Misplaced Pages

Talk:Great Game

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dan100 (talk | contribs) at 15:44, 22 December 2004 (Title of article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:44, 22 December 2004 by Dan100 (talk | contribs) (Title of article)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This article has been cited as a source or otherwise recommended by the mainstream press. See Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages as a press source for details. Also see , an article by "Global Politician".

Geographic range

Didn't "The great game" refer to control of the entire region? Not just afghanistan, but the whole of the middle east... -Martin

I've heard a bit about it, and read a bit - but not a lot. My impression was that it was a conflict between Russia & Britian, centered in Afgastan. I am planning to do some more reasearch on it, and post bits and pieces. So far what I have read seems to relate just to Afganistan both past and present. Ie: the great game has not ended. Karl

There were more regions where the Great Game was 'played' than just in Afghanistan. There was also Persia and Tibet, where British and Russians tried to get their influence. Andre Engels 14:10, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)


I too think that Afghanistan was only one part – albeit a central one – of the ‘Great Game’. In their (excellent) ‘Tournament of Shadows’ Meyer and Brysac include the whole political history of Anglo-Russian (both Imperial and Soviet) Asian expansion from the ‘Kim’ level right up to the Foreign Office level. In addition to this they mention Napoleons alexandrine fantasy of Asiatic conquest, the Kaiser’s bid for Near Eastern dominion, as well as a Nazi expedition to Tibet – in search of more Aryans. Finally they conclude with the arrival of the United States in the 40’s taking over from the British – ‘the more things change, the more they stay the same’. However in his seminal work “the Great Game’ – which is even better than ‘tournament’ – Peter Hopkirk gives a more limited definition of the Great Game as the Anglo-Russian rivalry central Asia. (Incidentally this is a notoriously problematic geographical description – even the Royal Central Asian Society eventually gave up and changed their name to the Royal Society for Asian Affairs) A rivalry which concluded in 1907, with the Anglo-Russian Entente – any Central Asian rivalry that occurred after that was something else. Kipling on the other hand, in Kim, said; “When every one is dead the Great Game is finished. Not before.” Which for my money is the best description…Kris Radford 1 September 2004.

Title of article

Why did you move The Great Game? it is The Great Game not a Great Great. Jooler 18:25, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Note: the article was originally at The Great Game. I moved the article to Great Game around October 11, 2004, where the article sat for the next month and half until someone—I'm assuming Jooler—moved it to The Great Game around November 25. Lowellian (talk)] 17:49, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)
For the same reason that the United States page is at United States rather than The United States, even though we say "the United States is a nation" not "United States is a nation." The article the isn't used for terms in Misplaced Pages page titles except in book titles, for example. Lowellian (talk)] 21:05, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)
Or, if you want another example, for the same reason that the Cultural Revolution page is at Cultural Revolution rather than The Cultural Revolution. Lowellian (talk)] 21:07, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

Completly wrong analogies. Jooler

How so? You don't explain how they are "completely wrong analogies". Was not the Great Game a historical event, like the Cultural Revolution? Lowellian (talk)] 21:20, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
Or maybe you characterize the Great Game as a "rivalry and strategic conflict" (to use the words directly from the introductory sentence of the article)? Well, the Cold War is also a "rivalry and strategic conflict", and that article is located at the Cold War rather than The Cold War. The Cold War may be the Cold War rather than just any cold war, but the article is still located at Cold War. Lowellian (talk)] 21:27, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)

"The Great Game" is never is never referred to without the definite article it is an historical period like like The Great War - The Blitz - The Age of Enlightenment - The Age of Reason -The Sixties. Jooler 20:31, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

You say "never referred to without a definite article"? Neither is the United States, nor the Cold War, and yet the articles are where they are. Regarding your examples: The Great War redirects to World War I, so that says nothing about Misplaced Pages policy. And I think both The Age of Enlightenment and The Age of Reason violate the Misplaced Pages standard and should be moved.
Which is the correct sentence?
This strategic conflict was the Great Game.
or:
This strategic conflict was The Great Game.
The former is correct, as you will find if you read any historical work on the subject, including the references cited at the end of the article.
Lowellian (talk)] 07:07, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)


Neither sentence is correct. This strategic conflict, known as "The Great Game" ,was .... would be correct Jooler
  • Simply put, it was called "The Great Game", and so should the article be called too. Dan100 15:43, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)