Maelzel's Chess-Playerby Edgar Allan Poe
No
exhibition of the kind has ever elicited so general attention as the Chess-Player
of Maelzel. Wherever seen it has been an object of intense curiosity, to
all persons who think. Yet the question of its "modus operandi is "still
undetermined. Nothing has been written on this topic which can be considered
as decisive--and accordingly we find every where men of mechanical genius,
of great general acuteness, and discriminative understanding, who make
no scruple in pronouncing the Automaton a "pure machine, "unconnected
with human agency in its movements, and consequently, beyond all comparison,
the most astonishing of the inventions of mankind. And such it would undoubtedly
be, were they right in their supposition. Assuming this hypothesis, it
would be grossly absurd to compare with the Chess-Player, any similar thing
of either modern or ancient days. Yet there have been many and wonderful
automata. In Brewster's Letters on Natural Magic, we have an account of
the most remarkable. Among these may be mentioned, as having beyond doubt
existed, firstly, the coach invented by M. Camus for the amusement of Louis
XIV when a child. A table, about four feet square, was introduced, into
the room appropriated for the exhibition. Upon this table was placed a
carriage, six inches in length, made of wood, and drawn by two horses of
the same material. One window being down, a lady was seen on the back seat.
A coachman held the reins on the box, and a footman and page were in their
places behind. M. Camus now touched a spring; whereupon the coachman smacked
his whip, and the horses proceeded in a natural manner, along the edge
of the table, drawing after them the carriage. Having gone as far as possible
in this direction, a sudden turn was made to the left, and the vehicle
was driven at right angles to its former course, and still closely along
the edge of the table. In this way the coach proceeded until it arrived
opposite the chair of the young prince. It then stopped, the page descended
and opened the door, the lady alighted, and presented a petition to her
sovereign. She then re-entered. The page put up the steps, closed the door,
and resumed his station. The coachman whipped his horses, and the carriage
was driven back to its original position.
The magician of M. Maillardet is also worthy of notice. We copy the
following account of it from the "Letters "before mentioned of Dr.
B., who derived his information principal!
from the Edinburgh Encyclopaedia.
"One of the most popular pieces of mechanism which we have seen, Is
the Magician constructed by M. Maillardet, for the purpose of answering
certain given questions. A figure, dressed like a magician, appears seated
at the bottom of a wall, holding a wand in one hand, and a book in the
other A number of questions, ready prepared, are inscribed on oval medallions,
and the spectator takes any of these he chooses and to which he wishes
an answer, and having placed it in a drawer ready to receive it, the drawer
shuts with a spring till the answer is returned. The magician then arises
from his seat, bows his head, describes circles with his wand, and consulting
the book as If in deep thought, he lifts it towards his face. Having thus
appeared to ponder over the proposed question he raises his wand, and striking
with it the wall above his head, two folding doors fly open, and display
an appropriate answer to the question. The doors again close, the magician
resumes his original position, and the drawer opens to return the medallion.
There are twenty of these medallions, all containing different questions,
to which the magician returns the most suitable and striking answers. The
medallions are thin plates of brass, of an elliptical form, exactly resembling
each other. Some of the medallions have a question inscribed on each side,
both of which the magician answered in succession. If the drawer is shut
without a medallion being put into it, the magician rises, consults his
book, shakes his head, and resumes his seat. The folding doors remain shut,
and the drawer is returned empty. If two medallions are put into the drawer
together, an answer is returned only to the lower one. When the machinery
is wound up, the movements continue about an hour, during which time about
fifty questions may be answered. The inventor stated that the means by
which the different medallions acted upon the machinery, so as to produce
the proper answers to the questions which they contained, were extremely
simple."
The duck of Vaucanson was still more remarkable. It was "of "the
size of life, and so perfect an imitation of the living animal that all
the spectators were deceived. It executed, says Brewster, all the natural
movements and gestures, it ate and drank with avidity, performed all the
quick motions of the head and throat which are peculiar to the duck, and
like it muddled the water which it drank with its bill. It produced also
the sound of quacking in the most natural manner. In the anatomical structure
the artist exhibited the highest skill. Every bone in the real duck had
its representative In the automaton, and its wings were anatomically exact.
Every cavity, apophysis, and curvature was imitated, and each bone executed
its proper movements. When corn was thrown down before it, the duck stretched
out its neck to pick it up, swallowed, and digested it.*
*Under the head "Androides "in the Edinburgh Encyclopedia may be
found a full account of the principal automata of ancient and modern times.
But if these machines were ingenious, what shall we think of the calculating
machine of Mr. Babbage? What shall we think of an engine of wood and metal
which can not only compute astronomical and navigation tables to any given
extent, but render the exactitude of its operations mathematically certain
through its power of correcting its possible errors? What shall we think
of a machine which can not only accomplish all this, but actually print
off its elaborate results, when obtained, without the slightest intervention
of the intellect of man? It will, perhaps, be said, in reply, that a machine
such as we have described is altogether above comparison with the Chess-Player
of Maelzel. By no means--it is altogether beneath it--that is to say provided
we assume(what should never for a moment be assumed) that the Chess-Player
is a "pure machine, "and performs its operations without any immediate
human agency. Arithmetical or algebraical calculations are, from their
very nature, fixed and determinate. Certain "data "being given, certain
results necessarily and inevitably follow. These results have dependence
upon nothing, and are influenced by nothing but the "data "originally
given. And the question to be solved proceeds, or should proceed, to its
final determination, by a succession of unerring steps liable to no change,
and subject to no modification. This being the case, we can without difficulty
conceive the "possibility "of so arranging a piece of mechanism, that
upon starting In accordance with the "data "of the question to be
solved, it should continue its movements regularly, progressively, and
undeviatingly towards the required solution, since these movements, however
complex, are never imagined to be otherwise than finite and determinate.
But the case is widely different with the Chess-Player. With him there
is no determinate progression. No one move in chess necessarily follows
upon any one other. From no particular disposition of the men at one period
of a game can we predicate their disposition at a different period. Let
us place the "first move "in a game of chess, in juxta-position with
the "data "of an algebraical question, and their great difference
will be immediately perceived. From the latter--from the "data--"the
second step of the question, dependent thereupon, inevitably follows. It
is modelled by the "data. "It must be "thus "and not otherwise.
But from the first move in the game of chess no especial second move follows
of necessity. In the algebraical question, as it proceeds towards solution,
the "certainty "of its operations remains altogether unimpaired. The
second step having been a consequence of the "data, "the third step
is equally a consequence of the second, the fourth of the third, the fifth
of the fourth, and so on, "and not possibly otherwise, "to the end.
But in proportion to the progress made in a game of chess, is the "uncertainty
"of each ensuing move. A few moves having been made, "no "step
is certain. Different spectators of the game would advise different moves.
All is then dependent upon the variable judgment of the players. Now even
granting (what should not be granted) that the movements of the Automaton
Chess-Player were in themselves determinate, they would be necessarily
interrupted and disarranged by the indeterminate will of his antagonist.
There is then no analogy whatever between the operations of the Chess-Player,
and those of the calculating machine of Mr. Babbage, and if we choose to
call the former a "pure machine "we must be prepared to admit that
it is, beyond all comparison, the most wonderful of the inventions of mankind.
Its original projector, however, Baron Kempelen, had no scruple in declaring
it to be a "very ordinary piece of mechanism--a "bagatelle "whose
effects appeared so marvellous only from the boldness of the conception,
and the fortunate choice of the methods adopted for promoting the illusion."
But it is needless to dwell upon this point. It is quite certain that the
operations of the Automaton are regulated by "mind, "and by nothing
else. Indeed this matter is susceptible of a mathematical demonstration,
"a priori. "The only question then is of the "manner "in which
human agency is brought to bear. Before entering upon this subject it would
be as well to give a brief history and description of the Chess-Player
for the benefit of such of our readers as may never have had an opportunity
of witnessing Mr. Maelzel's exhibition.
The Automaton Chess-Player was invented in 1769, by Baron Kempelen,
a nobleman of Presburg, in Hungary, who afterwards disposed of it, together
with the secret of its operations, to its present possessor. Soon after
its completion it was exhibited in Presburg, Paris, Vienna, and other continental
cities. In 1783 and 1784, it was taken to London by Mr. Maelzel. Of late
years it has visited the principal towns in the United States. Wherever
seen, the most intense curiosity was excited by its appearance, and numerous
have been the attempts, by men of all classes, to fathom the mystery of
its evolutions. The cut above gives a tolerable representation of the figure
as seen by the citizens of Richmond a few weeks ago. The right arm, however,
should lie more at length upon the box, a chess-board should appear upon
it, and the cushion should not be seen while the pipe is held. Some immaterial
alterations have been made in the costume of the player since it came into
the possession of Maelzel--the plume, for example, was not originally worn.
At the hour appointed for exhibition, a curtain is withdrawn, or folding
doors are thrown open, and the machine rolled to within about twelve feet
of the nearest of the spectators, between whom and it (the machine) a rope
is stretched. A figure is seen habited as a Turk, and seated, with its
legs crossed, at a large box apparently of maple wood, which serves it
as a table. The exhibiter will, if requested, roll the machine to any portion
of the room, suffer it to remain altogether on any designated spot, or
even shift its location repeatedly during the progress of a game. The bottom
of the box is elevated considerably above the floor by means of the castors
or brazen rollers on which it moves, a clear view of the surface immediately
beneath the Automaton being thus afforded to the spectators. The chair
on which the figure sits is affixed permanently to the box. On the top
of this latter is a chess-board, also permanently affixed. The right arm
of the Chess-Player is extended at full length before him, at right angles
with his body, and lying, in an apparently careless position, by the side
of the board. The back of the hand is upwards. The board itself is eighteen
inches square. The left arm of the figure is bent at the elbow, and in
the left hand is a pipe. A green drapery conceals the back of the Turk,
and falls partially over the front of both shoulders. To judge from the
external appearance of the box, it is divided into five compartments--three
cupboards of equal dimensions, and two drawers occupying that portion of
the chest lying beneath the cupboards. The foregoing observations apply
to the appearance of the Automaton upon its first introduction into the
presence of the spectators.
Maelzel now informs the company that he will disclose to their view
the mechanism of the machine. Taking from his pocket a bunch of keys he
unlocks with one of them, door marked ~ in the cut above, and throws the
cupboard fully open to the inspection of all present. Its whole interior
is apparently filled with wheels, pinions, levers, and other machinery,
crowded very closely together, so that the eye can penetrate but a little
distance into the mass. Leaving this door open to its full extent, he goes
now round to the back of the box, and raising the drapery of the figure,
opens another door situated precisely in the rear of the one first opened.
Holding a lighted candle at this door, and shifting the position of the
whole machine repeatedly at the same time, a bright light is thrown entirely
through the cupboard, which is now clearly seen to be full, completely
full, of machinery. The spectators being satisfied of this fact, Maelzel
closes the back door, locks it, takes the key from the lock, lets fall
the drapery of the figure, and comes round to the front. The door marked
I, it will be remembered, is still open. The exhibiter now proceeds to
open the drawer which lies beneath the cupboards at the bottom of the box--for
although there are apparently two drawers, there is really only one--the
two handles and two key holes being intended merely for ornament. Having
opened this drawer to its full extent, a small cushion, and a set of chessmen,
fixed in a frame work made to support them perpendicularly, are discovered.
Leaving this drawer, as well as cupboard No. 1 open, Maelzel now unlocks
door No. 2, and door No. 3, which are discovered to be folding doors, opening
into one and the same compartment. To the right of this compartment, however,
(that is to say the spectators' right) a small division, six inches wide,
and filled with machinery, is partitioned off. The main compartment itself
(in speaking of that portion of the box visible upon opening doors 2 and
3, we shall always call it the main compartment) is lined with dark cloth
and contains no machinery whatever beyond two pieces of steel, quadrant-shaped,
and situated one in each of the rear top corners of the compartment. A
small protuberance about eight inches square, and also covered with dark
cloth, lies on the floor of the compartment near the rear corner on the
spectators' left hand. Leaving doors No. 2 and No. 3 open as well as the
drawer, and door No. I, the exhibiter now goes round to the back of the
main compartment, and, unlocking another door there, displays clearly all
the interior of the main compartment, by introducing a candle behind it
and within it. The whole box being thus apparently disclosed to the scrutiny
of the company, Maelzel, still leaving the doors and drawer open, rolls
the Automaton entirely round, and exposes the back of the Turk by lifting
up the drapery. A door about ten inches square is thrown open in the loins
of the figure, and a smaller one also in the left thigh. The interior of
the figure, as seen through these apertures, appears to be crowded with
machinery. In general, every spectator is now thoroughly satisfied of having
beheld and completely scrutinized, at one and the same time, every individual
portion of the Automaton, and the idea of any person being concealed in
the interior, during so complete an exhibition of that interior, if ever
entertained, is immediately dismissed as preposterous in the extreme.
M. Maelzel, having rolled the machine back into its original position,
now informs the company that the Automaton will play a game of chess with
any one disposed to encounter him. This challenge being accepted, a small
table is prepared for the antagonist, and placed close by the rope, but
on the spectators' side of it, and so situated as not to prevent the company
from obtaining a full view of the Automaton. From a drawer in this table
is taken a set of chess-men, and Maelzel arranges them generally, but not
always, with his own hands, on the chess board, which consists merely of
the usual number of squares painted upon the table. The antagonist having
taken his seat, the exhibiter approaches the drawer of the box, and takes
therefrom the cushion, which, after removing the pipe from the hand of
the Automaton, he places under its left arm as a support. Then taking also
from the drawer the Automaton's set of chess-men, he arranges them upon
the chessboard before the figure. He now proceeds to close the doors and
to lock them--leaving the bunch of keys in door No. 1. He also closes the
drawer, and, finally, winds up the machine, by applying a key to an aperture
in the left end (the spectators' left) of the box. The game now commences--the
Automaton taking the first move. The duration of the contest is usually
limited to half an hour, but if it be not finished at the expiration of
this period, and the antagonist still contend that he can beat the Automaton,
M. Maelzel has seldom any objection to continue it. Not to weary the company,
is the ostensible, and no doubt the real object of the limitation. It Wits
of course be understood that when a move is made at his own table, by the
antagonist, the corresponding move is made at the box of the Automaton,
by Maelzel himself, who then acts as the representative of the antagonist.
On the other hand, when the Turk moves, the corresponding move is made
at the table of the antagonist, also by M. Maelzel, who then acts as the
representative of the Automaton. In this manner it is necessary that the
exhibiter should often pass from one table to the other. He also frequently
goes in rear of the figure to remove the chess-men which it has taken,
and which it deposits, when taken, on the box to the left (to its own left)
of the board. When the Automaton hesitates in relation to its move, the
exhibiter is occasionally seen to place himself very near its right side,
and to lay his hand, now and then, in a careless manner upon the box. He
has also a peculiar shuffle with his feet, calculated to induce suspicion
of collusion with the machine in minds which are more cunning than sagacious.
These peculiarities are, no doubt, mere mannerisms of M. Maelzel, or, if
he is aware of them at all, he puts them in practice with a view of exciting
in the spectators a false idea of the pure mechanism in the Automaton.
The Turk plays with his left hand. All the movements of the arm are
at right angles. In this manner, the hand (which is gloved and bent in
a natural way,) being brought directly above the piece to be moved, descends
finally upon it, the fingers receiving it, in most cases, without difficulty.
Occasionally, however, when the piece is not precisely in its proper situation,
the Automaton fails in his attempt at seizing it. When this occurs, no
second effort is made, but the arm continues its movement in the direction
originally intended, precisely as if the piece were in the fingers. Having
thus designated the spot whither the move should have been made, the arm
returns to its cushion, and Maelzel performs the evolution which the Automaton
pointed out. At every movement of the figure machinery is heard in motion.
During the progress of the game, the figure now and then rolls its eyes,
as if surveying the board, moves its head, and pronounces the word "echec
"(check) when necessary.* If a false move be made by his antagonist,
he raps briskly on the box with the fingers of his right hand, shakes his
head roughly, and replacing the piece falsely moved, in its former situation,
assumes the next move himself. Upon beating the game, he waves his head
with an air of triumph, looks round complacently upon the spectators, and
drawing his left arm farther back than usual, suffers his fingers alone
to rest upon the cushion. In general, the Turk is victorious--once or twice
he has been beaten. The game being ended, Maelzel will again if desired,
exhibit the mechanism of the box, in the same manner as before. The machine
is then rolled back, and a curtain hides it from the view of the company.
*The making the Turk pronounce the word "echec, is "an improvement
by M. Maelzel. When in possession of Baron Kempelen, the figure indicated
a "check "by rapping on the box with his right hand.
There have been many attempts at solving the mystery of the Automaton.
The most general opinion in relation to it, an opinion too not unfrequently
adopted by men who should have known better, was, as we have before said,
that no immediate human agency was employed--in other words, that the machine
was purely a machine and nothing else. Many, however maintained that the
exhibiter himself regulated the movements of the figure by mechanical means
operating through the feet of the box. Others again, spoke confidently
of a magnet. Of the first of these opinions we shall say nothing at present
more than we have already said. In relation to the second it is only necessary
to repeat what we have before stated, that the machine is rolled about
on castors, and will, at the request of a spectator, be moved to and fro
to any portion of the room, even during the progress of a game. The supposition
of the magnet is also untenable--for if a magnet were the agent, any other
magnet in the pocket of a spectator would disarrange the entire mechanism.
The exhibiter, however, will suffer the most powerful loadstone to remain
even upon the box during the whole of the exhibition.
The first attempt at a written explanation of the secret, at least the
first attempt of which we ourselves have any knowledge, was made in a large
pamphlet printed at Paris in 1785. The author's hypothesis amounted to
this--that a dwarf actuated the machine. This dwarf he supposed to conceal
himself during the opening of the box by thrusting his legs into two hollow
cylinders, which were represented to be (but which are not) among the machinery
in the cupboard No. I, while his body was out of the box entirely, and
covered by the drapery of the Turk. When the doors were shut, the dwarf
was enabled to bring his body within the box--the noise produced by some
portion of the machinery allowing him to do so unheard, and also to close
the door by which he entered. The interior of the automaton being then
exhibited, and no person discovered, the spectators, says the author of
this pamphlet, are satisfied that no one is within any portion of the machine.
This whole hypothesis was too obviously absurd to require comment, or refutation,
and accordingly we find that it attracted very little attention.
In 1789 a book was published at Dresden by M. I. F. Freyhere in which
another endeavor was made to unravel the mystery. Mr. Freyhere's book was
a pretty large one, and copiously illustrated by colored engravings. His
supposition was that "a well-taught boy very thin and tall of his age (sufficiently
so that he could be concealed in a drawer almost immediately under the
chess-board") played the game of chess and effected all the evolutions
of the Automaton. This idea, although even more silly than that of the
Parisian author, met with a better reception, and was in some measure believed
to be the true solution of the wonder, until the inventor put an end to
the discussion by suffering a close examination of the top of the box.
These bizarre attempts at explanation were followed by others equally
bizarre. Of late years however, an anonymous writer, by a course of reasoning
exceedingly unphilosophical, has contrived to blunder upon a plausible
solution--although we cannot consider it altogether the true one. His Essay
was first published in a Baltimore weekly paper, was illustrated by cuts,
and was entitled "An attempt to analyze the Automaton Chess-Player of M.
Maelzel." This Essay we suppose to have been the original of the "pamphlet
to "which Sir David Brewster alludes in his letters on Natural Magic,
and which he has no hesitation in declaring a thorough and satisfactory
explanation. The "results "of the analysis are undoubtedly, in the
main, just; but we can only account for Brewster's pronouncing the Essay
a thorough and satisfactory explanation, by supposing him to have bestowed
upon it a very cursory and inattentive perusal. In the compendium of the
Essay, made use of in the Letters on Natural Magic, it is quite impossible
to arrive at any distinct conclusion in regard to the adequacy or inadequacy
of the analysis, on account of the gross misarrangement and deficiency
of the letters of reference employed. The same fault is to be found in
the '`Attempt &c.," as we originally saw it. The solution consists
in a series of minute explanations, (accompanied by wood-cuts, the whole
occupying many pages) in which the object is to show the "possibility
"of "so shifting the partitions "of the box, as to allow a human
being, concealed in the interior, to move portions of his body from one
part of the box to another, during the exhibition of the mechanism--thus
eluding the scrutiny of the spectators. There can be no doubt, as we have
before observed, and as we will presently endeavor to show, that the principle,
or rather the result, of this solution is the true one. Some person is
concealed in the box during the whole time of exhibiting the interior.
We object, however, to the whole verbose description of the "manner "in
which the partitions are shifted, to accommodate the movements of the person
concealed. We object to it as a mere theory assumed in the first place,
and to which circumstances are afterwards made to adapt themselves. It
was not, and could not have been, arrived at by any inductive reasoning.
In whatever way the shifting is managed, it is of course concealed at every
step from observation. To show that certain movements might possibly be
effected in a certain way, is very far from showing that they are actually
so effected. There may be an infinity of other methods by which the same
results may be obtained. The probability of the one assumed proving the
correct one is then as unity to infinity. But, in reality, this particular
point, the shifting of the partitions, is of no consequence whatever. It
was altogether unnecessary to devote seven or eight pages for the purpose
of proving what no one in his senses would deny--viz: that the wonderful
mechanical genius of Baron Kempelen could invent the necessary means for
shutting a door or slipping aside a pannel, with a human agent too at his
service in actual contact with the pannel or the door, and the whole operations
carried on, as the author of the Essay himself shows, and as we shall attempt
to show more fully hereafter, entirely out of reach of the observation
of the spectators.
In attempting ourselves an explanation of the Automaton, we will, in
the first place, endeavor to show how its operations are effected, and
afterwards describe, as briefly as possible, the nature of the "observations
"from which we have deduced our result.
It will be necessary for a proper understanding of the subject, that
we repeat here in a few words, the routine adopted by the exhibiter in
disclosing the interior of the box--a routine from which he "never "deviates
in any material particular. In the first place he opens the door No. I.
Leaving this open, he goes round to the rear of the box, and opens a door
precisely at the back of door No. I. To this back door he holds a lighted
candle. He then "closes the back door, "locks it, and, coming round
to the front, opens the drawer to its full extent. This done, he opens
the doors No. 2 and No. 3, (the folding doors) and displays the interior
of the main compartment. Leaving open the main compartment, the drawer,
and the front door of cupboard No. I, he now goes to the rear again, and
throws open the back door of the main compartment. In shutting up the box
no particular order is observed, except that the folding doors are always
closed before the drawer.
Now, let us suppose that when the machine is first rolled into the presence
of the spectators, a man is already within it. His body is situated behind
the dense machinery in cupboard No. T. (the rear portion of which machinery
is so contrived as to slip "en masse, "from the main compartment to
the cupboard No. I, as occasion may require,) and his legs lie at full
length in the main compartment. When Maelzel opens the door No. I, the
man within is not in any danger of discovery, for the keenest eve cannot
penetrate more than about two inches into the darkness within. But the
case is otherwise when the back door of the cupboard No. I, is opened.
A bright light then pervades the cupboard, and the body of the man would
be discovered if it were there. But it is not. The putting the key in the
lock of the back door was a signal on hearing which the person concealed
brought his body forward to an angle as acute as possible--throwing it
altogether, or nearly so, into the main compartment. This, however, is
a painful position, and cannot be long maintained. Accordingly we find
that Maelzel "closes the back door. "This being done, there is no
reason why the body of the man may not resume its former situation--for
the cupboard is again so dark as to defy scrutiny. The drawer is now opened,
and the legs of the person within drop down behind it in the space it formerly
occupied.* There is, consequently, now no longer any part of the man in
the main compartment--his body being behind the machinery in cupboard No.
1, and his legs in the space occupied by the drawer. The exhibiter, therefore,
finds himself at liberty to display the main compartment. This he does--opening
both its back and front doors--and no person Is discovered. The spectators
are now satisfied that the whole of the box is exposed to view--and exposed
too, all portions of it at one and the same time. But of course this is
not the case. They neither see the space behind the drawer, nor the interior
of cupboard No. 1 --the front door of which latter the exhibiter virtually
shuts in shutting its back door. Maelzel, having now rolled the machine
around, lifted up the drapery of the Turk, opened the doors in his back
and thigh, and shown his trunk to be full of machinery, brings the whole
back into its original position, and closes the doors. The man within is
now at liberty to move about. He gets up into the body of the Turk just
so high as to bring his eyes above the level of the chess-board. It is
very probable that he seats himself upon the little square block or protuberance
which is seen in a corner of the main compartment when the doors are open.
In this position he sees the chess-board through the bosom of the Turk
which is of gauze. Bringing his right arm across his breast he actuates
the little machinery necessary to guide the left arm and the fingers of
the figure. This machinery is situated just beneath the left shoulder of
the Turk, and is consequently easily reached by the right hand of the man
concealed, if we suppose his right arm brought across the breast. The motions
of the head and eyes, and of the right arm of the figure, as well as the
sound "echec "are produced by other mechanism in the interior, and
actuated at will by the man within. The whole of this mechanism--that is
to say all the mechanism essential to the machine--is most probably contained
within the little cupboard (of about six inches in breadth) partitioned
off at the right (the spectators' right) of the main compartment.
*Sir David Brewster supposes that there is always a large space behind
this drawer even when shut--in other words that the drawer is a "false
drawer," and does not extend to the back of the box. But the idea is altogether
untenable. So common-place a trick would be immediately discovered--especially
as the drawer is always opened to its fun extent, and an opportunity thus
afforded of comparing its depth with that of the box.
In this analysis of the operations of the Automaton, we have purposely
avoided any allusion to the manner in which the partitions are shifted,
and it will now be readily comprehended that this point is a matter of
no importance, since, by mechanism within the ability of any common carpenter,
it might be effected in an infinity of different ways, and since we have
shown that, however performed, it is performed out of the view of the spectators.
Our result is founded upon the following "observations "taken during
frequent visits to the exhibition of Maelzel.*
*Some of these "observations "are intended merely to prove that
the machine must be regulated ~ "mind, "and it may be thought a work
of supererogation to advance farther arguments in support of what has been
already fully decided. But our object is to convince, in especial, certain
of our friends upon whom a train of suggestive reasoning will have more
influence than the most positive a prim demonstration.
I. The moves of the Turk are not made at regular intervals of time,
but accommodate themselves to the moves of the antagonist--although this
point (of regularity) so important in all kinds of mechanical contrivance,
might have been readily brought about by limiting the time allowed for
the moves of the antagonist. For example, if this limit were three minutes,
the moves of the Automaton might be made at any given intervals longer
than three minutes. The fact then of irregularity, when regularity might
have been so easily attained, goes to prove that regularity is unimportant
to the action of the Automaton--in other words, that the Automaton is not
a "pure machine."
2. When the Automaton is about to move a piece, a distinct motion is
observable just beneath the left shoulder, and which motion agitates in
a slight degree, the drapery covering the front of the left shoulder. This
motion invariably precedes, by about two seconds, the movement of the arm
itself--and the arm never, in any instance, moves without this preparatory
motion in the shoulder. Now let the antagonist move a piece, and let the
corresponding move be made by Maelzel, as usual, upon the board of the
Automaton. Then let the antagonist narrowly watch the Automaton, until
he detect the preparatory motion in the shoulder. Immediately upon detecting
this motion, and before the arm itself begins to move, let him withdraw
his piece, as if perceiving an error in his manoeuvre. It will then be
seen that the movement of the arm, which, in all other cases, immediately
succeeds the motion in the shoulder, is withheld--is not made--although
Maelzel has not yet performed, on the board of the Automaton, any move
corresponding to the withdrawal of the antagonist. In this case, that the
Automaton was about to move is evident--and that he did not move, was an
effect plainly produced by the withdrawal of the antagonist, and without
any intervention of Maelzel.
This fact fully proves, ~--that the intervention of Maelzel, in performing
the moves of the antagonist on the board of the Automaton, is not essential
to the movements of the Automaton, 2--that its movements are regulated
by "mind--"by some person who sees the board of the antagonist, 3--that
its movements are not regulated by the mind of Maelzel, whose back was
turned towards the antagonist at the withdrawal of his move.
3. The Automaton does not invariably win the game. Were the machine
a pure machine this would not be the case--it would always win. The "principle
"being discovered by which a machine can be made to "play "a game
of chess, an extension of the same principle would enable it to win a game--a
farther extension would enable it to win "all "games--that is, to
beat any possible game of an antagonist. A little consideration will convince
any one that the difficulty of making a machine beat all games, Is not
in the least degree greater, as regards the principle of the operations
necessary, than that of making it beat a single game. If then we regard
the Chess-Player as a machine, we must suppose, (what is highly improbable,)
that its inventor preferred leaving it incomplete to perfecting it-- a
supposition rendered still more absurd, when we reflect that the leaving
it incomplete would afford an argument against the possibility of its being
a pure machine--the very argument we now adduce.
4. When the situation of the game is difficult or complex, we never
perceive the Turk either shake his head or roll his eyes. It is only when
his next move is obvious, or when the game is so circumstanced that to
a man in the Automaton's place there would be no necessity for reflection.
Now these peculiar movements of the head and eves are movements customary
with persons engaged in meditation, and the ingenious Baron Kempelen would
have adapted these movements (were the machine a pure machine) to occasions
proper for their display--that is, to occasions of complexity. But the
reverse is seen to be the case, and this reverse applies precisely to our
supposition of a man in the interior. When engaged in meditation about
the game he has no time to think of setting in motion the mechanism of
the Automaton by which are moved the head and the eyes. When the game,
however, is obvious, he has time to look about hirn, and, accordingly,
we see the head shake and the eyes roll.
5. When the machine is rolled round to allow the spectators an examination
of the back of the Turk, and when his drapery is lifted up and the doors
in the trunk and thigh thrown open, the interior of the trunk is seen to
be crowded with machinery. In scrutinizing this machinery while the Automaton
was in motion, that is to say while the whole machine was moving on the
castors, it appeared to us that certain portions of the mechanism changed
their shape and position in a degree too great to be accounted for by the
simple laws of perspective; and subsequent examinations convinced us that
these undue alterations were attributable to mirrors in the interior of
the trunk. The introduction of mirrors among the machinery could not have
been intended to influence, in any degree, the machinery itself. Their
operation, whatever that operation should prove to be, must necessarily
have reference to the eve of the spectator. We at once concluded that these
mirrors were so placed to multiply to the vision some few pieces of machinery
within the trunk so as to give it the appearance of being crowded with
mechanism. Now the direct inference from this is that the machine is not
a pure machine. For if it were, the inventor, so far from wishing its mechanism
to appear complex, and using deception for the purpose of giving it this
appearance, would have been especially desirous of convincing those who
witnessed his exhibition, of the "simplicity "of the means by which
results so wonderful were brought about.
6. The external appearance, and, especially, the deportment of the Turk,
are, when we consider them as imitations of "life, "but very indifferent
imitations. The countenance evinces no ingenuity, and is surpassed, in
its resemblance to the human face, by the very commonest of wax-works.
The eyes roll unnaturally in the head, without any corresponding motions
of the lids or brows. The arm, particularly, performs its operations in
an exceedingly stiff, awkward, jerking, and rectangular manner. Now, all
this is the result either of inability in Maelzel to do better, or of intentional
neglect--accidental neglect being out of the question, when we consider
that the whole time of the ingenious proprietor is occupied in the improvement
of his machines. Most assuredly we must not refer the unlife-like appearances
to inability--for all the rest of Maelzel's automata are evidence of his
full ability to copy the motions and peculiarities of life with the most
wonderful exactitude. The rope-dancers, for example, are inimitable. When
the clown laughs, his lips, his eyes, his eye-brows, and eyelids--indeed,
all the features of his countenance--are imbued with their appropriate
expressions. In both him and his companion, every gesture is so entirely
easy, and free from the semblance of artificiality, that, were it not for
the diminutiveness of their size, and the fact of their being passed from
one spectator to another previous to their exhibition on the rope, it would
be difficult to convince any assemblage of persons that these wooden automata
were not living creatures. We cannot, therefore, doubt Mr. Maelzel's ability,
and we must necessarily suppose that he intentionally suffered his Chess
Player to remain the same artificial and unnatural figure which Baron Kempelen
(no doubt also through design) originally made it. What this design was
it is not difficult to conceive. Were the Automaton life-like in its motions,
the spectator would be more apt to attribute its operations to their true
cause, (that is, to human agency within) than he is now, when the awkward
and rectangular manoeuvres convey the idea of pure and unaided mechanism.
7. When, a short time previous to the commencement of the game, the
Automaton is wound up by the exhibiter as usual, an ear in any degree accustomed
to the sounds produced in winding up a system of machinery, will not fail
to discover, instantaneously, that the axis turned by the key in the box
of the Chess-Player, cannot possibly be connected with either a weight,
a spring, or any system of machinery whatever. The inference here is the
same as in our last observation. The winding up is inessential to the operations
of the Automaton, and is performed with the design of exciting in the spectators
the false idea of mechanism.
8. When the question is demanded explicitly of Maelzel-- "Is the Automaton
a pure machine or not?" his reply is invariably the same--"I will say nothing
about it." Now the notoriety of the Automaton, and the great curiosity
it has every where excited, are owing more especially to the prevalent
opinion that it is a pure machine, than to any other circumstance. Of course,
then, it is the interest of the proprietor to represent it as a pure machine.
And what more obvious, and more effectual method could there be of impressing
the spectators with this desired idea, than a positive and explicit declaration
to that effect? On the other hand, what more obvious and effectual method
could there be of exciting a disbelief in the Automaton's being a pure
machine, than by withholding such explicit declaration? For, people will
naturally reason thus,--It is Maelzel's interest to represent this thing
a pure machine--he refuses to do so, directly, in words, although he does
not scruple, and is evidently anxious to do so, indirectly by actions--were
it actually what he wishes to represent it by actions, he would gladly
avail himself of the more direct testimony of words--the inference is,
that a consciousness of its not being a pure machine, is the reason of
his silence--his actions cannot implicate him in a falsehood--his words
may.
9. When, in exhibiting the interior of the box, Maelzel has thrown open
the door No. I, and also the door immediately behind it, he holds a lighted
candle at the back door (as mentioned above) and moves the entire machine
to and fro with a view of convincing the company that the cupboard No.
1 is entirely filled with machinery. When the machine is thus moved about,
it will be apparent to any careful observer, that whereas that portion
of the machinery near the front door No. 1, is perfectly steady and unwavering,
the portion farther within fluctuates, in a very slight degree, with the
movements of the machine. This circumstance first aroused in us the suspicion
that the more remote portion of the machinery was so arranged as to be
easily slipped, "en masse, "from its position when occasion should
require it. This occasion we have already stated to occur when the man
concealed within brings his body into an erect position upon the closing
of the back door.
10. Sir David Brewster states the figure of the Turk to be of the size
of life--but in fact it is far above the ordinary size. Nothing is more
easy than to err in our notions of magnitude. The body of the Automaton
is generally insulated, and, having no means of immediately comparing it
with any human form, we suffer ourselves to consider it as of ordinary
dimensions. This mistake may, however, be corrected by observing the Chess-Player
when, as is sometimes the case, the exhibiter approaches it. Mr. Maelzel,
to be sure, is not very tall, but upon drawing near the machine, his head
will be found at least eighteen inches below the head of the Turk, although
the latter, it will be remembered, is in a sitting position.
11. The box behind which the Automaton is placed, is precisely three
feet six inches long, two feet four inches deep, and two feet six inches
high. These dimensions are fully sufficient for the accommodation of a
man very much above the common size--and the main compartment alone is
capable of holding any ordinary man in the position we have mentioned as
assumed by the person concealed. As these are facts, which any one who
doubts them may prove by actual calculation, we deem it unnecessary to
dwell upon them. We will only suggest that, although the top of the box
is apparently a board of about three inches in thickness, the spectator
may satisfy himself by stooping and looking up at it when the main compartment
is open, that it is in reality very thin. The height of the drawer also
will be misconceived by those who examine it in a cursory manner. There
is a space of about three inches between the top of the drawer as seen
from the exterior, and the bottom of the cupboard--a space which must be
included in the height of the drawer. These contrivances to make the room
within the box appear less than it actually is, are referrible to a design
on the part of the inventor, to impress the company again with a false
idea, viz. that no human being can be accommodated within the box.
12. The interior of the main compartment is lined throughout with "cloth.
"This cloth we suppose to have a twofold object. A portion of "it
"may form, when tightly stretched, the only partitions which there is
anv necessity for removing during the changes of the man's position, viz:
the partition between the rear of the main compartment and the rear of
the cupboard No. 1, and the partition between the main compartment, and
the space behind the drawer when open. If we imagine this to be the case,
the difficulty of shifting the partitions vanishes at once, if indeed any
such difficulty could be supposed under any circumstances to exist. The
second object of the cloth is to deaden and render indistinct all sounds
occasioned by the movements of the person within.
13. The antagonist (as we have before observed) is not suffered to play
at the board of the Automaton, but is seated at some distance from the
machine. The reason which, most probably, would be assigned for this circumstance,
if the question were demanded, is, that were the antagonist otherwise situated,
his person would intervene between the machine and the spectators, and
preclude the latter from a distinct view. But this difficulty might be
easily obviated, either by elevating the seats of the company, or by turning
the end of the box towards them during the game. The true cause of the
restriction is, perhaps, very different. Were the antagonist seated in
contact with the box, the secret would be liable to discovery, by his detecting,
with the aid of a quick car, the breathings of the man concealed.
14. Although M. Maelzel, in disclosing the interior of the machine,
sometimes slightly deviates from the "routine "which we have pointed
out, yet "reeler in "any instance does he "so "deviate from it
as to interfere with our solution. For example, he has been known to open,
first of all, the drawer--but he never opens the main compartment
without first closing the back door of cupboard No. 1--he never opens the
main compartment without first pulling out the drawer--he never shuts the
drawer without first shutting the main compartment--he never opens the
back door of cupboard No. 1 while the main compartment is open--and the
game of chess is never commenced until the whole machine is closed. Now
if it were observed that "never, in any single instance, "did M. Maelzel
differ from the routine we have pointed out as necessary to our solution,
it would be one of the strongest possible arguments in corroboration of
it--but the argument becomes infinitely strengthened if we duly consider
the circumstance that he "does occasionally "deviate from the routine
but never does "so "deviate as to falsify the solution.
15. There are six candles on the board of the Automaton during exhibition.
The question naturally arises--"Why are so many employed, when a single
candle, or, at farthest, two, would have been amply sufficient to afford
the spectators a clear view of the board, in a room otherwise so well lit
up as the exhibition room always is--when, moreover, if we suppose the
machine a "pure machine, "there can be no necessity for so much light,
or indeed any light at all, to enable "it "to perform its operations--and
when, especially, only a single candle is placed upon the table of the
antagonist?" The first and most obvious inference is, that so strong a
light is requisite to enable the man within to see through the transparent
material (probably fine gauze) of which the breast of the Turk is composed.
But when we consider the arrangement of the candles, another reason immediately
presents itself. There are six lights (as we have said before) in all.
Three of these are on each side of the figure. Those most remote from the
spectators are the longest--those in the middle are about two inches shorter--and
those nearest the company about two inches shorter still--and the candles
on one side differ in height from the candles respectively opposite on
the other, by a ratio different from two inches--that is to say, the longest
candle on one side is about three inches shorter than the longest candle
on the other, and so on. Thus it will be seen that no two of the candles
are of the same height, and thus also the difficulty of ascertaining the
"material "of the breast of the figure (against which the light is
especially directed) is greatly augmented by the dazzling effect of the
complicated crossings of the rays--crossings which are brought about by
placing the centres of radiation all upon different levels.
16. While the Chess-Player was in possession of Baron Kempelen, it was
more than once observed, first, that an Italian in the suite of the Baron
was never visible during the playing of a game at chess by the Turk, and,
secondly, that the Italian being taken seriously ill, the exhibition was
suspended until his recovery. This Italian professed a "total "ignorance
of the game of chess, although all others of the suite played well. Similar
observations have been made since the Automaton has been purchased by Maelzel.
There is a man, "Schlumber0er, "who attends him wherever he goes,
but who has no ostensible occupation other than that of assisting in the
packing and unpacking of the automata. This man is about the medium size,
and has a remarkable stoop in the shoulders. Whether he professes to play
chess or not, we are not informed. It is quite certain, however, that he
is never to be seen during the exhibition of the Chess-Player, although
frequently visible just before and just after the exhibition. Moreover,
some years ago Maelzel visited Richmond with his automata, and exhibited
them, we believe, in the house now occupied by M. Bossieux as a Dancing
Academy. "Schlumberg"er was suddenly taken ill, and during his illness
there was no exhibition of the Chess-Player. These facts are well known
to many of our citizens. The reason assigned for the suspension of the
Chess-Player's performances, was "not "the illness of "Schlumberger.
"The inferences from all this we leave, without farther comment, to
the reader.
17. The Turk plays with his "left "arm. A circumstance so remarkable
cannot be whatever. beyond a accidental. Brewster takes no notice of it
whatever beyond a mere statement, we believe, that such is the fact. The
early writers of treatises on the Automaton, seem not to have observed
the matter at all, and have no reference to it. The author of the pamphlet
alluded to by Brewster, mentions it, but acknowledges his inability to
account for it. Yet it is obviously from such prominent discrepancies or
incongruities as this that deductions are to be made (if made at all) which
shall lead us to the truth.
The circumstance of the Automaton's playing with his left hand cannot
have connexion with the operations of the machine, considered merely as
such. Any mechanical arrangement which would cause the figure to move,
in any given manner, the left arm--could, if reversed, cause it to move,
in the same manner, the right. But these principles cannot be extended
to the human organization, wherein there is a marked and radical difference
in the construction, and, at all events, in the powers, of the right and
left arms. Reflecting upon this latter fact, we naturally refer the incongruity
noticeable in the Chess-Player to this peculiarity in the human organization.
If so, we must imagine some "reversion--"for the Chess-Player plays
precisely as a man "would not. "These ideas, once entertained, are
sufficient of themselves, to suggest the notion of a man in the interior.
A few more imperceptible steps lead us, finally, to the result. The Automaton
plays with his left arm, because under no other circumstances could the
man within play with his right--a "desideratum "of course. Let us,
for example, imagine the Automaton to play with his right arm. To reach
the machinery which moves the arm, and which we have before explained to
lie just beneath the shoulder, it would be necessary for the man within
either to use his right arm in an exceedingly painful and awkward position,
(viz. brought up close to his body and tightly compressed between his body
and the side of the Automaton,) or else to use his left arm brought across
his breast. In neither case could he act with the requisite ease or precision.
On the contrary, the Automaton playing, as it actually does, with the left
arm, all difficulties vanish. The right arm of the man within is brought
across his breast, and his right fingers act, without any constraint, upon
tile machinery in the shoulder of the figure.
We do not believe that any reasonable objections can be urged against
this solution of the Automaton Chess-Player.
|