Idleness and playing games

Idleness had been an Item on the pre-1327 agenda of the view, when It specifically referred to people with no

visible means of earning a living, such as those 'who continually haunt taverns'. i The court keeping guide produced for the manors of St Alban's Abbey similarly viewed with suspicion 'any man who goes about loafing by night, commonly haunting the tavern and who is no rich proprietor or rich merchant ' . 2 The records of the

Carshalton view show a similar concern about idlers who spent time playing games. The offence of playing with dice was first recorded in Carshalton in 1428 when three men were described as communes lusores ad dales. ^ the charge may have resulted from a statute of 1388, which was confirmed by a later statute of 1409-10, banning idle games and encouraging more useful pastimes like archery. * Predictably, the men who were fined for playing games

in Carshalton - Adam Parys, Thomas Trewman and Thomas Buxsale - were also involved in cases of assault and

t h e f t .

In the 1440s the new offence of playing handball came before the view when Thomas Buxsale, who had been fined for playing dice, was also fined for playing handball with his fellow tithingman 'contrary to the statute', s Although the game was called handball Cpila manualis^, it was also a form of football, and legislation against playing it was issued at intervals during the fifteenth century. Only two were fined at the meeting in April 1446, but the number had increased to eight by the

following September. There are signs that the view had some difficulty in enforcing the statute, since the tithingmen were fined for not presenting the offenders. The failure of the tithingmen to present them is hardly surprising, since Thomas Buxsale, the tithingman, was one of the players. There was also a further difficulty because John Carter, a juror of the view, refused to co­ operate with his fellow-jurors in imposing a fine on the players. ® The fines of 2d each did not deter the players and eleven were again fined in the following year for playing handball ’contrary to the s t a t u t e ’. ?

Further statutes were issued in the fifteenth century to restrict the playing of games. One of these was issued in 1477 and shows how the legislators connected the playing of games with violent behaviour. It declared that no-one should play unlawful games like dice, quoits or tennis, but that all should practice archery for the defence of the land and that ’new and unprofitable games, such as Closh, Kailes, Half-bowl, Hand-in and Hand-out and Queckboard’, should be forbidden because they resulted in murder, robbery and other crimes. ®

In 1537, two men in Carshalton, Thomas Roger and Thomas Wright, were fined for playing with dice ’contrary to the s t a t u t e ’ and, although there is no evidence for violence

as the result of the game, Wright had previously been fined for theft, s

Because of the emphasis on archery as a useful pastime, the view was made responsible for ensuring that the butts were in good order, lo However, the frequency of the orders to repair the butts suggests that they were usually out of order. This is largely substantiated by a survey of shooting grounds in and around London in 1561 which found that land was being enclosed with tall hedges and wide ditches 'for private gain', making archery impossible.il The survey suggested that people preferred to play games instead of practising archery. This was confirmed at the Carshalton view in 1565, when an order was made that various gentlemen, who were allowing their servants to play prohibited games within their houses, should encourage them to practice archery

instead.

At the same meeting, John F r o m o n d , who was probably one of the gentlemen referred to in the order, was presented at the view for having a bowling alley at his house where various people, including servants, were playing bowls and setting a bad example to others. 12 Playing bowls

and having bowling alleys were banned by various statutes, but nobles and gentlemen were allowed to play under licence. The patent rolls recorded the issuing of

licences for bowling alleys 'for the recreation of gentlemen and other fit persons of the better sort', excluding servants, vagabonds, Idle and masterless persons. i ^ As Fromond did not have such a licence and was allowing his servants to play games, the view ordered him not to repeat the offence and Imposed a penalty against further offences. At the same time, an associate of Fromond, Robert Harman, was also fined for allowing people to play card games at his house. i*

In 1571, 17 men were fined 12d each for being in the habit of playing games and, In 1582, the tlthlngmen presented that all the residents had been playing games 'at one time' and should be fined Id each. i ^ This suggests that they may have been playing a rowdy game of handball or football. After this date, there were no further references to playing games In the records of the v i e w.

References :