• Ancient Games Of Chance
• Ancient Games Of Chance
• Medieval Games Of Chance

Nuns steal 500k. Ancient Romans were well-known for their religious routines and for being superstitions, which explains why they enjoyed games of chance so much, especially chariot racing. This activity was dangerous to both drivers and horses, who often suffered serious injuries and even death, but Roman people saw these dangers as all part of the excitement. Beloved by such luminaries as the boy pharaoh Tutankhamun and Queen Nefertari, wife of. Ancient debris is an extremely rare ore found in the Nether, and is the main source of netherite scraps. Its high blast resistance makes it immune to normal explosions. In item form, it floats on lava and cannot be burned by any form of fire. 1 Obtaining 1.1 Generation 1.2 Breaking 1.3 Chest loot 2 Usage 2.1 Smelting ingredient 3 Sounds 4 Data values 4.1 ID 5 Advancements 6 History 7 Issues 8. The exact symbolism and fairness of the games may have varied, but high stakes were common. European colonists noted games of chance with large amounts of trade goods, food, housing, or even people, as the pot. Mayans used precious stones or feathers as wagers. Games were raucous affairs.

Seega, or Sija (سيجة), as it is pronounced in Arabic, is an ancient Egyptian game, whose origins are unclear. There are carved Seega boards on a few different Egyptian temples, dating all the way back to the 1300s BCE, but it is not clear if the boards have been carved at the time of the temple’s construction or later in history. Seega has been continuously played in Egypt since the ancient times until today and its rules are known.

Seega game board, carved on the wall of Elkab Temple of Amenhotep III, Elkab, Egypt. Photo: Bruce Allardice, July 2, 2013.

Rules for Seega have been published for the first time in 1836, in a book by Edward William Lane, called “An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians”. Lane traveled to Egypt twice, in the 1820s and 1830s, and observed Egyptian Bedouin and Felaheen (peasants) play various games, whose rules he recorded. Lane noted that the Egyptians employ various strategies while playing Seega, but he did not know what they were. In 1890, after Lane’s death, H Carrington Bolton, published strategy analysis for Seega in an article called “Seega, an Egyptian Game”. Finally, in 1892, both Lane’s and Bolton’s work have been combined in a general book about board games by Edward Falkener, called “Games Ancient and Oriental, and How to Play Them”, which popularized various ancient games in the western world.

Another Seega game board, carved on the wall of Elkab Temple of Amenhotep III, Elkab, Egypt. Photo: Bruce Allardice, July 2, 2013.

Since Seega is a game of the Egyptian poor and nomads, it did not have fancy manufactured boards and pieces, as opposed to games like Senet, Aseb, Mehen, and Hounds and Jackals, all of which were the games of royalty and the wealthy. The Felaheen and the Bedouin simply dug holes in the sand to make a temporary playing board or carved them into rocks, and used pebbles of two different colors to play. It has been my observation, that in Egypt, for whatever reason, the wealthy preferred games of chance, where as the poor preferred games of strategy without a chance component.

Seega Rules:

1. Seega is a 2 player game.
2. It consists of a board with a 5×5 grid and 24 playing pieces of two different colors, 12 pieces per player. The 5×5 version is called Khamsawee Seega, meaning Five by Five Seega. There are variations of Seega that are played on a 7×7 board with 48 pieces, 24 pieces per player, called Sebawee Seega, meaning Seven by Seven Seega, and a 9×9 board with 80 pieces, 40 pieces per player, called Tisawee Seega, meaning Nine by Nine Seega. The rules are exactly the same for all versions and the only difference is the length of the game due to a larger number of pieces.
   Seega Board
3. Each cell on the board is called Ein, meaning in Arabic “eye”. Each piece is called Kelb, meaning in Arabic “dog”.
4. All pieces begin off the board.
5. The players decide who starts first by agreement or a throwing a lot, such as a toss of a coin.
6. Each player takes a turn and places two pieces at a time into any empty cells they chose, except for the center cell.
7. Once all of the pieces have been placed the players take turns moving one piece at a time from an occupied cell into empty cells. Each player tried to sandwich an opponent’s piece between two of their pieces. If the opponent’s piece gets sandwiched between two of the players pieces then that piece gets knocked out and is removed from the board.
8. Pieces can only move horizontally or vertically, and not diagonally.
9. Pieces can only be sandwiched horizontally or vertically, and not diagonally.
10. The sandwiched piece gets only knocked out if the player made a move to sandwich it with one of their pieces. If a player’s piece enters a cell which positions it in between two of opponent’s pieces then it does not get knocked out.
11. If a player can knock off multiple pieces in subsequent moves then they can make as many moves in a row as will allow them to knock off the opponents pieces. Otherwise, additional moves cannot be made by the same player.
12. A player can knock off multiple pieces of the opponent in a single move if all of those pieces get sandwiched simultaneously.
13. The center cell is a safe cell. If a piece is sitting on it it cannot get knocked out even if it gets sandwiched by two of opponent’s pieces.
14. Pieces can only move one cell at a time and cannot skip cells or jump over other pieces, whether their own or opponent’s.
15. The same piece cannot move back and forth on the same cells more than twice.
16. If one player’s pieces get trapped so that they cannot make any moves then the opponents keeps taking turns until they either free up cells for the player to move or the opponent must remove one of their pieces off the board to allow the first player to move.
17. The goal of the game is to knock out all of the opponent’s pieces. The player all of whose pieces get knocked out looses the game and the opponent is the winner.
18. If a stalemate occurs where it becomes impossible to knock out all of the opponents pieces, then the game ends and the winner is the player who has more pieces on the board than the opponent. In a 5×5 Seega this may occur when the loser has only one piece left. In a 7×7 Seega this may occur when the loser has 7 pieces left. In 9×9 Seega this may occur when the loser has 11 pieces left. It is still possible to capture the opponents pieces at that stage of the game, but it may take a very long time. Therefore, if the players want to shorten the game they may agree for the player with less pieces to simply surrender.

On Strategy:

1. There is a variation in the game where the first two placements cannot be made on any cells of choice. The first player specifically places two of their pieces on cells A3 and E3, and the second player follows by placing two pieces specifically on cells C1 and C5. After that pieces can be placed into any cells the players chose, except for the center cell C3. This variation was recorded by Lane in Egypt proper, where as the primary rule not having this restriction was recorded by Bolton in St. Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai.
2. During initial placement, the player should always try to occupy at least one cell (preferably two) adjacent to the center cell, so that they can move into it once the movement of pieces begins and they do not get trapped and lose two of their pieces in the first moves of the game.
3. After occupying two cells adjacent to the center, each player should try to occupy as many cells on the outside rows as possible, because this will allow them to move towards the center and trap opponents pieces.
4. If both players have the same number of pieces it is advantageous to try to trap the opponent’s pieces so that they cannot move.

Ancient Games Of Chance

References:

Gambling was known to the ancient world. Games of chance were an appreciated pastime, often turning into addiction, among the Greeks – Herodotus relates that the Lydians supposedly invented some games (History 1:94); among the Romans, who are known to have bet heavily on chariot races; and among the Teutons, of whose gambling habits Tacitus states that in their less sober moments they even gambled themselves into slavery (Germany, 24). While the Hebrews were also acquainted with gambling (Judg. 14), it was only from mishnaic days onward that the rabbis took a definitive attitude toward gambling.

Professional and Compulsive Gambling

Professional gambling in any shape or form, whether among Jews or non-Jews, was severely frowned upon. The professional gambler was considered a parasite who was engaged in a useless endeavor and contributed nothing to better the world. Some rabbis went so far as to declare the professional gambler a robber whom the Mishnah (Sanh. 3:3) disqualified from giving testimony; he was looked upon as a spineless wastrel who, instead of engaging in the study of Torah or in the pursuit of an honest livelihood (Maim., Comm. to Mishnah, Sanh. 3:3), frittered his time and efforts away on a demeaning occupation and unseemly conduct (Rabban (ed. 1920), 224d; Mordekhai, Sanh. nos. 690, 695).

The rabbis recognized the inability of the compulsive gambler to control his passion for the game (Shiltei ha-Gibborim, Sheb. 756), considered him a moral weakling, and consequently dealt with him severely. One medieval rabbi advised: 'Do not show pity to the gambler who pleads 'pity me in order that I may not be shamed and disgraced by him who has won a gulden.' Better he be disgraced…' (Judah he-Ḥasid, Sefer Ḥasidim, ed. by R. Margaliot (1957), no. 1026; cf. no. 400). So vehement was his opposition to the gambler that if the latter were to lose his money and require assistance from charity, it was to be denied to him.

Ancient Games Of Chance

Public calamities that befell the Jewish community were often considered the consequence of, and the punishment for, excessive gambling. In 1576, in Cremona, three scholars proposed a ban on gambling after a pestilence had abated. They maintained that the popular passion to gamble was the main source of all calamities that had befallen the community. A similar view had been expressed earlier by Judah Katzenellenbogen (Isaac Lampronti, Paḥad Yiẓḥak, 3 (Venice, 1798), 54a).

Effects of Gambling

Community leaders, keenly aware of the painful and destructive effects of gambling upon an individual's character, meted out severe punishment. Gambling debts could not be collected through the Jewish courts (Resp. Rashba, vol. 7, no. 445). The gambler was often placed under ban, dismissed from the burial society (ibid., nos. 244, 270; Resp. Rosh 13:12), at times prohibited from holding his wedding in the synagogue courtyard (Loewenstein, in JJLG, 8 (1910), 184f.), not called to the Torah (Finkelstein, Middle Ages, 282–95), etc. Family life was also disrupted by gambling habits, and there is much evidence readily available to show how difficult relationships were between gamblers and their wives (Resp. Rashba, vol. 2, nos. 35, 286; vol. 7, no. 501; Rosh, resp. 82:2, inter alia). Women refused to live with such husbands; wife-beating and drinking were common (Zikhron Yehudah no. 71; responsa Maharyu no. 135) and the education of children was jeopardized (Rosh, resp. 82:2). Repelled by the conditions under which they were forced to live, gamblers' wives often sought divorce. The gambler's desertion of his family was not an uncommon occurrence. One moralist even suggested that women should join their husbands in their acts of gambling in order to save their marriages (Moses of Jerusalem (Moses Henochs), Brant-Shpigel, ch. 10).

Gambling was denounced not only by Jewish law and by Jewish moralists, but its evils and terrible consequences were warned against by popular folk singers, in colloquial expressions, and in proverbs. 'Gambling poems,' describing the sorrow of a home where the man gambles, speak pitifully of the mental anguish of the gambler's 'widow,' the hidden tears, and the neglect of the children.

Curbs on Gambling

Jewish writings mention many gamblers who made conscious efforts to curb their passion and activities. A common practice among them was to take an oath not to indulge in games of chance, although this usually resulted in a double violation: gambling and breaking a vow. The vows varied: some gamblers set a time limit to their vows; others excluded specific days or special occasions; while still others only refrained from placing monetary stakes, but played, for example, for stakes of fruit (Resp. Rashba, vol. 3, no. 305; Maharshal, resp. no. 185). Rabbis discouraged hasty vows, realizing that these did not lessen the lure of games of chance.

Exemptions

Communal restrictions to suppress gambling were often enacted; the frequency of these enactments, however, shows how futile the prohibitions were and how popular the games. Taking into consideration the attraction of games and gambling, the enactments were flexible: on many festive occasions (e.g., Ḥanukkah, Purim, the intermediary days of Passover and Sukkot, and the New Moon) the restrictions were lifted (Israel Bruna, resp. no. 136). Special family occasions also received communal dispensation for gambling (Finkelstein, Middle Ages, 228–42, 284–91). In general, however, the prohibitions were enforced and accompanied by severe penalties: excommunication and flagellation were commonly meted out to transgressors (Resp. Rashba, vol. 7, nos. 244, 270); fines were imposed and honorary functions within the synagogue withheld.