A milestone on the way

foot of page William Clarke In at the deep end | A new Nyren | Old Clarke and the MCC | Old Clarke and the Players | Old Clarke and the AEE

---

William Clarke

William Clarke

Harry Altham's History of Cricket is highly readable. Chapter 9 is entitled William Clarke and the First All-England Eleven, and Altham begins it by saying:

In the history of cricket, certain figures stand like milestones on the way.

He names a few, including WG, and then places William Clarke of Nottingham among them. I'd call Clarke a landmark on the way, and WG a monument. "Old Clarke", as he came to be known, was one of the most influential players ever, and he left an incalculable legacy. Clarke recognised the potential of the new railway network, and founded an entity called the All-England Eleven (the AEE), which travelled by rail to far-flung destinations where top-class cricket was hitherto unknown. In doing so, Clarke revolutionised cricket, and made himself a fortune.

C. L. R. James mentions Clarke only once. He is telling us that the Victorians recreated cricket in their own image, or in Thomas Arnold's image, and that they purged the game of bookies, and of those like Beauclerk who sold matches for money. James asserts that cricket in 1837, when Victoria succeeded William IV, was "still no more than a camp-follower in the life of the nation". During her reign, it became "a national institution". To get there, says James, cricket needed morals, manners, and virtue. He is not against money, as long as it's honest money. After all, the professionals and the ground staffs had to be paid, and MCC and the new county clubs needed profit. He then says:

...and in 1846 William Clarke organised the first itinerant All England XI to make money—he said so plainly.

And that was it in a nutshell. Clarke offered his players more than MCC would pay them, and took them by rail to showcase their skills before local spectators who could barely dream of going to Lord's. He was able to arrange lucrative matches, especially in the North, where the Lancashire and Yorkshire county clubs were founded in the early 1860s. While Clarke paid his players well, the match contracts were always enough to ensure a surplus, which Clarke kept for himself. Hence, as James says, Clarke made money, and said so plainly.

Clarke was born in Nottingham on Christmas Eve in 1798. He died in Wandsworth on 25 August 1856, aged 57. Like his contemporary William Lillywhite (1792–1854), he became both a bricklayer and an outstanding bowler. In 1819, aged twenty, he married Jane Wigley, landlady of the Bell Inn, and they had six children, including Alfred Clarke who became a noted player in his own right. Sometime in the 1820s, Clarke lost his right eye when he was struck by the ball during a game of fives.

Remembering the Ball of the Century.

Clarke's bowling style, learned from William Lambert, was right arm slow with an underarm action. Even after the roundarm revolution, he never changed his action. According to William Caffyn, who is quoted by Altham, Clarke took a very short run-up, and delivered the ball from about hip level. The ball was consistently spun from leg to off, following a "curved flight", achieving an "abrupt rise" from the pitch. Even the top batters like Nicholas Felix and Fuller Pilch would struggle against Clarke's deliveries, and he was sometimes unplayable. Puts me in mind of Shane Warne. Did Felix or Pilch ever look as if someone had nicked their lunch?

As a right-handed batter, Clarke was sometimes very useful, and he scored eight half-centuries. His highest score was 75, a big innings in those days of rough-track pitches, for the Players of Nottinghamshire against the Gentlemen of Nottinghamshire in July 1842. He seems to have been a competent fielder, and held 55 catches in his 143 appearances that CricketArchive recognise as first-class.

Clarke was a shrewd team captain, with great tactical expertise. He was also, as John Major put it, "short-tempered, and not above sharp practice".

Above all, although he was a great player, Clarke's lasting fame is due to his foundings of Trent Bridge Cricket Ground in 1838, and of the All England Eleven (the AEE) in August 1846. The AEE took to the railway, and played their first match in Sheffield, at the Hyde Park Ground, commencing 31 August. A revolution had begun.

In at the deep end

While he is remembered as Old Clarke, he began as young Clarke, and is known to have played for Nottingham in 1816, when he was seventeen, in a match against Ripon. The earliest scorecard on which he is named is from the notorious "odds" match between the Nottingham XXII and an England XI, played at the Forest New Ground in Nottingham on 23–25 June 1817. Clarke was then eighteen. While it is fitting that his first recorded opponents should be an England Eleven, he could never have expected to be involved in one of the most controversial matches in the game's history, and we may safely assert that he had nothing at all to do with Beauclerk's shenanigans.

The match scorecard shows that Clarke was #5 in the Nottingham batting order, and he scored 1 and 0. Lambert bowled him out in the first innings. In the second, Clarke was caught by Charles Holloway of Hampshire, who probably shared wicket-keeping duties with Tom Howard. We don't know if Clarke bowled against England, only that he didn't bowl anyone out.

A new Nyren

Clarke continued to play regularly for Nottingham, and became team captain in 1830, a position he held until 1855. From 1835, the team was called Nottinghamshire, and the present county club was founded in 1841 (it's the second oldest, after Sussex in 1839). In all that time, Clarke was the mainstay, and Altham says he became the acknowledged "General" of both club and county. That title was formerly bestowed upon Richard Nyren of Hambledon, but I'd say Nyren is flattered by the comparison. Nyren was a fine all-rounder, and a great captain, but Clarke was much more, because he was additionally a superb organiser.

The Trent Bridge Inn, painted in 1850 by Robert Bradley.

Clarke's first wife, Jane, died in September 1837. He soon became involved with Mary Chapman, landlady of the Trent Bridge Inn. There was an area of meadow land behind this pub, and Clarke saw it would be ideal for cricket. He married Mary, and began developing the meadow into a now world-famous ground which stages Test cricket every year. It was soon ready for matches. In 1840, Trent Bridge hosted Nottinghamshire v Sussex, which the visitors won by 14 runs. Clarke took nine wickets in the match, but the combination of Lillywhite and Charles Taylor made the difference for Sussex. Trent Bridge was noted for the quality of its pitches, and Notts began to use it regularly.

Old Clarke and the MCC

It was not until 1846, when Clarke was 47 years old, and was becoming known as "Old", that Marylebone Cricket Club thought it might be an idea to engage his services. For nearly thirty years, Clarke had been one of the very best bowlers in England, but MCC either overlooked him or ignored him. Given Clarke's status in the game, he cannot possibly have been overlooked. MCC in the 1840s was still under the baleful shadow of the vile Beauclerk, so we may safely assume that Clarke had "given offence".

Grimston. Yes, it was a Tory.

MCC may have realised their foolishness in June 1845 when they played against the North at Lord's. MCC fielded a reasonably good team which included Jemmy Dean, William Hillyer, William Lillywhite, Will Dorrinton, Fuller Pilch, and Tom Sewell. Those were all great or very good players. Their colleagues were amateurs (so-called "gentlemen"). One of them, Roger Kynaston, was a half-decent player, so fair enough in his case. The other four were "jolly good chaps" who went to the right school, you know, and they included the ludicrous Grimston—he of "infernal machine" (a lawn mower) inanity.

The North's team wasn't great, and they had a couple of public school nonentities too, but they were mostly a solidly professional line-up which included George Parr, Sam Redgate, and Old Clarke. MCC batted first, and were bowled out for 41. Seven of the wickets were clean bowled. Clarke and Redgate, bowling unchanged, did the damage. Clarke took seven, Redgate three. The North scored 141, although Hillyer with five wickets caused them a lot of problems. The top scorer was Sam Dakin with 41 not out, as many as MCC all together. MCC did better in the second innings, and restricted Clarke to three wickets (ten in the match), but they were all out for 99 to lose the match by an innings. Dorrinton, with 11 and 25, top-scored in both MCC innings.

Whatever the history between Clarke and the MCC, he agreed to join the Lord's ground staff ahead of the 1846 season, even though he regarded the pay as insufficient. We'll come back to that. Clarke played for the MCC team against Norfolk on 27/28 July, at Lord's, and took six wickets. He also top-scored with 31, and MCC won by 88 runs. Norfolk were a minor county, though, and Clarke's MCC debut in the equivalent of a first-class match was against Sussex on the Royal New Ground, in Brighton, on 10–12 August. He took three wickets, and played a match-winning innings of 65 as MCC won by 21 runs.

Clarke's last match for MCC was also in Sussex, but at the Cricket Field Road ground in Horsham. Although Clarke was wicketless in the match, MCC won by 79 runs. It's surprising in a way that MCC retained his services after 1846, given the bathchair spluttering which erupted after he formed the AEE in August of that year.

Old Clarke and the Players

Archest of the arch

Back in July of 1846, Clarke had made another debut when he was selected for the Players. I find it amazing that one of the top professional bowlers did not play in the Gentlemen v Players (GvP) match until then. The fixture had been revived in 1819, when Young Clarke was learning his trade, and played on an almost annual basis since. It was frequently laughable, because the Gentlemen were usually outclassed until WG came along. And, let's face it, he wasn't a "gentleman"; more so than Wilfred Rhodes, Sydney Barnes, and even the old Emmott himself, WG was in truth the archest of arch-professionals.

From 1819 until 1845, the GvP match was always at Lord's, and Clarke did not go there unless he was playing for either Notts or the North. In September 1845, they played it in Brighton. It returned to Lord's in July 1846, and Clarke, now an MCC ground staff bowler, was finally able to take part. Surprisingly, it was one hell of a match, because the Gentlemen actually turned up and played for once.

The Players won the toss and decided to bat first, but they were bowled out for 85, Joe Guy making 25. The "Mighty Mynn" was on the loose, and took 7/37. Frederick Hervey-Bathurst, one of the best-ever amateur fast bowlers, took 3/48. The Gentlemen in their turn struggled against Clarke (5/30) and Hillyer (5/40), and were all out for 105 shortly before close of play. Clarke was moved up the order, and opened with Will Martingell, as day two began. He didn't last long against the pace of Hervey-Bathurst, and was caught by Nicholas Felix for only 3. Joe Guy was again batting well until he was run out for 31. He was denied a second top score, though—Mr Extras scored 32!

There was an unusual incident during this innings when Hillyer, the last man in, contrived to score a seven. Batting with Tom Sewell, he apparently hit the ball for an all-run four. A fielder then returned the ball, but it eluded his team-mates, and Hillyer ran for three overthrows too. The Players were all out for 145 during the evening session.

Needing 126 to win, the Gentlemen were 17/1 at close of play. Hillyer (6/40) was the best bowler for the Players, but they couldn't shift Charles Taylor until Tom Box stumped him after he had scored 44. That was a decisive innings. The Gents had reached 124/8, one to tie and two to win, when Hillyer trapped Edwin Napper lbw for 3. That left Richard Long, who was 9 not out, and last man Walter Mynn (brother of Alfred) to win, tie, or lose. Mynn got the two runs, and the Gentlemen won a great match by 1 wicket.

It had taken Clarke a long time to join the Players, but he stayed with them, and played in every GvP match at Lord's from 1846 to 1853 (there were two in 1851).

Old Clarke and the AEE

The All England Eleven in 1847. Joe Guy, George Parr, Will Martingell, Alfred Mynn, William Denison, Jemmy Dean, William Clarke, Nicholas Felix, Oliver Pell, William Hillyer, William Lillywhite, William Dorrinton, Fuller Pilch, and Tom Sewell.

And so we come to the famous All England Eleven which used the railways to spread the gospel of top-class cricket. It also, as Clarke said plainly, made him a lot of money. The above line-up in September 1847 is certainly an impressive one, and there is no doubt the AEE was far and away the best England team ever assembled to that time. Indeed, of the leading players in 1847, the line-up is short of only a couple. One is star wicket-keeper Tom Box, who joined the AEE in the following season. Ned Wenman is also absent, but he seems to have been largely inactive that year. Also missing are the two great names of future cricket publications—Arthur Haygarth and John Wisden—but they were only 22 and 21 then, and just beginning to earn recognition.

EM, also known as The Coroner.

There had been England teams since the first half of the 18th century. These were occasional teams organised by individual patrons, or by MCC since it was founded in 1787. While some were very good sides, they always lacked several top players. For example, if an England team played against Hampshire in the 1770s, it would include Lumpy Stevens, William Yalden, Will Palmer, John Minshull, and Joseph Miller. But it could not include John Small, Richard Nyren, Tom Brett, Tom Sueter, Tom Taylor, or the other Hambledon "cracks". Clarke wasn't taking on the top county teams. His opponents were town teams which didn't have the very best players, although the likes of Sheffield and Manchester certainly had some very good ones, as did the West Gloucestershire Club whose XXII hosted the AEE at Bristol in August 1855. Their team included a certain Edward Mills Grace, always known as "EM", who was only fourteen at the time. He fielded very well, and Clarke presented him with a bat after the match. Watching the match with his mother was EM's younger brother, seven-year old William Gilbert Grace.

Credit is certainly due to Clarke for popularising cricket in the northern counties, and in some other places like Gloucestershire. The AEE were in demand wherever they played, even though their matches were nearly all against odds, often against XXIIs like West Gloucestershire. Clarke, however, was a difficult character whose arrogance caused resentment, not least over his obsession with money, and his way of demonstrating to his team-mates that the lion's share of the takings were his and his alone. They put up with him because they earned more than with MCC or other teams, but only up to a point. In 1852, the disaffected Dean and Wisden formed the United England Eleven (the UEE). The UEE members publicly denounced Clarke, and resolved to boycott any match that Clarke had organised—which did not include MCC matches or GvP.

Clarke's final match was for the AEE in June 1856. Playing against Whitehaven XXII, he took a wicket with his last-ever ball. Two months later, he died.

The UEE was by no means the last of the itinerant elevens. There were several more, including the United North and the United South. The latter became a cash cow for WG and his brother Fred. In the decade or so after Clarke's death, there was an increasing interest in county cricket which led to the formation of several county clubs in the 1860s, and the creation of an unofficial championship (the official County Championship began in 1890). Odds matches could only appeal to the public for a limited period. Spectators in the North, for example, could now look forward to competitive eleven-a-side matches involving Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, and Yorkshire against each other and the southern counties. The travelling teams survived for many more years yet, some into the 1880s, but they'd had their day, and they faded away.

top of page At least so it was said | Death Comes to Cricket

---

At least so it was said

foot of page A match on the Forest New Ground | Two in one match | The ban

---

A match on the Forest New Ground

One of the most controversial matches in cricket's history was played at the Forest New Ground in Nottingham on 23–25 June 1817. It was an "odds" match between a Nottingham XXII and an England XI. The home team was, of course, the old Nottingham Town Club, which dated from 1771 at least, and were a much better team than the odds would suggest. Indeed, the match should have been eleven-a-side. Without the handicap, England might well have won, but who knows? Given the odds, Nottingham won by 30 runs.

Pavilion at the Forest ground

The match scorecard tells us how many each batter scored. But, as so often happened in the compilation of early scorecards, dismissal information was confined to the primary means alone, so the bowler wasn't named unless he bowled the batter out. A total of 62 wickets fell in the game, and sixteen were bowled. As a result, we only know the names of five bowlers. One of them was the great William Lambert, who bowled six men out in the first innings. Three of the others were Tom Howard, Tom Warsop, and Humphrey Hopkin.

The fifth was the vile Frederick Beauclerk.

William Clarke, then aged eighteen, was playing for Nottingham, but we don't know if he bowled against England, only that he didn't bowl anyone out.

Curiously, there wasn't a single lbw among those 62 wickets, but there was a hit the ball twice. That was Nottingham's George Smith, whose 29 in the second innings was the highest score of the match. Nottingham batted first. While we have a batting order, we have no way of knowing if it was the actual order, or just a list of names, especially as there is no fall of wicket data. The order was unchanged for the second innings, and the same applied to England.

George Osbaldeston

Anyway, the Nottingham XXII totalled 50, and only one batter reached double figures. That was Sam Hudson, #21 in the order, who scored 10. The not out batter William Chapman, who didn't score, was #22 in the order. England batted next, and they had an impressive line-up which included Lambert and Billy Beldham, though "Silver Billy" was then aged 51. Until the 1840s, these two and John Small were the three greatest-ever batters. England also had E. H. Budd, George Osbaldeston, and Beauclerk, so Nottingham could have expected to be well down on first innings. Maybe they surprised themselves, then, because they dismissed England for 53. Apparently, there was a to-do about Henry Bentley being "unfairly run out", and one of the umpires was replaced. Because Beauclerk had a tantrum, no doubt. Beldham top-scored with 11, and keeper Joe Dennis dismissed three batters with two stumpings and a catch.

In their second innings, Nottingham made 98, largely thanks to the 29 runs scored by Smith until he hit the ball a second time. Did he? Or did Beauclerk say he did? That gave Nottingham a lead of 95, and we may assume England had plenty of time left to reach their target. They were dismissed for 65. Bentley, who was #1 in the order, made 14 before Dennis stumped him. Howard evidently played well, and was 19 not out at the end. Hopkin bowled both Beldham and Beauclerk for low scores. So, the match ended in victory for Nottingham by 30 runs.

Arthur Haygarth's Scores & Biographies is a classic, especially Volume 1 which covers the years up to 1826. Although Haygarth was invariably polite, he did speak his mind, or at least provide strong hints as to what he thought. He covers Nottingham v England on page 401, and wrote:

This match was "said" to have been "sold" on both sides.

Note his use of quotes and italics. You could just say: "Well, Beauclerk was involved". In addition to the usual shenanigans, Beauclerk got a broken finger, which almost caused lockjaw. Haygarth says Beauclerk had annoyed John Sherman, who returned "an angry overthrow". Beauclerk was injured trying to stop the ball.

Two in one match

A week later, there was a five-day match at Lord's between teams labelled Sussex and Epsom. Epsom, of course, is in Surrey, and is famous for the Derby. Ten of the Epsom team came from anywhere but Surrey. The exception was Robert Robinson. His team-mates included Budd, Howard, and William Ward—all greats—and six other good players. Yes, that's ten. In addition, Epsom were handicapped by the useless and appalling Aislabie, who was surely the worst player of all time, as well as being a slave plantation owner. Sussex had nine of their own players, including the Broadbridge brothers, but they were without William Lillywhite. They had two given men, Lambert and Osbaldeston.

An accurate title for the game would be "Sussex with Lambert and Osbaldeston versus Ten of All England".

This match is remembered for the performance of William Lambert, who made scores of 107 not out and 157, the first time anyone is known to have scored two centuries in the same match. Osbaldeston scored 106 in the first innings. The team scores were 292 and 445 by Sussex, 204 and 106 by Epsom, so Sussex won by 427 runs. Lambert was then 38 years old. Unbelievably, that was his last match in top-class cricket.

So, what happened? Did he retire? No, he didn't retire. Beauclerk happened.

The ban

William Lambert, c. 1850

Beauclerk hated Lambert and Osbaldeston because they defeated him and Tom Howard in a single wicket match some years earlier. Taking advantage of the "who sold who" row that followed the Forest New Ground match, he accused Lambert of not trying his best, and of profiting from the Nottingham victory.

The MCC committee, better known as the autocratic Beauclerk's yes men, called Lambert to account, and banned him from Lord's for life. That effectively ended Lambert's career in senior cricket, because Lord's at the time was the game's sole major venue.

Arthur Haygarth's comment on Lambert's ban was:

Lambert was not allowed to appear at that ground any more, owing to his having (at least, so it was said) "sold" the England v Nottingham match.

"At least, so it was said" neatly summarises anything that was ever said by Beauclerk. Notice too that Haygarth again placed "sold" in quotes.

Haygarth had to be careful when he wrote his biography of the Reverend (!) Beauclerk only a few years after the hypocrite died. John Major, writing over 150 years later, had no need to be reticent, although he did try to be fair by reminding us that Beauclerk was a good player. Indeed, he was a very good player, but that doesn't negate what Major called a "damning charge sheet"—Beauclerk was seen as "avaricious, ill-tempered, hypocritical, and a gamester adept at sharp practice". Derek Birley said Beauclerk, the Vicar of St Albans if you please, was "completely devoid of Christian charity".

C. L. R. James does not mention Beauclerk by name. He tells us that Thomas Arnold "aimed to create a body of educated men who would resist the crimes of Toryism", and that what Arnold really hated was "the tribe of selfish and ignorant lords, and country squires and clergymen". Well, Beauclerk wasn't a country squire, but the rest is him to a T.

Haygarth discovered that Lambert continued to play local club cricket in Reigate until he was about sixty. Lambert died in April 1851, at the age of 72. Nearly five years earlier, in August 1846, his Nottingham opponent William Clarke had founded the All-England Eleven. In later years, Clarke freely acknowledged that Lambert had been one of his main mentors, especially in the art of underarm spin bowling, at which Clarke himself became a master.

top of page Jewel in the Crown | A milestone on the way

---

Jewel in the Crown

foot of page Introduction Factories and Presidencies | Sailors in Cambay | George Vernon's XI From Colombo to Bombay | Defeat by the Parsees | Impact of the tour Sources

---

Introduction

I ended The Origins of the Game with Queen Elizabeth I granting a Royal Charter to the Honourable East India Company. This time, I'll look at how cricket became popular in India, after "John Company" imported it into the sub-continent.

Factories and Presidencies

The year 1612 was a significant one in Indian history because the East India Company established its first "factory" (trading post) at Surat. This followed a naval battle with Portuguese ships in the nearby Gulf of Cambay (now Khambhat). Surat is now part of Gujarat, about 165 miles south of Ahmedabad, and 180 miles north of Mumbai.

Cambay (Khambhat) in 1813

It was the first firmly established English base in India, and it was from there that English activity and influence began to spread. It is possible that cricket was first played on the sub-continent at this time.

In 1639, the Company founded the city of Madras (now Chennai, and the capital of Tamil Nadu on the south-east coast). They built a fort and a factory there. The Company's growing power was enhanced in 1657, when Oliver Cromwell ordered its reorganisation as the sole joint-stock company with rights to the Indian trade.

Earlier, in 1650 and 1655, the Company had absorbed rival companies that had been incorporated by Cromwell under the Commonwealth and Protectorate. In 1661, the Company acquired sovereign rights to Portuguese territory on the west coast of India, including Bombay (now Mumbai). In 1674, it arranged a trading treaty with the Maratha Kingdom that had recently been founded by Shivaji Bhonsle in central India.

Thus far, the Company had been primarily concerned with trade. This changed in 1689 with the establishment of administrative districts called "presidencies" in the Indian provinces of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay. It then began its long period of political rule in India. In 1690, an Anglo-Mughal treaty allowed English merchants to establish a trading settlement on the Hooghly River, which became Calcutta (now Kolkata). All of these places became famous cricket centres as the popularity of the game grew among the native population.

In 1702, the Company bought control of the New (or English) Company that had been set up as a rival trading organisation in 1698. An Act of Parliament then amalgamated the two as "The United Company of Merchants of England Trading to the East Indies". The charter was renewed several times in the eighteenth century, each time with financial concessions to the Crown. Then, in 1707, there was an important historical event with the death of Aurangzeb, precipitating the disintegration of the Mughal Empire.

Sailors in Cambay

Cricket certainly arrived a long, long time before anyone wrote anything down. The first time anyone did that was in 1721, when it was reported that English sailors were playing cricket at Cambay (modern Khambhat), near Baroda (modern Vadodara), and that is the earliest known reference to cricket being played in the sub-continent. One of the players wrote:

When my boat was lying for a fortnight in one of the channels, though the country was inhabited by the Culeys (sic), we every day diverted ourselves with playing Cricket and to other Exercises, which they would come and be spectators of.

The "Culeys" were undoubtedly native Indians, but it isn't clear if the writer meant a particular people like the Bengalis or the Punjabis, or if he misspelt the derogatory term "coolie" that was applied to labourers. Either way, the Indians were certainly interested, and this was the beginning of cricket's rise towards the peak of Indian culture.

Eden Gardens in 1861

There are few reports of Indian cricket through the 18th century, but the Calcutta Cricket and Football Club is known to have been in existence by 1792. It was probably founded more than a decade earlier. Calcutta's famous stadium, Eden Gardens, opened in 1864 on the site of the Eden Gardens Park, which dated from 1842 and was already in use for cricket. In 1799, another club was formed at Seringapatam (Srirangapatna) in south India, after the successful British siege, and the defeat of Tippoo Sultan (1750–1799).

In 1864, a Madras versus Calcutta match was arguably the start of first-class cricket in India. The most important fixture in the 19th century was the Bombay Presidency match which evolved, first, into the Bombay Triangular, and then into the Bombay Quadrangular.

These involved ethic teams called Europeans, Hindus, Muslims, and Parsees. The first match was played in 1877, and then intermittently for several seasons, until finally being given first-class status in 1892–93, when the Europeans met the Parsees in two matches at Bombay and Poona (Pune). The first match was a draw, and the Parsees won by 3 wickets at Poona.

The first overseas team to tour India was the English amateur one led by George Vernon in 1889–90. The tour, which included Ceylon, was a huge success, but none of its matches are considered first-class. In 1892–93, Lord Hawke captained an English team that played four first-class matches including one game, 26–28 January 1893, against "All India". At Lord's in June 1932, India played their first-ever Test match.

George Vernon's XI

There's much more to be said about Indian cricket in the 19th century, but I'm moving on to the 1889–90 season when an English team arrived, and made the first overseas tour of the country.

George Vernon

George Frederick Vernon (1856–1902) was a Middle Temple barrister, who became engaged in the Colonial Service. He was working for the West Africa Police in the Gold Coast Colony (now Ghana) in 1902, where he died of malaria at age 46.

He was a dual international for England, playing for the rugby union team five times, and once in Test cricket. In first-class cricket, Vernon played for Middlesex and MCC for the most part, and took part in 240 matches between 1876 and 1898. He was a right-handed batter (RHB) who scored four centuries and 28 fifties.

Vernon's career average was only 19.10, so you might wonder how he ever got into the England team? Well, he was available.

He sailed to Australia in 1882–83 with Ivo Bligh on the quest to "bring back those Ashes". Vernon played in the first Test, which the Aussies won by 9 wickets. He didn't contribute much, batting at #11, scoring 11 not out and 3. He didn't play again, and England recovered those Ashes without him.

If you have access to CricketArchive, see George Vernon (profile), and Australia v England, 1st Test, 1882–83 (scorecard). There are two obituaries online: in Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game, volume XXI, issue 612; and in Wisden, 1903. Disappointingly, neither of these mentions the 1889–90 tour of India and Ceylon.

Vernon organised and managed the tour, and so the team is always known as G. F. Vernon's XI. The captain was supposed to be "his lordship" Martin Hawke, but he missed the first nine matches through poetic justice. Hawke had left England ahead of the main party because, being a jolly good chap who went to the right school, he just had to indulge in a spot of big-game hunting. It's the done thing, you know, what! Anyway, when he arrived in Gwalior, he copped a very nasty bout of gastritis, which saved the lives of several animals. Hawke, of course, was the upper-class twit who declared that no professional should ever captain England. When one did (Len Hutton), we won the Ashes (mind you, Bradman had retired by then).

Actually, Hawke and Vernon were the only players in the party who were at all well known at the time. One who later made a name for himself was wicket-keeper Hylton "Punch" Philipson, then at Oxford, who went on to play for England in five Tests between 1892 and 1895. There were no professionals on the trip, and so the team was decidely sub-standard. None of its thirteen matches have been recognised as first-class. Even so, with the exception of the Parsees, Vernon's team was much better than any in India or Ceylon at the time, and achieved six innings victories. They had three other substantial wins, plus one against North-West Frontier Province by 3 wickets. Two matches, against Bihar Wanderers and Northern India, were drawn. And, they had one defeat, when they lost by 4 wickets to the Parsees at the famous Gymkhana Ground in Bombay.

The classic magazine, Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game, carried a lot of news about the tour and its preparations. Issue 215, dated 11 July 1889, tells us that the team were to sail by P&O steamer Bengal, embarking from Tilbury on 31 October, and stopping at Colombo, Madras, and Calcutta. Raising the team was difficult because of invitations being declined. Then, on 10 September, Herbert Rhodes, a sometime Yorkshire amateur who had accepted, fell to his death from a hotel balcony in Dover. An inquest ruled that he had died accidentally, but there seems to have been something suspicious, and perhaps scandalous, about Rhodes' doings.

From Colombo to Bombay

Thomas Tapling

In the end, the players who assembled in Colombo were Vernon, Philipson, Ernest de Little, Arthur Gibson, George Hone-Goldney, John Hornsby, E. M. Lawson-Smith, Albert Leatham, Francis Shand, and James Walker. They were joined in India by reserve wicket-keeper Thomas Tapling who, by the way, was a renowned philatelist, noted for the size, quality, and value of his collection.

Vernon arranged two matches in Colombo. These were against "All Ceylon" and the Colombo Cricket Club, which is now a first-class team. Without a full eleven, Vernon had to recruit local players as given men. Even so, his team won both of these games by an innings, but the matches were against European residents only. So, no, they didn't encounter the likes of Murali, or Lasith Malinga, or Kumar Sangakkara.

The Bengal made a short stop in Madras, and then went on to Calcutta, arriving in the week before Christmas.

The team's first match in India was played 23–25 December 1889 against the old Calcutta club at Eden Gardens. Tapling had arrived, so Vernon could select a full team, and they won by 9 wickets. Days later, they played Bengal, also at Eden Gardens, winning that one by an innings and 17 runs. Vernon's XI then took to the railways, and played nine more matches between 9 January and 1 March. They travelled to Bankipore, Allahabad, Bombay, Lucknow, Agra, Meerut, and Lahore.

As in Ceylon, their opponents in India were European residents—mostly British expats—who were typically Army officers, or Colonial Service officials. With one exception. Vernon agreed to play against the Parsee Gymkhana of Bombay on the Gymkhana Ground in a two-day match on 30 and 31 January 1890. His team were still in good form because they had easily beaten the Bombay Gymkhana team by an innings on the 27th and 28th, and left-arm spinner John Hornsby, who became a good bowler in the 1890s, took match figures of 13/78.

Defeat by the Parsees

Bombay Gymkhana today

There was a strong Parsee community in Bombay which had wholeheartedly adopted cricket. Indeed, they had already sent two pioneering teams to England—in 1886 and 1888—but they were the sole native community who could assemble a competitive team in 1890. Apart from the Parsees, cricket in India was still an exclusively British sport.

The best Parsee player was all-rounder M. E. Pavri, a fast bowler who had enjoyed success in England on the 1888 tour. He played for Middlesex a few years later, and became known as the "Grace of the Parsees" because, like WG, he was both an all-rounder and a doctor.

Vernon won the toss, and decided to bat first. They struggled against Pavri and his fellow bowlers, B. D. Gagrat and R. E. Modi. Vernon made the top score of 45 not out, but they were all out for 97 in the 32nd over, and eight of them were bowled. The Parsees fared no better in their first innings, and were 80/9 at close of play. They were all out for 82 in the second over next morning. Fast bowler Ernest de Little took 4/25, and Hornsby 3/25. Vernon's XI began their second innings with a lead of 15 but they could not cope with Pavri, who skittled them for 61, taking an impressive 7/34. So, with plenty of time in hand, the Parsees needed 77 for a famous victory. Hornsby and de Little again caused problems. The Parsees were 17/4 at one point, but Pavri and B. C. Machhliwala steadied the innings with scores of 20 and 21 not out, and the Parsees made it to their target with four wickets in hand.

The match had been billed in advance as the "Cricket Championship of India". The Parsee victory was celebrated throughout Bombay. In his excellent book, Ramachandra Guha says the match was acclaimed as "the greatest sporting contest in the city's history", and many people said the result was "a blow to the prestige of Empire". Guha adds that the celebrations "revealed the communal competitiveness that would drive the progress of cricket in colonial India". He also mentions a cautionary note in the Parsee newspaper Rast Goftar, that their players must "bear in mind that Hindu and Muslim cricketers would be seeking to emulate their success, so they must themselves be ready to face challenges".

Four weeks passed before Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game could publish a report of the match. In issue 231 on 27 February, the magazine praised the Parsees, saying "their victory cannot fail to give a fresh impetus to the practice of the game among the followers of that great community". According to a separate report in the same issue, Vernon's team travelled to Lucknow on the Jubbulpore mail train, but they were expected to return to Bombay for a rematch with the Parsees. This didn't happen. The last match was against the Punjab in Lahore at the end of February. By then, the team had been depleted by injuries, and needed four replacements for the match in Lahore.

Impact of the tour

India Railways Map, 1909

The tour relied on rail transport. India had an extensive network by the 1880s, and the tourists made full use of it. The Jubbulpore mail train mentioned above is just one example. The map here shows the Indian rail network as it was in 1909, just twenty years later, and the route taken by Vernon and his team can easily be traced.

English cricket's love of trains began during the so-called "railway boom". William Clarke—of whom, more anon—realised the potential of railways as the means of taking his All-England Eleven to play against teams all over the country.

There is no doubt Vernon's tour was a success. It gave the sport a tremendous boost in both Ceylon and India. On 27 March 1890, Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game reproduced an article in India's Pioneer Mail which praised Vernon's XI for "setting on foot an enterprise now sure to be repeated". That was a safe prediction, and the next tour by an English team was in 1892–93.

Colynge Caple said the tour began as "something in the nature of a pleasure trip", but "forged yet another link in the ever-growing chain of international cricket".

Sources

Among the best sources for information about early Indian cricket are:

• Bose, Mihir (1990). A History of Indian Cricket. Andre-Deutsch.
• Caple, S. Canynge (1959). England versus India: 1886–1959. Littlebury & Co. Ltd.
• Guha, Ramachandra (2001). A Corner of a Foreign Field – An Indian History of a British Sport. Picador.
• Raiji, Vasant (1986). India's Hambledon Men. Tyeby Press.

top of page The Origins of the Game | At least so it was said

---

The Origins of the Game

foot of page Unlikely that we shall ever know..... | Club-ball | Any form of ball-bashing Longshanks and creag | The Weald | The French Connection Burgundy | Bowls or bowling? | Guildford and the Coroner Giovanni Florio | India

---

Unlikely that we shall ever know.....

In the opening paragraph of his Phoenix History of Cricket, Roy Webber says:

"The origins of the game have been lost in the mists of time and it is unlikely that we shall ever know much more about early cricket than we do today (my italics). Several cricket lovers have spent years in libraries all over the country in an attempt to collect more data, but their work is restricted to the amount of matter available for research. And this is the real core of the problem: few newspapers of the 17th century are available and in those which exist little space is devoted to cricket. Apart from a few items, therefore, we are completely in the dark over the early years of cricket history, and can only deduce the story (my italics) of the spread of cricket from the sparse evidence available".

Webber wrote that in 1960 which, hard to believe, is well over half a century ago. Yet he could have written it yesterday for, apart from a few small finds here and a number of corrections there, we do indeed know little more today than he did in 1960. Now, as then, more than 95% of what we know about cricket before the 19th century is to be found in the works of Harry Altham, F. S. Ashley-Cooper, Samuel Britcher, G. B. Buckley, Arthur Haygarth, John Nyren, James Pycroft, H. T. Waghorn and a few others. There have been some good contributors since Webber's day but the best we can get from them is a new angle, another approach or a fresh theory. The original research has been done and all that is left is to "deduce the story" by analysing "the sparse evidence available".

Club-ball

Several sources are in agreement that cricket evolved from a generic activity which they have named "club-ball". Desmond Eagar, the former Hampshire captain, wrote the first three chapters of Barclays World of Cricket and mentioned the 18th century writer, Joseph Strutt, who was the first to declare cricket to be a descendant of club-ball. John Nyren in 1833 agreed with Strutt. In 1851, James Pycroft went further by saying that club-ball was the name by which cricket was known in the 13th century but that, of course, is erroneous speculation of the worst possible kind. A few years later, Arthur Haygarth wrote that cricket has "so close an affinity to the primitive and indigenous game of club-ball as to be a direct off-shoot".

Felix on the Bat (1845). Nicholas Felix held a dismissive view of club-ball.

Harry Altham wrote that "most of all did our own forefathers enjoy hitting a ball with that which it was second nature for them to carry, a staff or club, be it straight or crooked". He saw that routine activity as the "parent tree" of club-ball which split into three distinct groupings: the hockey group in which the ball is driven to and fro between two goals; the golf group in which the ball is driven towards a specific target; and the cricket group in which the ball is aimed at a target and then driven away from it. Therefore, although there is no definite link between them, the cricket group must include baseball and rounders as well as cricket itself.

Interestingly, Altham seems to have forgotten the tennis group, unless he thought tennis involves "goals", and so is akin to hockey. Well, it isn't, so there are four groups which involve hitting a ball with some kind of bat, club, racquet or stick. John Major begins his account by saying that cricket at its most basic is a club striking a ball and the same, he says, is true of golf, rounders, baseball, hockey and tennis. Major goes on to demolish Pycroft's nonsense, and quotes Nicholas Felix, who asserted that club-ball was a very ancient game, totally distinct from cricket.

Any form of ball-bashing

As for what club-ball was, no one actually knows. Derek Birley asks if it ever was a specific game? He doubts that, and thinks the term was, after all, generic. As he puts it, "a catch-all term to cover any form of ball-bashing the citizenry were apt to waste their time on".

David Underdown, who was Professor of History Emeritus at Yale University, deliberately side-steps the debates about cricket's prehistory and dismisses them as speculation. He doesn't mention club-ball at all except to concede that, yes, young people probably did always play whatever forms of the numerous bat-and-ball games were popular in their localities. The only one of the theories he supports is the where as he believed cricket to have originated in south-east England. He states with good reason that, before the legal deposition made by John Derrick in 1597, there is nothing any historian can usefully say about cricket.

So, from all of that, when did cricket's history begin? As we have just seen, numerous theories have been put forward about the sport's supposed origin and most of them, as per Underdown, can be dismissed as not worth mentioning. I accept the general view that cricket began in the south-east and evolved as a specific activity from a more generic club-and-ball one. Although it is surely another red herring, let's consider an activity called creag in the year 1300.

Longshanks and creag

On Thursday, 10 March 1300 (a Julian date which is 18 March 1300 in the Gregorian calendar), royal wardrobe accounts of Edward I (1239–1307; known as "Longshanks") include refunds to one John de Leek of monies that he had paid out to enable Prince Edward to play "creag and other games" at both Westminster and Newenden. Prince Edward, the future Prince of Wales who became Edward II (1284–1327), was then aged 15. He supposedly ended his life by acquaintance with a red-hot poker which inspired the term "go medieval" in Pulp Fiction.

This word creag is probably a variation of craic, a Gaelic word which was part of Middle English, and means "fun and games in general". Nevertheless, it has been suggested that creag was an early form of cricket. There is no evidence to support this view, and creag could have been something quite different as per craic, but it does at least seem a likely suspect, especially when the Kent location is considered.

The Weald

The most widely accepted theory on the origin of cricket is that it developed among the farming and metalworking communities of the Weald, which spreads across the counties of Kent and Sussex. The Weald is generally held to have been the cradle of cricket and one writer, Peter Wynne-Thomas, even says so in a book's title.

The Weald. Is this where cricket began? Looks like they've got the weather for it.

John Arlott, long regarded as the doyen of cricket writers and broadcasters, firmly believed that the Weald was the key location.

It is significant that these counties, and neighbouring Surrey, were the earliest centres of excellence, and that it was from here that the game eventually reached London, where it achieved mass popularity, and Hampshire, where it achieved both fame and legend.

There is, however, an alternative view that the sport originated in Flanders, and was brought to southern England by immigrant weavers. I think cricket was devised by children, and survived for many generations as essentially a children's game. As for when, I'd guess in Norman or Plantagenet times anytime before 1300. As for the name, it has no connection with the insect. It must have been derived from words that were in use, and possibly imported. In old French, the word criquet seems to have meant a kind of club or stick. There were strong Flemish connections with early cricket, as will be explained, and in Middle Dutch, the language of medieval Flanders, krick(e) meant a stick; in Olde English, cricc or cryce meant a crutch or staff. In the earliest known definite reference to the sport in 1597, it is called creckett. According to Heiner Gillmeister, a European language expert of the University of Bonn, "cricket" derives from the Middle Dutch phrase for hockey, met de krik ketsen (i.e., "with the stick chase"). Gillmeister believes the sport itself had a Flemish origin, but the jury is still out on that one.

The three centuries from creag to creckett contain speculation only. Harry Altham called the period "archaeological", and Rowland Bowen called it "prehistoric".

Bourne Park, near Bishopsbourne in Kent.

Bowen is much nearer the mark because I'm aware of only one connection between archaeology and cricket. That has been at Bourne Park (above) in Kent, where Horatio Mann had his Bishopsbourne Paddock ground in the 1770s. A team from the University of Cambridge spent some years digging there, and found Bronze Age and Roman artefacts, but no missing bats or stumps.

The French Connection

In 1337, King Edward III (1312–1377) claimed the throne of France. This began a long series of conflicts—collectively known as the Hundred Years War—which did not end until the English were finally expelled from most of France (except Calais) in 1453. Certain references have been found which some writers have interpreted as a "French Connection" in the origins of cricket, but they have missed a key historical point.

As the Hundred Years War progressed, large parts of France including great cities like Paris and Bordeaux were subject to long-term English occupation. Paris, when François Villon was born there in 1431, was described as "an English town". Calais remained an English possession until 1558, a whole century after the end of the Hundred Years War. So, there may well be cricket references in France but they do not indicate a movement of the sport from France to England; they indicate that English soldiers and settlers brought their culture across the Channel with them during the long period of occupation.

Cricket is the quintessential English game, and it has followed the English everywhere. If the English had colonised Mars, the Martians would now be members of the ICC!

Burgundy

Louis XI of France. The "Universal Spider".

Burgundy is now a province of France that is famous for its wine but, in medieval times, it was a powerful state in its own right. It held territory including modern Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, as well as much of north east France. It owed its wealth to trade, especially from its great cities of Bruges, Antwerp, Ghent and Amsterdam, which were the main centres of European commerce at the time.

The death of Duke Charles (the Bold) in 1477 enabled French King Louis XI, the notorious "Universal Spider", to redraw the map of Europe. Charles was succeeded by his daughter Marie (1457–1482) as Duchess of Burgundy, and she married the Austrian Habsburg archduke Maximilian (1459–1519) who later (in 1493) became Holy Roman Emperor. Louis XI took advantage of the confused situation following Charles' death to seize Burgundy itself, and its territory in Artois and Picardy. A revolt in the Netherlands was suppressed by Maximilian. The remaining Burgundian lands in Franche-Comte, Luxembourg, Flanders, Belgium, and the Dutch Netherlands became Habsburg territory.

The suppression of Flanders and the Netherlands under the dead hand of Habsburg autocracy caused many Flemish and Dutch traders to migrate to England, where they seem to have had an impact on the development of cricket. Unfortunately for the development of the game in their own lands, it is reasonable to assume it could not thrive under Habsburg rule.

With the Flemish came their language and perhaps their sport. No evidence has been found of cricket being played in Flanders, but they did play the hockey game mentioned above which is the basis of Gillmeister's theory. The cloth-working fringe area of the Weald was poorly populated in the 15th century. Villages were small but Flemish migration increased their populations, particularly in the middle years of the 16th century. The Flemings were certainly active in the cloth trade in all the areas where cricket was played in the 17th century. It has been surmised that the Flemings moulded the traditional game of stoolball into something we would recognise as cricket, but the evidence indicates it was a children's game until the end of the 16th century, though there can be little doubt that Flemish children did play it.

Bowls or bowling?

In 1588, using the execution of Mary I, Queen of Scots as a pretext, the militant King Philip II of Spain launched his Armada against Elizabethan England. The Armada was famously defeated by a combination of the English weather and the English fleet, the latter commanded by John Hawkins, Charles Howard and Francis Drake.

Plymouth Hoe

Everyone knows the legend of Drake finishing his game of bowls on Plymouth Hoe as the Armada hove into view. But, was he really playing bowls, or was he perhaps bowling? We shall never know.....

Guildford and the Coroner

And so we come to Monday, 17 January 1597 (Julian calendar), when a Guildford law court met to settle dispute over a certain plot of land. Evidence presented confirms that "creckett" was played there by schoolboys around 1550, and this is the earliest definite reference to cricket being played anywhere in the world. The crucial testimony was given by John Derrick, who was born in about 1538. Details of his death are unknown. He was Queen's Coroner for the County of Surrey. (Three hundred years later, Dr E. M. Grace was also a coroner, and was even nicknamed "The Coroner".)

To further the theory of a "Flemish Connection" in the history of cricket, John Eddowes in his The Language of Cricket (1997) points out that John Derrick's surname was derived from the Flemish name Hendrik. Derrick is cricket's first significant figure because he is the person who gives us our historical startpoint. Without him, we would know that something called "cricket-a-wicket" existed in 1598 because it is mentioned in a dictionary, but seems to be about another sort of activity that involves the "thrumming of wenches".

We would then know that a match of sorts took place at Chevening in Kent sometime around the year 1610 and, from a 1611 dictionary, that the French word crosse is "the crooked staffe wherewith boys play at cricket". Nothing, not one thing, to confirm beyond reasonable doubt that cricket was being played in the 16th century. All we could definitely say without John Derrick is that cricket was a seventeenth century game.

The Royal Grammar School in Guildford

The court case was brought by Guildford's Royal Grammar School, founded in 1509. It claimed ownership of a parcel of land in the Parish of Holy Trinity which, originally waste, had been appropriated and enclosed by one John Parvish to serve as a timber yard. Derrick testified that he and his boyhood friends had played "creckett" on the site fifty years earlier. His deposition is preserved in the Guildford Constitution Book. He bore written testimony that he had known the land for fifty years past and, when:

a scholler of the Ffree Schoole of Guildeford, hee and diverse of his fellowes did runne and play there at creckett and other plaies

This is the first definite mention of cricket in historical records, although some of the speculation about earlier points of origin may be plausible.

There are some people who insist the game was invented by the Guildford children, because there is no proof that it existed before they started playing it. There really isn't much point in going down that road. The reality is that, whatever may have gone unrecorded before 1597, we have a historical startpoint.

It is perhaps significant that cricket is the only one of the "plaies" referred to by name. It is more significant that it was being played by children because the 1611 dictionary clearly says about the "crooked staffe" that it is what boys use to play cricket "wherewith". As it happens, the earliest known adult participation is hot on the heels of the dictionary via an ecclesiastical court case in Sussex soon after Easter of the same year.

Giovanni Florio

Not cricket? Well, yes, it is, actually.

Harry Altham and others have recorded the probable reference to cricket in an Italian-English dictionary published in 1598 by Giovanni Florio (1553–1625), who defined the word sgillare as: "to make a noise as a cricket, to play cricket-a-wicket, and be merry". Some people think the reference is spurious and relates only to the neek! neek! neek! insect variety of cricket but "to play cricket-a-wicket" hardly suggests insect activity. Given the reference to cricket as a boys' game in another dictionary only 13 years later, it would seem that Florio does have both an insect and a game in mind.

Give a little whistle!

Florio's reference may be seen at Italian/English Dictionary: A Worlde of Words. The problem is that, in a later edition of his dictionary in 1611, Florio infers that "to play cricket-a-wicket" has sexual associations with references to frittfritt, defined "as we say cricket-a-wicket, or gigaioggie", and dibatticare, defined as "to thrum a wench lustily till the bed cry giggaioggie"! See Queen Anna's New World of Words, f.144 and f.198. All of which means that "cricket-a-wicket" was a euphemism for sex in the same way that Rock'n'Roll originally was, and it might not actually refer to the sport of cricket.

The world's most famous cricket (not the game) has to be Jiminy, self-appointed conscience of Johnson Pinocchio, whose nose grows when he lies. Although Jiminy was a character in Carlo Collodi's 1883 novel, he was the "Cricket With No Name", and he was named Jiminy by Walt Disney for the 1940 film.

India

Wednesday, 31 December 1600. This was the last day of the 16th century in Scotland, but not in England or Wales where New Year's Day was 25 March until 1752, when the Gregorian Calendar was introduced. It was on 31 December 1600 that Queen Elizabeth I granted a Royal Charter to the Honourable East India Company.

Often known colloquially as "John Company", it was initially a joint-stock company that sought trading privileges in India and the East Indies, but the Royal Charter effectively gave it a 21-year monopoly on all trade in the region. In time, the East India Company transformed from a commercial trading venture to one which virtually ruled India as it acquired auxiliary governmental and military functions, until its dissolution in 1858 following the Indian Mutiny.

The East India Company was the means by which cricket was introduced into India and, hence, into Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Afghanistan.

top of page Lost in the Mists of Time | Jewel in the Crown

---

Lost in the Mists of Time

foot of page About this blog | Long ago and far away Sources

---

About this blog

Introduction

Francis Thompson

Hello, I'm Jack, and this blog is about the history of cricket. I'm beginning at the beginning—whenever and wherever that might have been—and going on from there. While the blog is historical, it is not chronological. So, after we reach the end of the 16th century, when cricket's recorded history began, we go into TARDIS mode. That means I will visit different years, events, countries, grounds, and people as the mood takes me. Cricket has a vast history, and it is best to present it in a nonlinear fashion. Trawling through the years, one by one, would be pretty boring.

Some of the eventual content is being revived from an earlier blog, which I abandoned, and much more from an amenity site I developed back in the 2000s. Other pages will be based on various essays and articles I've written. I have my own ideas about the game's history, and so I will say what I think if the main sources are unsure about something. As for who and what the main sources are, I've listed them at the bottom of this page. I'll also make specific references in the text when I think they're needed.

The blog's title is A Field Full of Shades which invokes a line in the classic cricket poem At Lord's by Francis Thompson (1859–1907). Writing in 1907, a few months before he died of tuberculosis, Thompson nostalgically recalled an 1878 county match at Old Trafford between Lancashire and Gloucestershire. The poem mentions Dick Barlow, E. M. Grace, W. G. Grace, and A. N. Hornby.

Among its famous lines are:

For the field is full of shades as I near a shadowy coast, And a ghostly batsman plays to the bowling of a ghost, And I look through my tears on a soundless-clapping host As the run-stealers flicker to and fro To and fro

The players and spectators are shades in his memory. This blog too recalls the past and those shades who batted, bowled, and fielded to make it worthy of recall.

Scope

The Don

The determining factor is interest alone. I have considered the inclusion of some pages to explain what the game of cricket is, especially given its huge, wide-ranging terminology, but I reckon anyone who reads this site will already know the difference between a leg break and a googly. The scope, then, is essentially the sport's history, and not the sport itself. Having said that, cricket is an evolutionary sport. Developments like the origin of the 22-yard pitch length, the invention of the straight bat, the introduction of lbw, and the opening of Lord's were all historical events.

Although I watch the modern game, I'm not really interested in writing about it. My timespan will probably be from the 16th century to, shall we say, circa 1975. Perhaps the inaugural Cricket World Cup would be a good endpoint because the limited overs version of cricket has held sway since then, and it's not the same game as the one played by W. G. Grace, Don Bradman, and Gary Sobers. But then, the game they played was not the one played by William Clarke and Alfred Mynn. Then again, the game they played was not the one played by John Small and Lumpy Stevens, and even that wasn't the same as the game played by Robert Colchin and Richard Newland.

Cricket evolves, which is probably just as well.

Long ago and far away

In the beginning

As the title of this page says, the origins of cricket are lost in the mists of time. Let's go right back to that time tens of thousands years ago when humans first ventured north, out of Africa, and began to spread globally after reaching Eurasia. We were nomads then with civilisation the concept of a far distant, unimaginable future. Often, when you read accounts of this incredible journey undertaken by our ancestors, it is MAN who is doing it. But I rather think WOMAN went along too, don't you?

And if man and woman went together, it stands to reason that so did CHILDREN. Boys and girls.

"Little ones who grow?" suggested Captain Kirk to some aliens who really didn't have any.

In another episode of Star Trek, Captain Kirk did encounter five children on a faraway planet. But they were little monsters.

By the way, the little girl in the photo is a former actress called Pamelyn Ferdin. Some years later, she appeared in a 1971 film called The Beguiled, and she killed Clint!! It's very rare, apparently, for Clint to die on screen. I know his character Frank Morris, a real person, is supposed to have drowned following the Escape from Alcatraz, but it's never been proved.

Anyway, boys and girls. They play, don't they? It's fair to assume they have always played, and they have always invented games on the spot with whatever implements were available to fire their imaginations. As for implementing the idea, did children ever have inhibitions as long as it wasn't bedtime, or there wasn't some chore to be done? What games would the nomadic children have played, then? It's speculation, of course, but they would have done a lot of running around, and sometimes have hidden from each other. They must have had fights, sometimes in fun, and sometimes not. All of that is eyes, ears, hands, feet, and brain—oh, yes, nose and mouth too—but no tools.

Sticks and stones

Ladies playing stoolball in the 19th century. It's similar, yes. But it's "not cricket".

Suppose one little lad picks up a length of wood. A fallen branch that could be used as a stick or a club. Then he picks up a stone or a pebble. He uses his stick to hit the stone, and suddenly a whole myriad of bat and ball games, or club and ball games, or stick and ball games have originated. One of them is cricket, to be sure, with croquet, golf, hockey, hurling, shinty, tennis, and a whole raft of others like the Scandinavian games of brännboll and pesäpallo. In addition, there are three sports sometimes classified (quite wrongly) as cricket's "family"—baseball, rounders, and stoolball.

It must be said, and this is something upon which all sources agree, that there is no evidence of cricket having evolved from another sport. Also, vice-versa, there is no evidence of any other sport evolving from cricket. The idea of using a club to hit a smaller object has been around since children first played games, but we simply don't know which, if any, of those ancient pastimes was the direct ancestor of cricket.

That's it for now, apart from the source list below. Next time, I'll say more about the perceived origins of cricket. If you're still with me, thank you for your time, and for reading.

---

Sources

I'm listing here many of the printed and online sources I've found useful in my researches. Some of these are virtually unobtainable, but worth the price if you can get them. The list isn't exhaustive, and I will amend or expand it from time to time. As in any field of study, some sources are generally better and more reliable than others, but sometimes the "others" contain nuggets of specific information that the generics have overlooked. It's a case of finding what you can, and then deciding what to use.

Recommended

John Arlott

• Altham, H. S (1962). A History of Cricket, Volume 1 (to 1914). George Allen & Unwin.
• Ambrose, Don (2007). Researches. Don Ambrose.
• Arlott, John (1984). Arlott on Cricket (editor David Rayvern Allen). Collins.
• Ashley-Cooper, F. S (1900). At the Sign of the Wicket (1742–1751). Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game.
• Ashley-Cooper, F. S (1924). Hambledon Cricket Chronicle, 1772–1796. Jenkins.
• Ashley-Cooper, F. S (1929). Kent Cricket Matches 1719–1880. Gibbs & Sons.
• Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians (1981). A Guide to Important Cricket Matches Played in the British Isles, 1709–1863. ACS.
• Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians (1982). A Guide to First-Class Cricket Matches Played in the British Isles. ACS.
• Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians. Research. ACS.
• Bateman, Anthony (2003). More Mighty Than The Bat, The Pen. British Society of Sports History.

  "Crusoe"

• Birley, Derek (1999). A Social History of English Cricket. Aurum Press Ltd.
• Bose, Mihir (1990). A History of Indian Cricket. Andre-Deutsch.
• Bowen, Rowland (1970). Cricket: A History of its Growth and Development. Eyre & Spottiswoode.
• Bowen, Rowland (1965). Cricket in the 17th and 18th centuries. Wisden.
• Britcher, Samuel (1790–1805). A list of all the principal Matches of Cricket that have been played. MCC.
• Buckley, G. B (1935). Fresh Light on 18th Century Cricket. Cotterell.
• Buckley, G. B (1937). Fresh Light on pre-Victorian Cricket. Cotterell.
• Caple, S. Canynge (1959). England versus India: 1886–1959. Littlebury & Co. Ltd.
• Collins, A. R. (2016). Historical Calendar (great for Julian Calendar dates).
• CricketArchive.
• The Cricketer (1921 to 1994) via CricketArchive.
• Cricket: A Weekly Record of the Game (1882 to 1914) via ACS.

  Arthur Haygarth

• Frith, David (1978). The Golden Age of Cricket, 1890–1914. Lutterworth Press.
• Guha, Ramachandra (2001). A Corner of a Foreign Field – An Indian History of a British Sport. Picador.
• Harte, Chris (1993). A History of Australian Cricket. Andre Deutsch.
• Haygarth, Arthur (1862). Scores & Biographies, Volume 1 (1744–1826). Lillywhite.
• Haygarth, Arthur (1862). Scores & Biographies, Volume 2 (1827–1840). Lillywhite.
• James, C. L. R (1963). Beyond A Boundary. Hutchinson.
• Knox, Malcolm (2012). Never A Gentleman's Game. Hardie Grant.
• Leach, John (2008). From Lads to Lord's.
• Leach, John (2008). Classification of cricket matches from 1697 to 1825.

  Pelham Warner

• Major, John (2007). More Than A Game. HarperCollins.
• Marshall, John (1961). The Duke Who Was Cricket. Muller.
• Marylebone Cricket Club (2017). The official Laws of Cricket. MCC.
• Maun, Ian (2009). From Commons to Lord's, Volume One: 1700 to 1750. Roger Heavens.
• Maun, Ian (2011). From Commons to Lord's, Volume Two: 1751 to 1770. Martin Wilson.
• McCann, Tim (2004). Sussex Cricket in the Eighteenth Century. Sussex Record Society, Lewes.
• Mote, Ashley (1997). The Glory Days of Cricket. Robson.
• Nyren, John (1998; first published in 1833). The Cricketers of my Time. Robson Books.
• Old Ebor—Cricket From the Dim and Distant Past. WordPress.
• Playfair Cricket Annual. Playfair Books Ltd (and others). Various editions from 1948.
• Preston, Norman (editor) (1963). Wisden Cricketers' Almanack. 100th edition. John Wisden & Co. Ltd.
• Pycroft, James (1854). The Cricket Field. Longman.
• Rae, Simon (1998). W. G. Grace: A Life. Faber & Faber.

  Roy Webber

• Raiji, Vasant (1986). India's Hambledon Men. Tyeby Press.
• Ranjitsinhji, K. S (1897). The Jubilee Book of Cricket. Blackwood.
• Robertson-Glasgow, R. C (1966). Crusoe on Cricket. Pavilion Books.
• Swanton, E. W.; Plumptre, George; and Woodcock, John (editors) (1986). Barclays World of Cricket. Willow Books.
• Terry, David (2008). The Seventeenth Century Game of Cricket: A Reconstruction of the Game. SportsLibrary.
• Thomson, A. A (1962). Cricket: The Golden Ages. Sportsman's Book Club.
• Underdown, David (2000). Start of Play. Allen Lane.
• Waghorn, H. T (1899). Cricket Scores, Notes, etc. (1730–1773). Blackwood.
• Waghorn, H. T (1906). The Dawn of Cricket. Electric Press.
• Wanostrocht, Nicholas (1845). Felix on the Bat. Eyre & Spottiswoode.
• Warner, Pelham (1946). Lord's, 1787–1945. Harrap.

  John Wisden

• Warner, Pelham (1950). Gentlemen v. Players, 1806–1949. Harrap.
• Webber, Roy (1951). The Playfair Book of Cricket Records. Playfair Books Ltd.
• Webber, Roy (1958). The County Cricket Championship. Sportsman's Book Club.
• Webber, Roy (1960). The Phoenix History of Cricket. Phoenix House Ltd.
• West, Peter (editor) (1948). Playfair Cricket Annual. 1st edition. Playfair Books Ltd.
• Williams, Charles (2012). Gentlemen & Players—The Death of Amateurism in Cricket. Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
• Wilson, Martin (2005). An Index to Waghorn. Bodyline.
• Wisden Cricketers' Almanack. John Wisden & Co. Ltd (and others). Various editions from 1864.
• Wisden Cricketers' Almanack (online archive). Selected articles from all annuals—hosted by ESPNcricinfo.
• Wynne-Thomas, Peter (1997). From the Weald to the World. Stationery Office Books.

Anyway, these works have all been useful, and I recommend them.

But, wait! There's always one...

The WikiBin

I subscribe to the Universal Law that THERE IS ALWAYS ONE, and you may have noticed that my recommendations do not include the appalling "any idiot can edit" rubbish that springs up in all Google searches. Cricket content in the WikiBin is unreliable, and often very badly written.

It started okay back in the early 2000s, but standards have fallen alarmingly since the mid-2010s. Now, it is no longer a surprise to see such howlers as "an elven-aside match"—sourced to Tolkien, no doubt, as it can only mean no elves were playing. On Planet Earth, cricket and football matches are eleven-a-side, as all intelligent people know. Countless good editors have voted with their feet.

To be fair, there are still a handful of good editors, but there is only so much they can do, and their efforts are overwhelmed by the incompetence and blockheaded stupidity of certain self-ordained experts who know neither what they are doing nor what they are talking about. I should also mention the toxic atmosphere within the so-called "community".

The best thing to do on Google is shut the WikiBin, and check the other results.

top of page The Origins of the Game

---