The Life and Times of the Immortal Victor Trumper: A Correction

Peter Kettle | 7:32am GMT 27 March 2025

The volume of papers presented at the Victor Trumper symposium in Sydney during 2015 has been reviewed by ”Archie Mac” on this website back in September 2017. The book recently released under the title of Young Vic prompted me to look over Roger Page’s contribution to this volume again, his piece being headed Trumper in Print. In an otherwise highly informative and fine piece of writing (spanning 8 pages), the seven words that formed the ending to the following paragraph struck me as being rather odd:

“Considering Trumper’s celebrity status – he was as famous in his day as Don Bradman during 1930s and 1940s and Shane Warne in more recent times – it seems incredible, at least viewed today, that no books by or about him were written during his lifetime. But cricket books were a rare commodity during the Golden Age, only Griffin’s Bat and Ball, the East Melbourne history and the short-lived annuals and periodicals published in this era – and his {Trumper’s} lifetime was to be shortened.” 

(This paragraph appearing on pages 165/6: italics added.)

I soon realised that the effect of this addition has been to water down, and be at odds with, the first sentence while simultaneously making a blunder into the bargain. Trumper died when having already played 255 first-class matches through to the age of 36 and 4 months, with 15 full seasons in Australia plus five overseas tours. And it is reasonable to expect that – even with good health – Trumper would have had no more than some 4 to 6 more years of effective participation in first-class cricket left in him, by which time he would have been in his early-forties. 

Moreover, Trumper might well have been reluctant to carry on beyond his late-thirties as I gather that – by this time – his family could no longer support him and he would have been in need of paid employment. He was classified as an “amateur” cricketer and didn’t receive a salary or match fees for playing the game (though he did benefit monetarily from his testimonial match, held in February 1913, and received a share of the gate receipts to cover expenses and potential losses). Further participation in cricket would therefore have eaten into time potentially spent working and being remunerated for it. 

Whilst it is stated on the front cover of this volume of papers that it is “Edited by Ronald Cardwell”, following the title page there is a note listing a trio of editors, including Julee Gould and Peter Lloyd besides Mr Cardwell himself – though without matching particular papers to one or more of these individuals. However, as Mr Cardwell was the de facto Editor-in-Chief he should take responsibility for this editorial gaff, even if he wasn’t the underlying culprit.

And it is not only the author – Roger Page – who realises that his submitted manuscript has been altered. It transpires that Mr Cardwell now recognises that an editorial gaff has, indeed, been made. Personally, I think its effect is such as to cast a shadow over Roger Page’s piece as a whole. 

Accordingly, the main aim of this note of “Correction” is to alert those who have acquired a copy of this volume to this particular matter, and suggest they go to the top of page 166 and cross out the offending final seven words. They might then view Roger’s piece in a more favourable light. (And if a reprint is contemplated in due course, the error can then be corrected – by omission.)

Finally to say this: it is possible that Mr Cardwell himself has no surviving note of the unfortunate addition actually being made. Sceptics might wonder if the addition came to be made by the unobserved intervention of an unknown external party. Those among them who believe in the existence of aliens, and think there is credible evidence for them occasionally having visited this Earth, might suspect that this has been the real source of the seven additional words. I have to concede that perhaps aliens have made such visitations. Yet it is a long bow to think that certain aliens have known about this particular cricketer and the fact that his life was cut short. For one thing, they would have needed an ability to read the English language and also have managed to get hold of a relevant document. So I feel that we can discount such a possible cause of the addition.