYH article I cited:

<Kolisch never challenged Morphy, nor even proposed to play a match with him, and the story regarding the challenge, as explained by Kolisch himself [...]>

Now, does the "explained by Kolisch himself" apply to the entire content of the sentence, or just to the end of the sentence (the [...] describing the letters exchanged)?

Another Kolisch favorite problem, an M2, from S. Loyd:

<It was an impromptu affair, composed at a dinner given just prior to the Paris tournament and a wager made no one could master it in under an hour>

(White to move)

click for larger view

The arcticle in the NYH of 1889 isn't worthless, but its value concerns other questions, say, did Kolisch in his later life deny that he challenged Morphy, and, if so, why? So, I'm not going to discuss this article in detail, when I talk about what happened in the 1860s (primary/secondary source - a principle I always respect).

The 1860s are very well documented and easily accessible. Links to online journals can be found for example here: http://www.chessarch.com/library/ma.... You can extent your search to newspapers at chessarch or somewhere else. Of course, a good Morphy biography can be of great help, too.

Kolisch achieved his early success at chess, but later went on to fame and true fortune as a banker. His chess playing may have been responsible for that as well -

In <Habitues of the Cafe de la Regence> (Winter - "Chess Facts and Fables", p220 pbk):

<The late Baron Kolisch may be said to have risen to rank and fortune over the chessboards of the Cafe de la Regence, where he made his first appearance in the '60s and for a long time was content to delve among the <mazettes> at half a franc a game. He was a jovial and amusing companion, and had the good luck to make a friend of a stockbroker fond of chess who gave Kolisch an opening as a <coulissier>, or commission agent at the Paris Bourse. Here his business talents attracted the attention of the Rothschilds, and his futrue career was assured.">

Feels like the same subject to me. You found a source and drew already a conclusion, but I cannot see any verification.

Academical historians use many categories of sources to avoid mistakes. Here is an example from chess history that illustrates the dangers of family sources: http://www.chessarch.com/archive/00....

The NYH article belongs to those sources, which German historians call 'ex post' (I don't know, if this term is used in English, too), like many obituaries. James Mortimer's reminiscences are written decades later, too, and they seem to be quite anecdotical.

I'm a little confused about your cautions. Not the last one so much, as I haven't researched it, but your first advisement.

I've read it before, but any excuse for a re-reading is a good excuse. However, consider the imperative at the end:

"The conclusion I would like to present to chess biographers is this: <Do not limit the range of research to old chess columns and chess periodicals>. We have to look for confirmation of the “facts” in non-chess related literature and in the record offices, or archives, of schools, universities, churches, cemeteries and hospitals."

An obituary in a general circulation newpaper, such as the New York Herald, is not a chess periodical, nor exactly a chess column. As a non-professional, I certainly will never have access to the other records referred to.

<Feels like the same subject to me. You found a source and drew already a conclusion, but I cannot see any verification.>

What exactly you are referring to here isn't exactly clear to me. I posted two quotes, one from Winter the other from the NY Herald, so some further specification would be helpful. And it's inconclusive which conclusion is being called into question.

I'm a little on a defensive footing without knowing what exactly is in need of defending.

But I know that you were observing Lent, let's rejoin the discussion next week. I have an hypothesis of events which seems to fit all the known record (ie known to me). It would be interesting to have you critique it.

The essence is contained here:

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

It's Winter's treatment of the infamous Steinitz-Blackburne "dust-up".

(I should look up the German word for "dust-up"... not there, but "fight" is = kampfen, fechten, sich schlagen)

Winter shows how the story can become distorted in contemporary (i.e. modern) retelling.

But even more critical is the fact that the story may be confused from its very inception. The point is that even the contemporaneous sources can be in conflict, and contain truths and almost truths, even if retold by the very participants who are the only people who can recount the story, but who find it next to impossible to recount unbiasedly, even if given time to gain some distance and perspective on the event of interest.

With Kolisch we may have some parallels in both the telling and retelling of his challenge to Morphy.

OK then, here are the auxiliary links to fill out Winter's treatment:

<CN 6437>
http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/...

Maybe batgirl has been following our discussion here? She cites the <Daily Alta> article I ref'ed above:

Kolisch had changed his profession some times, before he rose from destitute beginnings to distinguished riches. The highlight of his chess career was the win of the Napoleon prize at Paris (1867). In later years, Kolisch became a banker and estate owner. He acquired the <Freiherrntitel> (Baron) in Sachsen-Meiningen. He bought land on the Kahlenberg and arranged beautiful parties in the gloriously renovated, former Villa Felix. He was an honorary member of the Vienna Chess Society. For a long time its vice-president, then for two years its president, and then committee member. He was also a publisher, first with the fiscal 'Grüne Blätter', which crashed fast. Later, he became the publisher of the 'Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung', ruining his health and after a financial loss of almost half a million, he put it aside (maybe he stopped publishing it) on 21 October 1888. His widow and his brother, the well-known paediatrician Dr. Emanuel Kolisch, mourn his death.

Curious about the exact nature of the publication that "ruin[ed] his health", I found this:

<The Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung (WAZ) was published from 1 March 1880 to 11 February 1934 to the Vienna daily liberal direction. It was founded by Theodor Hertzka that led to 1886 as editor, as long Editors acted inter alia 1899-1909 Julius Szeps and from 1927 to 1934, the Social Democrat Paul German . For the WAZ wrote inter alia Jakob Julius David , Milan Dubrovic , the screenwriter Paul Frank , Géza Herczeg , Robert Hirschfeld , Max Kalbeck , Ignaz von Kolisch , Carl Lafite , Emil Marriot , Alfred Polgar , Richard Specht , Elizabeth Thury , Berta Zuckerkandl and music critic Gustav Doempke . Hugo von Hofmannsthal published in the daily early poetry, for example, in the issue of December 25, 1896 the love poem "The Two". [1]

As an additional title was initially "Six-clock-sheet", later "Late Evening Journal" out. The publication changed. To 20 December 1888, the Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung appeared as a morning paper, midday leaf and six o'clock evening sheet, then in the evening on weekdays. Throughout its existence, the newspaper changed hands several times the size. Appeared originally in the format 41 x 26.4 cm, so 28 cm was changed from 1915 to 41 x.

In the wake of the uprising in February 1934, the Wiener Allgemeine Zeitung had to cease publication. >

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiener...

A few later years of the publication (post-Kolisch) may be available here:

http://anno.onb.ac.at/cgi-content/a...

also see

< Ignatz von Kolisch
Was Slovakian, not Polish.
Like Sir Jeremy Morse
He made a fortune at the Bourse.>

I was happy to see that that superb clerihew was included in the startling opus titled:

<"Ignaz Kolisch, The Life and Chess Career of that Mental Midget by Fabrizio Zavatarelli Which Has Been Granted the ISB number of 978-0-7864-9690-7, Or, In a Truncated Format, ISBN: 978-1-4766-1801-2, Which Consisteth It of 324 games, 174 Diagrams and 63 Illustrations, (with various appendices, notes, bibliography, indexes and all them ting, amounting to a <rastafari> 376 pages>".

<"... Why Kolisch, or in fact any of the other of the noted European masters, did not see fit to accept Morphy's den (?) is a mere matter of conjecture, scarely pertinent to the case, although it would be impossible to find any one who had ever played with Morphy who was not convinced that he was a class above the players of modern times">>

I should have guessed that one... but a den of Morphy was too attractive a concept.

* * * * *

Q- Why does <CG> insist on the seemingly unnecessary "von" in his name?

The esteemed, and perhaps most accurate book ever by Zavatarelli simply gives his name as

<Ignatz Kolisch>.

Us Z's gotta stick together. As do us Ignatz's...

<Ignaz Kolisch>

The "z" remains, but the "t" goes. Why?

1) Zavatarelli's authoritative biography of Kolisch uses that name.

http://www.amazon.com/Ignaz-Kolisch...

2) The contemporaneous press used <Ignaz> as well, and he even used it in his own signature:

https://books.google.com/books?id=U...

(did he write that in English?)

3) His descendents use that name:

https://www.chess.com/article/view/... (see first comment)

4) There's also this...

http://www.kwabc.org/index.php/ches...

Which I think pretty definitely eliminates both the "von" and the "t".

BTW- can anybody make out what I presume is the middle name?

.

London, England, Church of England Marriages and Banns, 1754-1921: <Ignaz Baron Kolisch>

<London, England, Crisp's Marriage Licence Index, 1713-1892: <Ignaz Baron Kolisch>

Germany & Austria, Directories of Military and Marine Officers, 1600-1918: <Ignaz Kolisch>

JewishGen Online Worldwide Burial Registry: <Dr. Ignaz Kolisch>

He was born in Pressburg, Slovakia. Slovakian website http://www.sachovespravy.eu/jan2006... has <Ignaz von Kolisch> and <Ignaz Kolisch> (but also d. 1879).