rorkesdriftvc.com :: View topic

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:38 am

Those contributors long enough in the tooth to recall my old postings concerning the cricket gear found among the detritus of the Isandlwana battlefield may find this morning's news of more than passing interest.

It would appear that, after all these years, the fragile remains of a willow blade have been discovered in an eroding donga, broadly in the vicinity of the previous finds of the pads (recorded by Montague) and stumps (Rider Haggard). Initial reports have suggested a hand-made Gunn & Moore, although I'm not 100% sure if even that illustrious firm predates 1879.

Despite this stunning discovery, however, the perennial question will always remain as to whether it came from the 24th's regimental gear (with Coghill, Bromhead, Pope and Symons being among the better known practitioners) or was owned by, say, Bradstreet, an accomplished colonial player who learnt his skills here at King's School, Canterbury. I have offered to help with any clues but apparently the investigations being made this morning at both Eshowe and Pietermaritzburg are presently focussing on the text of a directive made by Chelmsford the day before Ginghindlovu. Why this should be entirely escapes me.

Peter

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 8:50 am

Peter

That's remarkable. It's a shame that we will probably have to wait another year for the next discovery.

Peter

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:23 am

Peter and Peter, I have an 1870s original photograph of Bromhead, Penn Symons and some other members of the 24th cricket team if you'd like to email me privately for a scan. Ron Sheeley

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:47 pm

Hi,
As a Nottinghamshire CCC member and keen life-long cricketer, I have to dampen your enthusiasm, I'm afraid. It is my understanding that Gunn and Moore have only been making bats since 1885.

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 4:44 pm

Quite so, Peter!

Ron. Very many thanks for the offer - and great to hear from you. I wonder, however, whether this might be the same photo as one I have a copy of already, kindly provided to me by JY a few years back, taken - I understand - during the Secunderabad posting. (Sitting on old concrete steps, three bats in photo?)

Tony. Dead right - as I said, I had serious doubts that G&M were in business by 1879. So it's not from Trent Bridge, then.

As our very welcome but rather watery sun today has now passed the meridian, I'm not sure I'm any longer at liberty to reveal more here, but in view of the fact that this is not yet so for our friends in the western hemisphere, I may just get away with it. Apparently, the latest forensic news from KZN suggests the autograph printed on the blade by the maker can almost - but, frustratingly, not quite - be made out, and at present is limited to "A.... ...l" Got your Wisden handy?

Peter

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:23 pm

Maybe my Grandfather might have known of it's origins.

He wasn't averse to a using good bit of English willow both against the natives and the 'English' invaders.

He was one of the pioneers of first class cricket in S Africa and captained the Natal XI v Walter Read's England XI not too long after G&M's startup.

Sean

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:55 am

Sean

Is there anything your ancestors were not involved in Question

Dawn

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 12:16 pm

er....I have to say I'm a learnin' my cricket to you pros here.(beisbol is hard to shake you know?) Anyway, I'd wonder if perhaps come forensic tests on that "willow blade" could help identifying its link to the soldier-players. For example, were all bats made out of the same wood by co's at the time? Go on teach me cricket...... Wink

...

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:23 pm

Sean

Dawn's right, they do get everywhere! What was his name?

Rich

Teach cricket to an American? Now that really will have to move down to the off-topic section!!! Mind you, it has been done before (so they say). Only joking - a century or so ago the best fast bowler in the world was an American. (Is the cricket World Cup being played on your doorstep at present not accessible on some obscure TV channel?)

I fear Peter W (above) was the only one yesterday to consign my posting to its correct category - but does that mean that this country is the only one in the English-speaking world which continues to mark yesterday's date? Surely not! If so, my reference to the day before Ginghindlovu was in vain, as was the "revelation" about the autograph.

I'll just disappear for a year now!

P.

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:45 pm

Peter Ewart:

Please confirm that you are joking, in re: disappearing for a year. (I've done much the same with Alan C.)

As an American, I often require specific confirmation. I don't yet quite get the "British humour."

Barbara

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:48 pm

Peter...

Well look I don't know about my other American friends here and the milieu they're in but I am truly and deeply sorry to say that in the indubitably sporting environs where I hang my hat alas me boy there's just no talk of the "bowling" game 'round here! Jai alai maybe but crick.... Nada, nilch, nein, no...nope.....wickets? wickets? What is dis thing called wickets? Sticky? and "sticky" too? World Cup'o'cricket? You kiddin', they have that?? Ha whaddya know? And they have "sticky"wickets no less! Yeah, yorkshire pudding is here and the Beatles but getting the populace to hug cricket next to their hearts is like selling sand to those in the desert! Peter please forgive us our errant ways and our failure to understand at bottom another agricultural game for the outdoors.... Wink

.... I know some things around here at "not cricket"....and how do you bat against googlys? and do ya hit for the country?...... Wink

....

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:58 pm

Well done Peter,
you certainly caught a few there.

Don't forget, though, you're in danger of turning into a pumpkin down here !

Bit of a giveaway with the signature, though.

My Grandfather was George William Sweeney,
son of the 'Buffs' bandmaster, Robert William Sweeney.
Captain of cricket and rugby at Maritzburg College as well.

They played the original form of rugby, with heaps of players, and when you 'scored', placing the ball over the opposition line, you then got a 'try' at goal. Hence the name, try.

Don't know about you guys but I've got heaps of ancestors.

Sean

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:31 pm

Peter E.

I note the date of your original post was 1st April so I trust you have not been making sport of us. You may have to explain this to Barbara!

KIS

Posted: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:31 pm

Peter,

I've done a brief bit of research and can find no Test cricketers of that era with the letters you suggested. However, if I have time I'll take a more detailed look. One rather disconcerting aspect is that I cannot locate any autographed cricket bats before the 1930's, or any bat-makers with similar lettering. I'm sure there were some signed bats going much further back, but they seem a rarity Is it possible that the bat is in fact quite recent, I mean in the last 50 or so years?

Tony.

Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:17 am

I haven't logged on for a couple of days but have just noticed that this thread may be dead but won't lie down. I thought I'd killed it off on Sunday afternoon.

As I had fully expected, the solution surfaced very quickly on Sunday morning - just 12 minutes after my own original posting, in fact. Many thanks for your input Tony. Before further research is undertaken, however, I ought to draw your attention again to Peter W's breakfast time post on Sunday morning, the first sentence of my final para on Sunday afternoon, my further posting on Monday evening and, finally, both Sean's and Keith's contributions later that night.

I've done my best, so have Peter, Sean and Keith. The rest have, I have no doubt, merely rolled their eyes and (wisely) kept clear, and I don't blame them! I shall now (again!) retire rapidly, ducking and weaving as I go.

For the moment, we must rely once more on Montague and Haggard only.

Peter Wink