Search by property

Jump to navigation Jump to search

This page provides a simple browsing interface for finding entities described by a property and a named value. Other available search interfaces include the page property search, and the ask query builder.

Search by property

A list of all pages that have property "Warning" with value "<p>  </p>". Since there have been only a few results, also nearby values are displayed.

Showing below up to 46 results starting with #1.

View (previous 50 | next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)


    

List of results

    • 1840.6  + (<p> </p> <p> </p>)
    • 1823.6  + (<p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <div class="table_turner_container"> </div>)
    • 1867.26  + (<p> </p> <table class="stat<p> </p></br><table class="stats"></br><tbody></br><tr></br><td></br><p><span>Note:</span> Protoball is not familiar enough with 1860s humor to determine exactly how authentic this report is. Bare ball-shooting guns sound pretty iffy.  But 1867 was the start of Base Ball Fever, and we guess someone might have tried mounted forms of the game.</p></br></td></br></tr></br></tbody></br></table>one might have tried mounted forms of the game.</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>)
    • 1867.30  + (<p>7</p>)
    • Clipping:Postwar hostility  + (<p><br/>On the 16th inst., the<p><br/>On the 16th inst., the Union Club, of Richmond, a new organization, comprised of residents of Richmond, sent a challenge to the Richmond Club, the message sent being as follows:<br/>ROOMS UNION BASEBALL CLUB<br/>Richmond, Va., September 16, 1866</p><br/>SECRETARY OF THE RICHMOND BASEBALL CLUB:</p><br/>Sir:–Having been authorized, I hereby challenge the Richmond Club to a match-game of baseball, single game, to be played at any time between 5th and 20th of October, and according to the rules of the National Association. Please advise me of the action of the club as early as possible. Should the club think proper to decline the challenge, you will oblige me by stating plainly the reasons therefor.</p></br><p><br/>Respectfully, J. F. Dooley,<br/>Corresponding Secretary of the Union Baseball Club.</p></br><p><br/>The following was the gentlemanly(!) reply:</p></br><p><br/>RICHMOND, September 22, 1866<br/>J. F. DOOLEY, SECRETARY UNION BASEBALL CLUB:<br/>SIR:–Your communication of the 21st [sic] instant is before me. I am instructed to state that the Richmond Baseball Club does not desire, and will not play the Union Club a single game. We are not or do we expect to be members of the National Baseball Convention. Our reason: We are Southerners. Hoping this may be satisfactory. I am,</p></br><p><br/>J. V. BIDGOOD,<br/>Secretary Richmond Baseball Club</p>Convention. Our reason: We are Southerners. Hoping this may be satisfactory. I am,</p> <p><br/>J. V. BIDGOOD,<br/>Secretary Richmond Baseball Club</p>)
    • 1836c.12  + (<p><span style="color: #333333; f<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></br><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></br><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></br><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>o-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;"> </span></p>)
    • 1840s.46  + (<p><span>Dating this item as "1840s" is speculative, and turns on the ages of the Freeman<em> </em> Arguments for an alternative dating are welcome.  </span></p>)
    • 1860.20  + (<p><span>Richard Hershberger a<p><span>Richard Hershberger and others doubt the veracity of this story. He says [email of 1/30/2008] that one other account of that day says that Abe played hand-ball, and there is mention of this being the only athletic game that Abe was ever seen to indulge in. (But also see [[1830s.16]] on a younger Abe Lincoln and town ball in the 1830s).</span></p></br><p><span>Source [2] above contains other accounts of the nomination story.  They support the idea that Lincoln "played ball" the day before the nomination, but it seems fairly clear that the game played was "fives," presumable a form of handball.  For a very helpful submission from Steve Gietschier on the content of <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Herndon's Informants,</span> see the Supplemental Text, below.</span></p></br><p> </p></br><p> </p></br><p><span> </span></p>t, below.</span></p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p><span> </span></p>)
    • 1850c.54  + (<p><span>The limited availabil<p><span>The limited availability of positions played in early game reports and summaries makes the establishment of Adams's claim to have been the first to play the shortstop position tenuous. A page in the Knick's Game Books from July 1850 show that in one practice game he played "F" for "Field" instead of his usual position of "behind" (catcher), and so may be when he first took the position. Otherwise, there is no inidication in a primary source that he played the position until 1855.</span></p>rce that he played the position until 1855.</span></p>)
    • 1393.1  + (<p><strong>Caution:</strong<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>e verse is not authentic. Email from Dale Sproule, Publisher/Editor.</p>)
    • 1857.23  + (<p><strong>Caution:</strong> The arrival of the New York style of play was still a year into the future.</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>)
    • 1787.1  + (<p><strong>Caveat:</strong&<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>se Ball</span>, Volume 2, number 1 (Spring 2008), pages 35-36.</p>)
    • 1700.1  + (<p><strong>Caveat:</strong> The Wikipedia entry is has incomplete citations and could not be verified.</p>)
    • 1847.7  + (<p><strong>Caveat</strong>: Angus McFarland has not been able to verify this account as of November 2008.</p>)
    • 1845c.24  + (<p><strong>Note </strong><p><strong>Note </strong>that this enigmatic excerpt does not directly attribute to Crapo these references to ballplaying.  </p></br><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></br><p> </p>; <p> </p>)
    • 1854.14  + (<p><strong>Note:</strong> This assumes that the elevens at Haverford (see #[[1848.8]] above) don't qualify for this honor.</p>)
    • 1854.10  + (<p><strong>Note:</strong> This brochure seems to imply that New York rules governed this game, but does not say so.</p>)
    • 1854.3  + (<p><strong>Note:</strong> We have other no evidence that the term "<strong>Massachusetts Game</strong>" was actually in use as early as 1854.  The earliest it is found is 1858.</p>)
    • 1856.7  + (<p><strong>Note</strong>: Whaaaat? See #1828.1 above, and the <a href="http://retrosheet.org/Protoball/Rounders">Rounders Subchronology</a>.</p>)
    • 1858.27  + (<p>A claim that the Live Oaks, or the Olympics, preceded the Flour Citys appears above - see #1855.14.</p>)
    • 1845.1  + (<p>About 30 years later, reporter Wi<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></br><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></br><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>sacred places, while evolutionary stories provide no palpable, particular thing as a symbol for reverence, worship, or patriotism."</p>)
    • 1857.26  + (<p>According to Peter Morris in <<p>According to Peter Morris in <em>Base Ball Pioneers </em>(McFarland, 2012, p. 253), the first club, the Excelsior, took the field in 1858. Source: William R. Griffith, <em>The Early History of Amateur Baseball in the State of Maryland</em>, (Baltimore, n.p.1997), p. 4.</p> of Maryland</em>, (Baltimore, n.p.1997), p. 4.</p>)
    • 1860.1  + (<p>According to the <em>Boston Herald</em> (April 9, 1860), the MABBP convention drew only 33 delegates from 12 clubs.</p> <p> </p>)
    • 1859.17  + (<p>Anachronism alert-- in 1862 Princeton was known as the College of New Jersey.</p> <p>See also item #[[1857.23]] </p>)
    • 1848.19  + (<p>As of 2016, recent scholarship ha<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></br><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> provide no palpable, particular thing as a symbol for reverence, worship, or patriotism."</p>)
    • 1799.1  + (<p>Block advises, August 2015: </<p>Block advises, August 2015: </p></br><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>e insight into the era than we do 216 years later.</span></p>)
    • 1862.9  + (<p>Caveats: Admission was charged in<p>Caveats: Admission was charged in 1858 for the Brooklyn-New York games at the Fashion Race Course, Queens, which was enclosed but not a 'ball field'. </p></br><p>             Before the Union Grounds, there were no ball field enclosed for the purpose of charging admission.</p>rging admission.</p>)
    • 1829.5  + (<p>Citing the makeup of these player<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></br><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>>Base Ball</span>, volume 1 number 2 (Fall 2007), pp 28-29.</p>)
    • 1840s.45  + (<p>Dating this entry in the 1840s is highly arbitrary.  It is included only because it suggests that round ball and wicket were locally seen as common past activities at this fine college as of 1871.</p>)
    • 1830s.33  + (<p>Dating this remembered practice to the 1830s is somewhat arbitrary, as the writer's age in 1847 is unknown.  Locating the practice in NY State is also uncertain.</p>)
    • 1850s.60  + (<p>Dating this throwback game to the 1850s is arbitrary.  Correction welcomed.</p>)
    • 1858.10  + (<p>David Nevard raises vital questio<p>David Nevard raises vital questions about this account: "I have my doubts about this item - it just doesn't seem to fit. 1) The club names don't sound right. The famous club from Medway was the Unions, not the Medways, and I haven't seen any other mention of Union Excelsiors. 2) Lowry's evolution of the longest Mass Game does not mention this one. He shows the progression (in 1859) as 57 inns, 61 inns, 211 inns. It seems like a 4 day game in 1858 would have lasted longer than 57 innings. 3) It's a recollection 50 years after the fact. $1000, 10,000 people." [Email to Protoball, 2/27/07.]</p>,000 people." [Email to Protoball, 2/27/07.]</p>)
    • 1850s.31  + (<p>Douglass is not explicit about the period referenced here, but that it is before the Civil War.</p>)
    • 1862.86  + (<p>Dup of 1862.20?</p>)
    • 850c.1  + (<p>Even Homer nods</p>)
    • 1853.2  + (<p>In 2016, an 1845 edition of this book was discovered, and Protoball began to explore translations of its text.  See http://protoball.org/1845.29.</p>)
    • 1853c.1  + (<p>It appears that Fuess, the 1917 a<p>It appears that Fuess, the 1917 author, viewed this game as <strong>rounders</strong>, but neither the Mowry description nor the Hardy reference uses that name. It is possible that Fuess was an after-the-fact devotee of he rounders theory of base ball. The game as described is indistinguishable from <strong>round ball</strong> as played in New England, and lacks features [small bat, configuration of bases] used in English rounders during this period.  The placement of the batter, the use of "tallies" for runs, and the 50-inning game length suggests that the game played may have been a version of what was to be encoded as the <strong>Massachusetts Game</strong> in 1858.</p>lt;strong>Massachusetts Game</strong> in 1858.</p>)
    • 1841.15  + (<p>It is not clear that this article<p>It is not clear that this article reflects actual wicket play, or interest, in New Orleans in 1841.</p></br><p>The text appears have been 'borrowed' from a Cleveland paper: See [[1841.17]]</p></br><p>However, [[1844.13]] shows that a New Orleans wicket club did call a meeting in 1844.</p>[[1844.13]] shows that a New Orleans wicket club did call a meeting in 1844.</p>)
    • 1859.2  + (<p>It is not clear whether this qualifies as the first intercollegiate game by modern rules.</p>)
    • 1830c.28  + (<p>It is, of course, difficult to specify a reasonable date for a fictional account like this one.</p>)
    • 1862.17  + (<p>It would be desirable to locate a<p>It would be desirable to locate and inspect the Josephus Clarkson diary used in Twombley [A, above.]. Clarkson, described as a ship's chandler before the war, does not yield to Google or Genealogy bank as of 6/6/2009 or 4/3/2013.  John Thorn's repeated searches have also come up empty.  Particularly questionable is Clarkson's very early identification of Cartwright as an originator of the NY game.</p>tor of the NY game.</p>)
    • 1859.5  + (<p>John Thorn, on July 11, 2004, advised Protoball that "a challenge to the citation is a photo at the NBL of the Bostons of San Francisco, with a handwritten contemporary identification 'organized 1857'."</p>)
    • 1836c.11  + (<p>John Zinn: <span>It feels t<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 Thorn suggests, important.</span></p>s John Thorn suggests, important.</span></p>)
    • 1857.39  + (<p>Lacking enclosed fields, turnstiles or ticket stubs, attendances are only visual estimates.</p>)