A narrative history

• For origins of cricket – see here
• Timelines see – General history; early cricket; cricket generally
• For women’s Cricket – see here

FOLK CRICKET – 1550 to 1720

1550 to 1600 – earliest references

Overview

Christopher Brookes¹ refers to the period before 1660 as the era of the folk game. He writes:

…cricket, like all folk-games, was originally played by ordinary people², and rarely, if ever, by gentlemen. Sometimes children would make up the nucleus of players, but on saint’s days and other festivals entire communities would take part – women as well as men, the old as well as the young. In many cases, the opposite sides in a game were all the able-bodied inhabitants of neighbouring villages.

Many will find this description appealing, but sadly we do not have very much direct evidence to support it, or indeed to refute it. Indeed, we have very few references to bat and ball games before 1600 and such as they are, they mostly consist of hints in various ancient manuscripts and illustrations of bat and ball games being played in medieval Europe. None can be pinned down as being cricket, but they set the scene of games being played from which cricket was to emerge.

An important exception however is the game of cricket as played by Stoneyhurst college until around 1860, a game which seems to be fossilised version of the game that was established before the founding of the school in 1593. Beyond that, most studies of cricket in this era have concentrated on two matters, both of which involve a great deal of speculation and no prospect of certainty.

• The game or games from which cricket evolved
• The origin of the word cricket

These matters are given further consideration on this page, but here we will start with the first certain reference to cricket.

The Guildford Reference

In 1598, during a hearing over a disputed plot of land, a Surrey coroner named John Derrick, testified that about 50 years earlier he and some school friends “did runne and play there at Creckett and other Plaies”. This entry in a Guildford Court Book is dated January 15, 1598 and is the first certain record of cricket being played anywhere.

Stonyhurst Cricket

In 1593 the Jesuit, Fr Robert Persons, set up a English Catholic school in St Omer for the schooling of the sons of recusant aristocracy and gentry who, following the reformation, were unable to receive an education in line with their religion in Elizabethan England. Most of the pupils came from the South East. The College of St Omer operated until 1762 when, forced to leave what was by that time part of France, it moved first to Bruges, then, Liege (1773) and finally to the supportive and out of the way estate of Stoneyhurst Lancashire in 1794.

The school boys and their teachers who returned to England brought with them their own games including that of cricket.  But it was a form of the game preserved by geographical and cultural distance from the evolution of the game in England, one that almost certainly  dates back some way beyond the College’s foundation in 1593. It is the Coelacanth of Cricket, a survivor from a distant age when all other traces have disappeared. It is also virtually the only clue we have as to what the game may have been like in these very early days.

The following is an extract from T.E. Muir’s Stonyhurst, a modern history of the college

“ On the eve of Ash Wednesday ‘Matches’ boys, subdivided into teams of five, were organised and assigned to their respective cricket stones ranged in a line twenty yards from the back of the garden wall. Bats, three feet in length tapering to an oval head 4 ½ inches in width, were made by villagers in the winter months.  Some consisted entirely of ash, but most had an alder-head spliced on to an ash-handle. Balls which had a core of cork – sometimes with india rubber at the centre – were covered with worsted, soaked in glue and baked before the fire by the boys.  They were then taken to the shoemakers for casing with two hemispheres of hard leather sewn to form a thick seam around the ball.  Pitches were dominated by the single wicket stone; 27 yards away stood the ‘running in’ stone, placed at a slightly oblique angle to give a clear path for the striker.  The ‘running mark’, from which the bowler released the ball underarm and with the seam, was a further three yards away. ‘Play’ was called for the first ball, but thereafter ‘the bowler is at perfect liberty to bowl as quickly as he likes, and if the batsman be not ready, need allow no time’.  At the wicket he was assisted by a ‘second bowler’ and three ‘faggers’ or fielders. Amongst other things the second bowler was required ‘to have the cricket-stone free from all books, bats etc, which may in any way prevent him striking the stone with the ball’. The batsman, who retired after 21 balls, was obliged, from the nature of his implement to slog.  The hard surface of the Playground was well adapted for this and ‘greeners’ could be dispatched 100 yards across its length into the gardens beyond the Penance Walk. Runs were scored by racing to and from the running-in stone and, on the final ball, counted double.”

Clearly, the essentials of cricket are all here, with the exception of dismissal by being caught –

• A team game, not an individual game
• Equipment:
  • Bat
  • Hand-sized ball
  • Wicket
• Playing roles
  • Batter
  • Bowler
  • Fielder
• Progress of game
  • The ball being delivered to the batter by an opposing bowler from a fixed point
  • Runs being scored by striking the ball and running
  • Batters having an innings which is eventually curtailed by the ball striking the wicket
• Outcome of game being determined by comparing runs scored by each team

Rowland Bowen (in Cricket: A History) also drew the connection that St Omer, where the school was based, it is also where an an even earlier possible reference to cricket occurs, in a manuscript dated 1478. This however seems like a cul-de-sac; there is no other suggestion that France was the origin of the Stonyhurst game, especially as the College was not generally subject to much by way of local influence.

Clearly, from the description of the game and the appearance of the implements, there were significant changes before the game appeared in the broader historic record in the Eighteenth Century. It looks very much as if, while the rest of the game developed, the St Omer College game which later became Stonyhurst, stayed still. This game is a tantalising glimpse of Sixteenth Century Cricket.

---

1600 to 1720 – The very early days

Overview

In his book on cricket history, More than a Game, John Major calls, the Seventeenth Century, the lost Century of Cricket. You can see why, records of cricket before 1700 are few and vague. In terms of a general picture, it can be said that there were growing instances of references to cricket as the century progressed and these were concentrated in the Weald – that is to say, the area between the North Downs and the South Downs in the counties of Sussex, Kent and Surrey. It is still sporadic though – there are no reports of matches, no accounts of technique, no surviving equipment, no paintings. What there is, is a few records from court proceedings of where cricketers offended against the law. As Benny Green says, the one one sure sign of a an activities growing popularity is that someone should try to ban it. Indeed; these references are clearly the tip of the iceberg and point to a game that was on the move.

Also, it was finding its way into schools for the sons of aristocrats – Derek Birley speculates that it reached Winchester by 1647 and St Paul’s, London by 1655³, and, as discussed above, we know that is was adopted by what is now Stoneyhurst before 1600. Percy Thomas speculates that cricket may have reached the attention of the aristocracy in the Interregnum, the period when Cromwell was Great Protector, and the Aristocracy, being essentially persona non grata, retreated to their country retreats and perhaps saw more of rural entertainments. This may be the case, but the Stoneyhurst experience suggests that other forces were at work before then. I personally would suggest that it was that cricket games first came to the notice of the upper echelons via the school system and that is how their interest was sparked. By the end of the century, we do have a record of a match played for stakes and so the development of an elite game was under way.

Involvement of the aristocracy

A commonly held view is that cricket was a game played, maybe invented by boys that was taken up by village populations and and then appropriated by the aristocracy at the start of the Eighteenth Century. For example:

The appropriation of cricket by the gentry around the start of the eighteenth century shaped a new era in the game’s development. Their growing involvement initiated a fundamental shift in cricket’s social and cultural dynamics which altered general perceptions of the game.⁴

From the Early Cricket Timeline, it is clear that the monied classes were already taking an interest in the game. The 1629 incident mentions ‘persons of quality’. In 1652 John Rabson esq seems to be a member of the gentry. The 1655 reference has John Churchill playing cricket at St Paul’s School and the 1666 and 1667 references also involve the upper orders. It seems to me that there never was a time when cricket was confined to the rural working classes, something that may be explained by the education system which, while excluding the very highest and the poorest in society, was otherwise unsegregated. As I explain elsewhere, I think there is a possibility that cricket was devised in a structured way within the school system around 1550, possibly by a schoolteacher and spread from there and appealed to all classes of society.

The Interregnum and the Restoration

The interregnum is the period from 1649 and 1660 when the monarchy was in abeyance and when, for the most part, Oliver Cromwell ruled England as Lord Protector. Cromwell brought with him a Puritan philosophy which saw the playing of games of trivial and unnecessary. If such games games took place on a Sunday, they were positively sinful. The aristocracy kept a low profile during this period, retreating to their country estates, perhaps engaging more with the rural population, or perhaps not. Either way, this was not a great time for organised sport, as is seen by the number of persecutions.

After Cromwell’s Death, Charles was soon recalled from Continental Europe to become Charles II and the atmosphere of the country changed. Known as the Merrie Monarch, his accession to the throne was accompanied by general euphoria which encouraged activities such as sport, gambling and the return of the Aristocracy to the city. It has often been thought that they brought cricket with them, but John Major makes the point that there is no evidence of any cricket being played in London before 1700.⁵

Map of growth of cricket in the Seventeenth Century

This map is taken from The History of Cricket by Peter Wynne-Thomas (1997).

---

PROFESSIONAL CRICKET – 1720 to 1800

1720 to 1760 – Cricket spreads to London

Overview

This era is one of the most important in cricket history, but still one where we have very little information about the players themselves. The aristocracy became involved, often as players but more particularly as patrons or financiers of teams and arrangers of matches. As the century developed, matches would often be paid for a stake of a significant sum which would be supplemented by by placed on the outcome. Patrons were keen to have the best players represent them and were prepared to pay to get them. The excitement of these challenge matches filtered through to the public who turned up to watch them playing, drank beer and placed bets. Effectively, it was the birth of the elite game.

The major cricket ground of the period was the Artillery Ground in Finsbury in Central London, here team known as the London Club, based at the Star and Tavern in Pall Mall played numerous matches over the period and attracting large crowns. The Star and Garter patrons took responsibility for the laws as well, producing the first codification in 1744. Unruly behaviour was occasionally observed at matches however and this played a part in the decline of the game in the capital, much as hooliganism played a part in the decline of football around the 1970s and 1980s.

In 1756 the seven years war began involving most of the European great powers, fought primarily in Europe and the Americas. This had a depressing effect on London and resulted in may of the aristocracy retreating to their country residences and the consequent decline in London cricket. It was out of this lull in the game’s fortunes that set the scene for the birth of the Hambledon Club as the main force in the land.

Amateurs

Amateur status is often taken to mean simply someone who does something without being paid for it. In cricket though, and in other areas of life as well, the term is often shorthand for ‘gentleman amateur’. It referred to a category of player who played at elite level but without being paid remuneration, merely expenses. The implication was that their private means were sufficient to support them with the unseemly necessity of requiring to be paid for their time.

This distinction between amateur and professional was encapsulated by the Gentlemen v Players fixture which was first arranged by Lord Frederick Beauclerk in 1806 and played annually from 1829 to 1962. Peter Wynne-Thomas calls this “the most divisive of any long-running sporting event held in England” and you can easily see why.

The rural game

While the central story of this period is the virtual invention of elite cricket, the first professional team sport and one with a carefully codified set of rules, that is not to say that rural cricket was in decline. It should be remembered that the vast majority of the population lived in a rural setting, maybe 90% and for cricket to thrive and grow it had to make its own impact there. Aristocrats split their time between their country seats and town houses and rural and were keen to take their interests with them wherever they happened to be.

Cricket continued to thrive in the Weald and beyond. Indeed, the star players for the London matches were generally imported from the most successful rural teams, Slindon, a small village near Arundel, West Sussex, being the most important. This team, financed by Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond, featured Richard Newland, probably the most famous cricketer of his era. Such players came to London so they could earn money from their skills and frequently took part in both eleven a side contests and multi-player single wicket matches. Slindon defeated London twice, and then came what has become known as the Slindon Challenge. They issued an press notice to say it would play any parish in England. London did not accept. Only Addington and Bromley were able to accept. Matches against these teams were arranged at the Artillery Ground: against Addington on 12 and 13 September; and against Bromley on 14 September. We know that rain intervened and no result or match report has survived of either game, even though the games are known to have created huge interest.

Other teams from the Weald thrived during this period as well. There was Dartford and Bromley from Kent and Chertsey, Addington and Bromley from Surrey. More generally, village cricket was spreading across the land and quote from G.M. Trevelyan in 1747 is particularly revealing:

Village cricket spread fast through the land. In those days before it became scientific, cricket was the best game in the world to watch, with its rapid sequence of amusing incidents, each ball a potential crisis! Squire, farmer, blacksmith and labourer with their women and children came to see the fun, were at ease together and happy all the summer afternoon. If the French noblesse had been capable of playing cricket with their peasants, their chateaux would never have been burnt.

Another indication of the presence of village cricket is the volume known as A Fine Day in Hurstpierpoint: The Diary of Thomas Marchant 1714-1728. This is a record of the activities of a yeoman farmer and he includes attendance at the following games of cricket, generallly in the company of others:

• 30 April 1718 Bolney
• 4 June 1719 Sandfield, Hurstpierpoint
• 18 May 1721 Henfield
• 25 May 1721 Hurstpierpoint v. Henfield
• 3 June 1721 Hurstpierpoint v. Steyning
• 6 June 1721 Steyning v. Hurstpierpoint
• 10 June 1721 Ifield v. Hurstpierpoint
• 22 June 1721 Hurstpierpoint v. Cowfold
• 26 June 1721 Cowfold v. Hurstpierpoint
• 26 April 1722 Broadwater Green
• 10 May 1722 Newtek v. Hurstpierpoint
• 14 May 1722 Henfield Boys v. Hurstpierpoint Boys
• 23 May 1722 Hurstpierpoint v. Newtek
• 1 June 1722 Henfield
• 10 August 1724 Penshurst, Tunbridge and Wadhurst v. Dartford

County cricket

In his book on cricket history, Rowland Bowen poses the question which he considers one of the great puzzles of the game “why county cricket? Why did great cricket become centred on the counties in a period when the counties certainly meant a great deal socially, but when travelling conditions made county cricket an extremely difficult enterprise to organise?”⁶

The answer he provides is linked to the great patrons of the game. They made challenges then sought out the best players the could find to represent them, and they came from a wide area. The same of the county was then very often chosen for the team to add prestige to the match and thereby increase the publicity for the occasion. These were essentially though loose groupings of players picked for the occasion and, of course returned to if the performed well. They were though representatives of the patron or patrons, not really of a county in the sense we would understand today.

My view is that rather too much emphasis is sometimes placed on the name a team appeared under in the press, when in fact this was something of only peripheral importance; the name was not formal matter and true county cricket, where there was some kind of mechanism in existence to ensure that teams represented the best players of a County lay some years beyond the Eighteenth Century.

---

1760 to 1785 – The rural interlude

Overview

This is the period when the centre of cricket moved from the Capital of England to the remote hilltop, at Broadhalfpenny Down, Hambledon, fifteen miles from Winchester. It is something which encapsulates the romanticism of the game like nothing else. While there has been much debunking of the so-called Hambledon myth in recent years – writers like John Major and Roland Bowen have quite rightly pointed out that cricket had a long history before the Hambledon period and have also said the Hambledon Club was really Hampshire in all but name, and sometimes in name as well. Nonetheless, the story of this club and its times is so well recorded that it has become the dominant narrative of the era.

Map of Eighteenth Century cricket in the South-East

Cricket further North

It was around this time that we have evidence of cricket starting to move North. Some may possibly be attributable to the movement of schoolteachers around the country. But one factor that was certainly present was the movement of aristocrats to North Nottinghamshire. The Pelham family inherited the Dukedom of Newcastle and moved from Sussex to Nottinghamshire early in the century. Also around that area were the The Duke of Portland who, according to his estate accounts, was making cricket bats in the 1740s and the Duke of Kingston who had played cricket at Eton in 1751.

The earliest recorded match in Nottingham was against Sheffield in 1771. In the 1780s, there is cricket recorded in Leicestershire as well. The game in the north was not based in the patronage system of the South, but on enthusiasts getting teams together and playing on common land. Perhaps for this reason, there is much less information available regarding the players of those matches. The North-South split in cricket can be traced back to these times.

---

1786 to 1800 – London reascending

As the Hambledon period faded London re-emerged as the centre of the elite game, the epicentre being focused on the Marylebone Cricket Club, founded by members of the Star and Garter Club in Pall Mall. After flirting with the ground at White Conduit Fields, the Star and Garter patrons commissioned cricket-playing entrepreneur Thomas Lord to find a private ground for them closer to the centre of London. He came up with the first Lord’s Ground at Dorset Square in 1787 and that is where our story begins to draw to a conclusion.

The great players of the second generation of Hambledon teams were all drawn to the capital, including players such as Lumpy Stevens, Tom Walker and Silver Billy Beldham. The Green Man and Still at 335 Oxford Street was where players met and it and was also patronised by the leading bookmakers of the day.

The end of the Eighteenth Century though was overshadowed by the ongoing Napoleonic Wars and this had the effect of depressing activity in London and sending the Aristocracy and Gentry back to their Estates. 1800 then was a difficult time for cricket, especially the elite game, with a declining number of matches and seemingly falling interest. The Association of Cricket Statisticians say, in their booklet A Guide to Important Cricket Matches played in the British Isles 1709-1863, that ‘…in the period 1810 to 1814, the game was all but dead’. They quote the Nottingham Review of 17 September 1813 which says that ‘The manly and athletic game of cricket for which the boys of Sherwood have been so long and justly famed, it was thought, had fallen into disuse, if not disgrace…’. No so, of course, but the resurgence of cricket is a story for elsewhere.

---

Further Reading

Almost anything in the books section of the library would be of relevance. Of those, the following text are available on this site:

• The Cricket Field – Rev James Pycroft – (1859)
• Cricket and Community in England: 1800 to the Present Day – Peter Davies (Author), Robert Light – Extract relating to Eighteenth Century
• Early History of Cricket – E.D.R. Edgar – from the Barclays World of Cricket
• A History of Cricket – HS Altham and EW Swanton (1925)
• The Early History of Cricket – S.M. Toyne – 1955
• Arlott and Truman on Cricket – edited by Gilbert Phelps – two chapters of Arlott’s history which deal with the game before 1800

Beyond these, the two modern books that deal with the period in the most detail are those by David Underdown and John Major. Reading this site would put you in a sound position to absorb the interesting ideas they promote.

Footnotes

1. Brookes – chapter 2 ↩︎
2. In fact, the form of the game suggested by McCann bears some resemblance to a form of the game played in the island of Trobriand in Eastern Papua New Guinea and described in this film commissioned by the Papua New Guinea government in 1976: Trobriand Cricket: An Ingenious Response to Colonialism ↩︎
3. Birley page 10 ↩︎
4. Peter Davies (Author), Robert Light (2015) page 3 ↩︎
5. Major page 33 ↩︎
6. Bowen page 50 ↩︎