h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Well ... my cobber, the newly-joined researcher Walter of Colne, proposed a discussion on how the middle ages are like a sport. So here we are asking the question: how are the middle ages like a game of cricket?

Some possible answers (that are not necessarily my opinions) which come to mind are:

1. For long periods of time, only one team seems to be in the field of play with occasional spurts of energy from others. Eg. the Merovongian Period, the Carolongian Period, the Viking Period - where are all the other people in Europe at the time?

2. Some would say, and not me of course, that watching cricket is less interesting than watching paint dry. Similarly, and not me again, some would make such a statement about studying the middle ages!

3. The umpires were not always fair. Since when was it possible to rely on the fair judgement of one of the popes in a matter of international diplomacy?

4. ..... and here is where the rest of you come in!

Come on folks ... step up to the wicket and make a few runs!

Onja Warney!

Bran.

Bran,

What a great initiative. I'm still smarting from a rebuke received earlier today from one of our site colleagues, so I am anxious not to appear picky .... BUT (a) what is boring about watching paint dry which, in my view, is an incredibly soothing vehicle to inner calm, especially if accompanied by say Mozart's clarinet quintet and (b) I must dissociate myself from any inference that Popes are anything other than infallible. As to whether or not Popes are/were fair in their judgements - being fair or otherwise is a romantic but decidedly unreal notion that has very little to do with anything in either the Middle Ages or cricket.

That finishes my opening spell. I'm glad we are not batting first - this deck looks like it will give help to those hitting the seam.

Walter.

Welcome to the funny farm, Walt!

To start off with, I'm surprised (although I really shouldn't be) that others have had the same idea I had.

I don't know exactly how cricket relates to "the middle ages" per se, but I have come to the conclusion that there are historical analogies for cricket.

I see a game of cricket as being very much a form of siege warfare. The two batsmen are like knights of old defending their castles (the stumps) from attack. And they do look like knights in a way, with armour and a broadsword.

The fielding team is actively engaged in a siege, a war of attrition.

I'm not exactly sure how running between the creases fits into the analogy - changing the guard, perhaps?

Gooday Mustapha,

Your reputation precedes you. A lovely analogy. I had never thought of batsmen as knights, but it really works, what with their protective gear and helmets. And in cricket commentary terms, the stumps are often referred to as the 'castle'. The chivalry aspect comes into it as well, with terms such as a 'maiden over'. And cricket, perhaps above all other sports, still hangs on to a largely illusory concept of chivalrous conduct, fair play, that it is how you play the game that is important. Anyone who has ever spent time in the pavillion will recognise the similarity to the Round Table or the castle keep. Take care,

Walter.

Chivalry and proper deportment is important to the game. Betting scandals aside (and who's to say a couple of earthier knights like Sir Kay or Gawain wouldn't have placed a wager on the outcome of a battle?) you *are* expected to behave on the field.

Look at the brawls and slanging matches in American baseball - you will *never* see that in cricket.

What a pair of fast-bowlers you pair are! What great analogies - cricket as a knight's tournament along with the accoutrements of proper chivalric conduct kind of works.

I was wondering of either of you know what the actual origin of the game is - where it started, when was it (or an earlier incarnation) first played, whoes fault is it that we have it on television interrupting high cultural content like Funniest Home Videos (I do not watch that by the way!).

A further thought - is the running between the creases like the jousting lists (or whatever they are called) of a tourney - you know, knights charging at each other on horses with whacking great big bits of pointy timber? Batters do carry smaller albeit blunt bits of timber and use them a bit differently, but still.

Toodle-pip
Bran.

Gooday Mustapha,

It is true that first class cricket has not yet witnessed brawls on the paddock, or at least not as far as I know, although the notorious confrontation between Lillee and Javed was very close, and there have been innumerable 'menacing' shirtfronts and jostlings in recent years. But I think you are being too charitable in claiming that cricket doesn't have slanging matches. The Australian team has turned sledging into an art form, and just about every international that I can recall from the past few years has involved at least one and often more fiery exchanges out in the middle. However, I doubt that medieval chivalric values excluded baiting one's opponents or trying to unsettle them with some earthy aggro. For instance, that most beloved and revered English king, Henry V, before Harfleur, told the besieged inhabitants that if they did not immediately surrender, the English army would:

"Defile the locks of your shrill-shrieking daughters; your fathers taken by the silver beards and their most reverend heads dashed to the walls; your naked infants spitted upon pikes .... What say you? Will you yield and this avoid?"

Admittedly this is Shakespeare putting words into Henry's mouth, but it seems to me at least that he was probably doing no more than reflecting the values of the age as he understood them. So when an Australian fast bowler tells an incoming batsman that his throat, not his stumps, are the target, the chivalry involved, if any, has an ancient and illustrious antecedent. Take care,

Walter

Wars of words between opposing sides are to be expected. Aspirations to chivalry are just that - something to aspire to - and being human, most will fall short of others or their own expectations.

But still, there is an overriding respect for certain protocols, eg not dissing the umpire, or, to go back to old Hank 5, hospitable receiving foreign envoys. Also some things just go beyond the pale, and are reprehensible in war or cricket, like underam bowling or killing an enemy's pages and squires.