Property:Warning

From Protoball
Jump to: navigation, search

This is a property of type Text.


Pages using the property "Warning"

Showing 25 pages using this property.

(previous 25) (next 25)

1

1393.1 +<p><strong>Caution:</strong> The editor of <em>The Canadian Newcomers Magazine</em> informed us on 1/10/2008 that the Tendulkar piece "was strictly an entertainment piece rather than an academic piece." We take this to say that the verse is not authentic. Email from Dale Sproule, Publisher/Editor.</p>
1500s.2 +<p><strong>Caveat:</strong> "Stobbal" is usually used to denote a field game resembling field hockey or golf; thus, this account may not relate to stoolball <em>per se</em>.</p>
1630.4 +<p>We are uncertain whether the game was a running game or a field-hockey=-type game also called "stoball." </p>
1700.1 +<p><strong>Caveat:</strong> The Wikipedia entry is has incomplete citations and could not be verified.</p>
1720c.4 +<p>One wishes there was more evidence that this form of "base" was a ball-game, and not a game like tag or capture-the-flag.  If "base" was a ball-game, this report of native American play nearly 3 centuries ago is certainly remarkable. </p>
1750s.3 +<p>The writer present no evidence as to the earliest dates of known play.</p>
1787.1 +<p><strong>Caveat:</strong> Collins - and Wallace -believed that the proscribed game was shinny, and Altherr makes the same judgment - see Thomas L. Altherr, "Chucking the Old Apple: Recent Discoveries of Pre-1840 North American Ball Games," <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Base Ball</span>, Volume 2, number 1 (Spring 2008), pages 35-36.</p>
1799.1 +<p>Block advises, August 2015: </p> <p><span style="color: #333333; font-family: Arial; font-size: small;">That Cassandra Cooke, writing in the late 18th century, would have her readers believe that baseball was part of the vernacular in the early 17th century is certainly interesting, but since one contemporary reviewer labelled her book "despicable" there is absolutely no reason to think she had any more insight into the era than we do 216 years later.</span></p>
1823.6 +<p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <div class="table_turner_container"> </div>
1829.5 +<p>Citing the makeup of these players as differing from that of early town ball players' reports, and seeing the 1829 account as more of a morality tale than a reliable report, Richard Hershberger (email of 10/31/12) discounts this item as an account of the origins of Philadelphia town ball.</p> <p>In 1831 two organized groups, which later merged, played town ball: for a succinct history of the origins of Philadelphia town ball, see Richard Hershberger, "A Reconstruction of Philadelphia Town Ball," <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Base Ball</span>, volume 1 number 2 (Fall 2007), pp 28-29.</p>
1830c.28 +<p>It is, of course, difficult to specify a reasonable date for a fictional account like this one.</p>
1830c.30 +<p>We have assigned this to a date of ca. 1830 on the basis that players in their sixties seem to have played this (same) game as young adults.  Comments welcome on this assumption.  Were the southern shores of Lake Erie settled by Europeans at that date?</p>
1830c.31 +<p>Dating this item as "circa 1830" is highly speculative, and turns on the ages of the writer and his intended readers.  Arguments for an alternative dating are welcome.  </p>
1830s.16 +<p>There is some ambiguity about the city intended in this recollection.  Springfield IL and New Salem IL seem mostly likely locations.</p>
1831.1 +<p>The "firsts" tentatively listed above are for the US play of baserunning games other than cricket.  Further analysis is needed to confirm or disconfirm its elements. </p>
1836.11 +<p>John Zinn: <span>It feels to me that the author is conflating a number of different things (his role, for example) into a club that played in the late 1830's.  However even if he is off by 10 years, a club of some kind in the late 1840's would be something new and, as John suggests, important.</span></p>
1836c.12 +<p><span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">There is considerable uncertainty as to the dating of this item at c1836..</span></p> <p><span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">John Zinn further researched the players named in the 1871 account, and wrote on 7/28/2015:  "It feels to me that the author [whom John identifies as John W. Pangborn] is conflating a number of different things (his role, for example) into a club that played in the late 1830's. However even if he is off by 10 years, a club of some kind in the late 1840's would be something new and, as John [Thorn] suggests, important." John Zinn also reported 7/28/2015 that Bentley was 31 years old in 1836, and that Edge was 22; John W. Pangborn, the suspected 1871 author, was born in 1825 so was only 12 in 1837.</span></p> <p><span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">Further commenting on the credibility of this 1871 account, Richard Hershberger [19cbb posting, 7/28/2015] adds: "<span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">Going from general trends of the day, the [1871 author's] use of the word "club" is very likely anachronistic.  Organized clubs playing baseball were extremely rare before the 1840s in New York and the 1850s everywhere else.  On the other hand, informal play was common, and local competition between loosely organized groups is well attested.  My guess is that this was some variant or other. As for plugging, its mention increases the credibility of the account.  Even as early as 1871, plugging was being forgotten in the haze of the past.  Old-timers describing the game of their youth therefore routinely mentioned plugging as a distinctive feature. So putting this together, this looks to me like a guy reminiscing about quasi-organized (at most) play of his youth, using the anachronistic vocabulary of a "club." </span><br /></span></p> <p><span style="color: #333333; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;"> </span></p>
1837.1 +<p>Note that while Wheaton calls his group the "first ball organization," in fact the Philadelphia club that played Philadelphia town ball had formed several years earlier.</p>
1845.1 +<p>About 30 years later, reporter William Rankin wrote that Alexander Cartwright introduced familiar modern rules to the Knickerbocker Club, including 90-foot baselines.  </p> <p>As of 2016, recent scholarship has shown little evidence that Alexander <span class="sought_text">Cartwright</span> played a central role in forging or adapting the Knickerbocker rules.  See Richard Hershberger, <em>The Creation of the Alexander <span class="sought_text">Cartwright</span> Myth (</em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Baseball Research Journal</span>, 2014), and John Thorn, "<em>The Making of a New York Hero" dated </em>November 2015, at <a href="http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2015/11/30/abner-%3Cspan%20class=">cartwright/.">http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2015/11/30/abner-<span class="sought_text">cartwright</span>/.</a></p> <p>John's concluding paragraph is: "Recent scholarship has revealed the history of baseball's "creation" to be a lie agreed upon. Why, then, does the legend continue to outstrip the fact?  "Creation myths, wrote Stephen Jay Gould, in explaining the appeal of Cooperstown, "identify heroes and sacred places, while evolutionary stories provide no palpable, particular thing as a symbol for reverence, worship, or patriotism."</p>
1845.16 +<p>Richard Hershberger adds that one can not be sure that these were the same sides that played on October 21/25, noting that the <em>Morning Post</em> refers here just to New York "players", and not to the New York Club.</p>
1845c.24 +<p><strong>Note </strong>that this enigmatic excerpt does not directly attribute to Crapo these references to ballplaying.  </p> <p><strong>Note</strong> that there is reason to ask whether these games, or the ones described in [[1853.7]], were known as "rounders" when they were played.  As far  as we know, his sources did not use the name rounders, and Fuess may be imposing his assumption, in 1917, that base ball's predecessor was formerly known as rounders.  His book observes, elsewhere, that in warm weather students "tried to improve their skill at the rude game of "rounders," out of which, about 1860, baseball was beginning to evolve."     </p> <p> </p>
1845c.26 +<p><span>"In the case of the Redburn </span><span>poem, a strong competing interpretation concludes that HM is not </span><span>its author. I can't argue either side of Howes' hypothesis since </span><span>I have not read her work, and I only have a couple hundred words </span><span>of notes on the topic, but I think we all readily understand that </span><span>the attribution of Melville as author of this four canto poem is </span><span>not universally accepted." 19cbb post by Stephen Hoy, July 6, 2004</span></p>
1847.13 +<p>Rounders and Feeder texts are cloned from 1841.1, as is 1843.3</p>
1847.7 +<p><strong>Caveat</strong>: Angus McFarland has not been able to verify this account as of November 2008.</p>
1848.19 +<p>As of 2016, recent scholarship has shown little evidence that Alexander Cartwright played a central role in forging or adapting the Knickerbocker rules.  See Richard Hershberger, <em>The Creation of the Alexander Cartwright Myth (</em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Baseball Research Journal</span>, 2014), and John Thorn, "<em>The Making of a New York Hero" dated </em>November 2015, at <a href="http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2015/11/30/abner-cartwright/.">http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2015/11/30/abner-cartwright/.</a></p> <p>John's concluding paragraph is: "Recent scholarship has revealed the history of baseball's "creation" to be a lie agreed upon. Why, then, does the legend continue to outstrip the fact?  "Creation myths, wrote Stephen Jay Gould, in explaining the appeal of Cooperstown, "identify heroes and sacred places, while evolutionary stories provide no palpable, particular thing as a symbol for reverence, worship, or patriotism."</p>
(previous 25) (next 25)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Project
Toolbox