In 1938 the cultural historian Johan Huizinga identified the figure of homo ludens, or the human being at play. In his theory he describes people as playing creatures, who learn the cultural skills and rules of social coexistence through play. Play shapes and creates culture and promotes socially relevant discourse.
Games today are more widespread than ever before.

Millions of visitors attend exhibitions of video games and sales figures show that digital games are played by people of all generations. At the same time there are more and more fans of analogue games. Many people spend some of their leisure time on live-action or pen-and-paper role-playing games, living history enactments or simply board games. Sales figures have been rising for years and games are increasingly created on a crowdfunding basis with the involvement
of their future players.

There is no denying the general and historical relevance of games, or their function as a vector for shaping images of history. At the same time there is a risk that their narratives blur the line between fantasy and actual history. So what role can games with a historical background play for the analysis of real medieval history? How much fiction can a game include while still offering a realistic interpretation of the past? And can games be considered as a historical source in their own right?