Though the rules of the games played were the same between Christians and Muslims, the interpretation of the value of games were very different. Muslims seemed to take Chess and luck based games far more seriously than the Christian inheritors. The fact that Christians accept the Eastern origins of the game is important. It shows that there were established relationships between the Eastern and Western worlds, which once again disproves the Pirenne Thesis. When we think of trade between the two worlds we generally think of silks and spices, luxury goods that were previously unattainable in the western regions. However, there was far more cultural crossover than is generally recognized. Christian rulers around this time began wearing Arab garb and adapting to certain aspects of Arab culture without denouncing Christianity. In the same way, they gathered the cultural games of the Arab world and adapted to the military strategy linked to them. Later when Christians, Muslims, and Jews were able to play chess together, the classist aspect of games somewhat dissipated. Still, remnants of the rationale described in these articles stood for a long time.

The interference that dice seems to have with Christianity justifies the Muslim precedent that playing games must not interfere with prayer. When games were played for stakes, it led to unhealthy reactions. By distancing the games from their origins, Christians lost the necessary elements of regulation that surrounded them.

In chess's initial form, the miniatures were not necessarily considered to be noble figures. Elephants and knights were obviously powerful figures, but they did not have the religious elements that European chess adapted to: King, Queen, bishop, etc. It is rational to believe that the game's creation was unrelated to nobility.

This opinion was not common in this time period. Dice was seen as a peasant's game, played outside by less sophisticated people. The value of luck was not as respected as the value of skill. Still, gambling was allowed in dice while it was not allowed for chess.

This draws on the comparison between chess and war strategy recognized by multiple cultures. The risk of being seen as an intellectual threat was real, because it would encourage competition against them. During this time period, brothers killed one another for a chance to reach rulership. The concept of luck was not just useful in games, but also in life.

Orientalist ideology produced mystical images of the Eastern world. The language of this excerpt suggests that European appreciators of chess did acknowledge the Indian origin of the game, contradictory to my previous remark, but their perspective on the matter was skewed. Rather than appreciate the invention of the game as an innovation, they created a fable to explain the creation of the story.

Many of the restrictions placed on Muslim chess players are congruent with those that Europeans followed as customary. The rationale of the restriction on playing indoors is different in the Muslim account. In medieval Castile, playing outdoors was seen as a disgraceful act that only the poor would participate in. The Muslim rationale appears to be more religiously based.

In medieval Castile, it was understood that chess was a primarily European game. Though Muslims were understood as worthy opponents in the game, being able to play was viewed as a nobleman's skill. Though the origins of the game were Indian, the medieval Castilian accounts of the game leave out any discussion of the game's origin.

The westernization of Arabic vocabulary was very common in the ninth and tenth century. Many European traders would adapt to phrases they heard while interacting with Arab traders. For example, Sicilian cuisine has very close ties to Arabic. Sesame almond honey confectionaries are called cubbaita and qubbayāt respectively. Much of the trader's vocabulary came from misinterpretations of arabic phrases.