A Game at Chess

A Game at Chess Controversy Surrounding the Play

A Game at Chess debuted on the early modern English stage in 1624, just one year before Prince Charles would become King Charles I and replace his father, James I, as the king of England. The play remains a unique study in allegory, as its characters are likened to chess pieces on a board who must vie for a victory, sending the opposing chess pieces to the "bag." The play was not subtle about announcing itself as a largely symbolic performance: in the cast of characters, certain chess pieces are said to represent particular historical figures such as King James I (the White King), his son Prince Charles (the White Knight), and his daughter Elizabeth of Bohemia (the White Queen).

With the allegorical significance of the play in mind, one can easily see how the performance portrayed current events under the (thin) guise of a chess match. The play dramatizes conflict between the White House and Black House, recognizable to most as representation of the ongoing conflict between Protestant England and Catholic Spain. At the time the play was performed, there had been attempts at negotiating a peace between the two countries through the marriage of Prince Charles to the Spanish Infanta Maria Anna. These efforts, however, were ultimately unsuccessful.

Nonetheless, the play portrays the important political machinations of James I's court as a game of chess in which one must be cunning, strategic, and at times deceptive. The problem with this kind of performance in early modern England, however, is that it was illegal to portray a living monarch on the stage. Moreover, one could argue that the play does not necessarily portray James I's court in an altogether favorable light, suggesting often that the court is weak and ignorant of the strength of its enemies. As such, the play was shut down after only nine days, despite being a widely popular performance. Everyone involved in the production of the play – including Middleton – was prosecuted by the court, but Middleton was eventually acquitted on the grounds that the Master of the Revels had approved the play for performance.