I urge you to read the sets of rules invented by the senet historians referenced in the wikipedia article. I think you are overstating their knowledge of the ga

I urge you to read the sets of rules invented by the senet historians referenced in the wikipedia article. I think you are overstating their knowledge of the game. From wikipedia: "Although details of the original game rules are a subject of some conjecture, senet historians Timothy Kendall and R. C. Bell have made their own reconstructions of the game." Here is the citation[0]. My belief is that these are two completely different games, and therefor probably completely different from any ancient iteration of senet. Using the same game board and (some of) the same pieces is totally insufficient to call a game a "variation". Is old Japanese text, which adopted the Chinese writing system, a variant of the Chinese language? 0. http://www.gamecabinet.com/history/Senet.html http://www.gamecabinet.com/history/Senet.html