Foot-ball : $b its history for five centuriesVincent, James Edmund
History
Foot-ball : $b its history for five centuries
Vincent, James Edmund
Football
So much for the opinion of the pious Stubbs, who, it must be
recollected, was a Puritan, and one of the party who afterwards almost
succeeded in entirely putting down football during the supremacy of
their opinions. Perhaps it will be as well to finish the hostile
criticism with the opinion of King James I. of England, who, in his
Basilicon Doron, a manual of education written for his son, after
speaking in praise of various other sports, saith, “but from this count
I debar all rough and violent exercise, as the foot-ball meeter for
laming than making able the users thereof.” Still James I., taking him
for all in all, was something of an old woman, and can hardly have been
expected to look with favour upon a “charge” or a “scrimmage.” Added to
this, we have something more than a suspicion that his Royal Highness,
while posing as an original writer on education, was drawing a great
many of his views from Sir Thomas Elyot; for the Basilicon Doron bears
a most suspicious resemblance in many places to the work of the earlier
writer.
Perhaps the best description we have of the game at this period comes
from Carew’s “Survey of Cornwall,” published in 1602. Carew gives a
long account of the game of “hurling,” which was another form of the
football we have described above, with the addition that the players
were allowed, if they liked, to carry sticks and hit the ball towards
the goal, besides hurling, kicking, hitting, or running with it. We
thus see, as would naturally be expected, that hockey and football
started as the same sport but gradually “differentiated” into separate
games, according to the true Darwinian law of progress. Hurling is
described as a match between two large parties of men, in which each
side strives to get the ball as best it can up to the adversaries’
goal. Carew, who is a more genial critic than Elyot, Stubbs, or King
James I., describes hurling with much carefulness and acuteness of
observation. “For hurling to goales there are 15, 20, or 30 players,
more or less, chosen out on each side, who strip themselves to their
slightest apparel and then join hands in ranke one against another; out
of these ranks they matche themselves by payres, one embracing another,
and so passe away, every of which couple are especially to watch one
another during the play.” What football-player knows not the phrase,
“Mark your men”? “After this, they pitch two bushes in the ground, some
eight or ten feet asunder, and directly against them, ten or twelve
score paces off, other twain in like distance, which they term goales,
where some indifferent person throweth up a balle, the which whosoever
can catch and carry through the adversaries’ goals hath won the game.”
The hurlers also, we learn, were not allowed to _but_ or _handfast_
(charge or collar) under the girdle, or to “deale a foreballe” _i.e._,
to pass forward to one nearer the goal than the player, in which
passage we have the only explicit reference to “off-side” play which
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account