Medieval literary writers called the chess queen "queen", Latin regina. Authors of manuscripts on chess, so chess players, normally used a word with the literal sense of 'counsellor': Latin fersa. See the table, based on data borrowed from Murray [1913:423]. Click here for details.

In medieval chess the queen's move was identical with the king (doubleton)'s move in draughts in countries like Great Britain and the United States: a diagonal step into an adjacent square, whether occupied or empty, into a square beyond in the same diagonal [Murray 1913:325-6]. In the second half of the 15th c., the rules of chess were sweepingly changed. According to present-day chess historians this change was made in Spain. Bishop and queen received an extended freedom of move. The queen, in the medieval game rather weak, became the most powerful piece. In the new game the queen could go any number of squares in a straight or diagonal line; the bishop was allowed a limitless diagonal movement, like the doubleton in Polish draughts. The new queen received a new name, the bishop did not.

		The word dama has made many people reach for their pen: what was its origin? To establish the etymology of dama, it is of relevance to determine whether the word was invented by a man of literature or by a chess player. Were he a literary man, we may expect the word refers to the society; in this case dama must be an extension of meaning, a new sense, of dama = 'woman of rank'. Were he a chess player, it is incredible that dama refers to a social phenomenon. In that case the new chess queen was devised by a man (or a group of players) who was caught up in the movements of figures on a square board. We all know a computerfreak or a young man losing himself in chess or draughts, ignoring the world. It is psychologically very unlikely this kind of man occupied himself with social questions like the position of his queen or of the wife in general at the time he experimented with chess pieces. There are four reproductions of marvellous old paintings with people playing draughts on the walls of my living room, but draughts players visiting me seldom steal more than a glance at them. They are only interested in the game, hardly in the position of the game in the past, neither in its position in old civilisations, nor in paintings and drawings with draughts players, nor in beautiful boards and pieces. Therefore, if dama rose in the vocabulary of chess players, the word must be a new meaning of an existing word dama, and an example of unintentional word creation.
Modern queen	Modern bishop

Chess historians who looked for the etymology of dama, did not ask theirselves the question I mentioned, but chose for a "social" explanation, making no distinction between the game of chess and chess in the plastic arts and in literature. Click here for my objection. Anyway, the result was (and is) they are racking their brains for more than a century over dama, a name they cannot understand: the weak medieval medieval piece was literally called "queen", but the new strong piece only "woman of rank", how could it be possible? They solve(d) the contradiction by speculations on a strong medieval woman who could have served as a model for the new chess queen. Silbermann & Unzicker [1997 I:40-2], seeking the origin of the new queen in France, took their chance on Jeanne d'Arc. Petzold [1986:153; 1994:4-9] considered Mary, the Mother of God, as the paragon, in my eyes an almost blasphemous supposition, see Stoep 2005:40. A group of Spanish chess historians round the Spanish chess player and chess historian Ricardo Calvo [see for example Calvo 1990:82-89 or Westerveld 1997:217] put a more earthly claim: the new chess queen was modelled on a female historical figure, namely queen Isabella of Castile. Marilyn Yalom [2004:192] took their side: "It should not surprise us that the chess queen's official transformation into the strongest piece on the board coincided with the reign of Isabelle of Castile (1451-1504)".

(By the way, the etymological proposal made by Calvo & co seems impossible. Westerveld [1997] wrote a bulky book to make a reasonable case for the claim that dama was a homage to Isabella, but he was unable to quote even one source where the queen was mentioned dama. It means the word dama cannot refer to Isabella: little John cannot be named after a grandfather called Paul.)

Marilyn Yalom	Ricardo Calvo

Alas, these compelling, romantic etymologies seem unsubstantial (to me), for dama rose in the vocabulary of chess players. I admit that the name dama was first recorded in a Spanish literary source (a poem from the period 1470-1480), but the poet described a chess game where the players called the queen dama. For this reason, dama must be a new meaning of a word dama which was used by 15th c. Spanish chess players, as a matter of fact a homonym of dama = 'woman of rank'. Did such a word exist in the 15th c.? Certainly: it was used by Luis Ramirez de Lucena in the late 15th c., and meant 'row where the pawn is promoted'. Click here for evidence.

The original literal meaning of the word dama = 'chess queen' must have been “reward for the pawn which entered into the eight row” or something like that. Probably, this is an example of unconscious word creation; click here for my argumentation. For this reason, chess players must have associated dama = ‘promotion row’ with the concept ‘long move’ before they extended the word dama with the new sense ‘chess queen’.

A nice question is, how dama acquired the connotation ‘long move'. It cannot be a contribution of chess, for in the medieval game in Spain -also in the neighbouring countries France and Italy- the pawn could only be exchanged for a queen, and in the medieval game the queen had the short move [Murray 1913:226,461]. However, the chequered board served for another board game: draughts. Could it be possible that the promotion of  the draughts singleton to a long doubleton has incited Spanish chess players to the introduction of a long queen? There is reason for this question. The first Spanish draughts books -16th c. [Murray 1952:78; Stoep 1984:80]- described a game with a long doubleton (king), see the diagram, and there is no indication that in the 15th c., or in earlier ages, the game was ever played with a short doubleton. I have already called your attention to the situation in the 18th c., when chess players were strongly influenced by the promotion in draughts. In 16th c. France -the only country where we know the popularity of chess and draughts- draughts was a much more popular game than chess; in Spain between 1500 and 1900 more books on draughts than on chess were printed. What was the relation between draughts in chess in 15th c. Spain? I must admit I don't know anything about the situation in Spain. But in France, Spain's neighbour, draughts was an extremely popular game in this time -click here for my proofs-, and there are never borders for cultural phenomena. Therefore I see reason for the claim that draughts has been the source of inspiration for two main events in the evolution of chess: in the 18th c. the new strategy, in the 15th c. the extended move of the chess queen (and its name dama).

The diagram is a Spanish composition, included in Juan Timoneda's book (1635): 17-14 (32x5) 22-18 (5x32) 26-23 (32x29) 21-17 (13x22) 30-25 (22-26) 31x22 W+.

Picture of Jeanne d'Arc between 1450 and 1500 [Centre historique des Archives nationale, Paris]	Modern picture of Maria in a church in Warfhuizen (Holland)	Isabel of Castile [unknown source]

In the current climate my claim is inappropriate, if not improper, accustomed as we are to the excess of lofty words to chess, particularly the medieval game. In my view there is reason to put this into perspective; click here for my motivation. In this context, advocating a less one-sided approach of board games, I must say I don't fully understand Linde's and Murray's publications. Linde ascertained us that in the 18th c. chess was radically influenced by draughts, but at the same time he explains without any inquiry that draughts originated from chess. Was his discovery that draughts influenced upon chess not reason enough for an investigation into the relation between chess and draughts? Forty years later Murray tells us without any comparative historical inquiry and without referring to Linde, that draughts players have for centuries played their game under the influence of chess players. Incomprehensible.