1845 Knickerbocker Rules: Difference between revisions

From Protoball
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Change Article Category from Original Works to Original Analytics)
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Article
{{Article
|Title=1845 Knickerbocker Rules
|Title=1845 Knickerbocker Rules
|Version=
|Article Category=Original Analytics
|Article Category=Original Analytics
|Is Featured=No
|Is Featured=No
|Sort Order=-100
|Sort Order=-100
|Description=Evolution or Revolution? A Rule-By-Rule Analysis of the 1845 Knickerbocker Rules
|Description=Evolution or Revolution? A Rule-By-Rule Analysis of the 1845 Knickerbocker Rules
|Digger=Jeffrey Kittel,
|Digger=Jeffrey Kittel
|Article Date=2013/04/05
|Article Date=2013/04/05
|Document=1845-Knick-Rules.pdf
|Document=1845-Knick-Rules.pdf
|Text=1
Version 1.0, April 2013
Evolution or Revolution? A Rule-By-Rule Analysis of the 1845
Knickerbocker Rules
By Jeff Kittel1
(Note: This draft comprises Part One of a two-part examination of the main rules
of base ball as of about 1860. It covers the Knick Rules, and Part Two will
examine the major 1857 rules reformulation in 1857. We invite comments,
critiques, and relevant new data; we intend to post successive version on
Protoball over time.)
Summary
The rules of baseball set down by the Knickerbocker Club of New York in
1845 represent an evolutionary moment in the development of the modern game
of baseball rather than a revolutionary invention of a new game. A rule-by-rule
analysis of the Knickerbocker rule set that has come down to us shows that most
of the rules that have previously been considered revolutionary, or an invention
of the club, have antecedents in older bat and ball games. While both the 1845
rules and the Knickerbocker Club are historically significant, both are merely
parts of the evolutionary development of modern baseball rather than the starting
point of that development.
----
In the ongoing quest, during the late 19th and most of the 20th century, to
discover the singular moment at which point baseball was invented, the
Knickerbocker Base Ball Club of New York was in an enviable historical position.
Their substantial historical legacy, which historians have recognized for most of
1
Thanks to Larry McCray for helping design the “Roots of the Rules” Project and reviewing earlier drafts
of this research report.
2
the last century, rests largely upon two things. First, they left us a set of playing
rules which are largely accepted as the foundation of modern baseball.2
Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, they were not Abner Doubleday.
Not being Abner Doubleday was significant to early historians and
researchers who first looked into the origins of baseball in the United States in a
serious, scholarly manner. Any serious historian who took a look at the baseball
creation myth provided by the Mills Commission in 1905 immediately dismissed it
as the nonsense that it was.3
However, a story must begin somewhere and, if
baseball wasn’t invented by Doubleday, as the Mills Commission insisted, the
questions surrounding the origins of the game still remained unanswered. Into
this void of unanswered questions stepped the Knickerbocker Club, who would
assume the position of sire of the National Game.
The idea of the Knickerbockers as the originators of the modern game of
baseball is substantially more rational and evidenced-based than the Doubleday
myth, especially given the fact that the Knickerbocker Club actually played a form
of baseball. But many of the claims made about the club, upon which their
position of primacy rested, proved, in the end, not to be true. It was claimed that
the Knickerbockers were the first baseball club. While this was based upon the
best evidence available at the time, it turns out not to be true and we are
currently aware of several clubs that pre-dated the Knickerbockers and played
2
Protoball Chronology 1845.1 (http://protoball.org/1845.1)
3
For a scholarly debunking of the Doubleday myth, see Henderson, Ball, Bat and Bishop; Block,
Baseball Before We Knew It; or Thorn, Baseball in the Garden of Eden.
3
some form of baseball.4
It was claimed that the Knickerbockers were the first
organized club that had a set of by-laws but the Olympic Ball Club of Philadelphia
had a formal constitution by 1833.5
It was claimed that the Knickerbockers were
the first to codify the game of baseball but, based upon the testimony of William
Wheaton, we know that this is not true. Wheaton, a member of the
Knickerbocker Club, was, in 1837, a member of the Gotham Base Ball Club and
he claimed that, while a member of the Gothams, it “was found necessary to
reduce the rules of the new game to writing. This work fell to my hands…”6
We now know for a fact that the Knickerbockers were not the first baseball
club, that they were not the first club that had a formal, organized structure and
they were not the first club to set the rules of baseball down in writing. Given the
testimony of Wheaton, we could also argue that the Knickerbockers were not
even the first club to play the New York-style of baseball that gave birth to the
modern game. Yet they are still one of the most significant clubs in the history of
baseball for the simple fact that it is their rules that have survived. While there
were earlier, pre-modern baseball clubs and earlier, pre-modern sets of rules, it
is the Knickerbocker Rules of 1845 that have been handed down to us. William
Ryczek, in Baseball’s First Inning, writes that the Knickerbocker Rules represent
4
Thorn, John; “1843.6 Magnolia Ball Club Predates Knickerbockers”; Base Ball, Volume 5,
Number 1; p 89.
5
Hershberger, Richard; “1831.1 The Olympic Ball Club of Philadelphia”: Base Ball, Volume 5,
Number 1; p 77.
6
Brown, Randall; “1837.1 The Evolution of the New York Game – The Arbiter’s Tale”; Base Ball,
Volume 5, Number 1; p 83. Wheaton’s testimony originally appeared in the San Francisco
Examiner on November 27, 1887.
4
the “only documented, unbroken line between baseball as played in its current
form and any prior version of the sport…”7
So the argument that the Knickerbocker Club represents the spring from
which modern baseball flowed forth and that they should be credited with
originating the modern game rests on their 1845 rules and there is no doubt that
these rules are significant. In the seminal Baseball: The Early Years, the
Knickerbockers are described as having “blazed a path others were to follow”8
and Peter Morris has written that the club “unified all the multiple strands” of early
American baseball “into a single ‘regulation game.’”9
It is a fact that elements of
the 1845 rules are still used in the game today and the Knickerbockers are given
credit for introducing such elements as foul territory, tag-outs and three-out
innings to the game. But were these rules the original invention of the
Knickerbocker Club or did they have antecedents in earlier forms of American
baseball games?
In order to determine if the Knickerbocker Rules of 1845 were a
revolutionary step forward in the development of the modern game or simply an
evolutionary milestone in the long history of American baseball, it is necessary to
take a closer look at the rules themselves. Below you will find all twenty of the
Knickerbocker Rules as they were adopted on September 23, 1845:
1ST. Members must strictly observe the time agreed upon for exercise, and be
punctual in their attendance.
7
Ryczek, William; Baseball’s First Inning; pp 40-41.
8
Seymour, Harold; Baseball: The Early Years; p 16.
9 Morris, Peter; But Didn’t We Have Fun?; p 26.
5
2ND. When assembled for exercise, the President, of in his absence, the VicePresident, shall appoint an Umpire, who shall keep the game in a book provided
for that purpose, and note all violations of the By-Laws and Rules during the time
of exercise.
3RD. The presiding officer shall designate two members as Captains, who shall
retire and make the match to be played, observing at the same time that the
player's opposite to each other should be as nearly equal as possible, the choice
of sides to be then tossed for, and the first in hand to be decided in like manner.
4TH. The bases shall be from "home" to second base, forty-two paces; from first
to third base, forty-two paces, equidistant.
5TH. No stump match shall be played on a regular day of exercise.
6TH. If there should not be a sufficient number of members of the Club present at
the time agreed upon to commence exercise, gentlemen not members may be
chosen in to make up the match, which shall not be broken up to take in
members that may afterwards appear; but in all cases, members shall have the
preference, when present, at the making of the match.
7TH. If members appear after the game is commenced, they may be chosen in if
mutually agreed upon.
8TH. The game to consist of twenty-one counts, or aces; but at the conclusion an
equal number of hands must be played.
9TH. The ball must be pitched, not thrown, for the bat.
10TH. A ball knocked out of the field, or outside the range of the first and third
base, is foul.
11TH. Three balls being struck at and missed and the last one caught, is a handout; if not caught is considered fair, and the striker bound to run.
12TH. If a ball be struck, or tipped, and caught, either flying or on the first bound,
it is a hand out.
13TH. A player running the bases shall be out, if the ball is in the hands of an
adversary on the base, or the runner is touched with it before he makes his base;
it being understood, however, that in no instance is a ball to be thrown at him.
14TH. A player running who shall prevent an adversary from catching or getting
the ball before making his base, is a hand out.
6
15TH. Three hands out, all out.
16TH. Players must take their strike in regular turn.
17TH. All disputes and differences relative to the game, to be decided by the
Umpire, from which there is no appeal.
18TH. No ace or base can be made on a foul strike.
19TH. A runner cannot be put out in making one base, when a balk is made on
the pitcher.
20TH. But one base allowed when a ball bounds out of the field when struck.
The first thing that should be noted is that not all of the rules deal with
baseball as it is played on the field. The off-field rules, dealing with things such
as the behavior of club members, how teams were chosen and other extraneous
matters, are interesting and some study should be devoted to them. However,
for the purposes of this study, only those rules which deal with on-the-field
matters will be looked at. Also, it is interesting how much information about
game-play is left out of the rules. Morris notes that “many crucial items are
absent from the playing rules. Some of these omissions, such as the number of
players per side, were left out because the club chose to keep things as flexible
as possible. But other basic elements, including the direction of base-running,
the placement of fielders, and how a run was scored, are also left unspecified.
Their absence strongly suggests that the Knickerbockers’ rules were designed to
clarify disputed points rather than to spell out all the rules of the game.”10 This
lack of game-play information11 is significant and tells us that the core of the
10 Ibid; pp 29-30.
11 We could write another piece on the information that the Knickerbockers fail to provide us but we note
that they failed to record fundamental baseball rules such as how a run is scored or in what direction the
7
game the Knickerbockers were playing was reasonably well-known. It was not
necessary for the Knickerbockers to explain to people how to play baseball
because it was already an established and popular game.
Beyond that, it has been generally accepted that the rules the
Knickerbockers did establish, within the context of an already well known game,
were innovative and revolutionary. However, modern baseball historians such as
David Block, in Baseball Before We Knew It, and John Thorn, in Baseball in the
Garden of Eden, have, in reviews of the Knickerbocker Rules, challenged this
assertion. Presented below are those 1845 rules dealing with on-the-field-play
and evidence of antecedents to those rules. Reviewing these historical
antecedents should allow one to draw conclusions about the nature of the
Knickerbocker Rules. Based upon that evidence, one should be able to
determine if the Knickerbocker Rules of 1845 were a revolutionary step forward
that resulted in the creation of the modern game or if they only captured a
moment in the evolutionary development of the game.
Review of the Knickerbocker Rules of 1845
Rule 4: The bases shall be from "home" to second base, forty-two paces;
from first to third base, forty-two paces, equidistant.
bases were run. Smaller details such as how big a game ball was, what size bat was to be used, whether a
runner could advance on a foul ball, whether tag-ups were used, whether a foul ball counted as a strike are
also omitted. It's impossible to play a game of baseball based solely on information provided by the 1845
Knickerbocker Rules.
8
The interesting things about this rule do not involve the distances between
the bases but, rather, the use of bases, generally, and, more specifically, the use
of four bases. The modern use of ninety-foot base-paths, as noted by John
Thorn, was not implemented until the adoption of the 1857 rules12 but the use of
bases and a four-base layout have numerous antecedents in base ball games.
Block wrote that “The four-base square or diamond configuration was
almost certainly a known commodity to the young Knickerbockers, having
already appeared in at least four descriptions of early baseball-related games
published in America before 1845.”13
The four books that he mentioned were
William Clarke’s The Boy’s Own Book, published in 1829; Robin Carver’s The
Book of Sports, published in 1834; The Boy’s and Girl’s Book of Sports,
published in 1835; and The Boy’s Book of Sports, also published in 1835. The
importance of these books in the formulation of the Knickerbocker Rules was
noted by Robert Henderson, in Ball, Bat and Bishop, when he wrote that “There
is no direct evidence that the Knickerbockers consulted any printed book of rules
when they formulated their own, but the great popularity of [these books], which
totaled several editions, and must have run into hundreds if not thousands of
copies before 1842, must have resulted in the knowledge of a ‘diamond-shaped’
field for a base-running game in the minds of hundreds of boys. In fact, as we
have shown, boys all over the country played these games. There need be no
mystery about the genesis of the Knickerbocker rules. They came directly or
12 Thorn, John; Baseball in the Garden of Eden; p 73.
13 Block, David; Baseball Before We Knew It; p 81.
9
indirectly from these popular books of boys games.”14
Clarke specifically
mentions stool-ball, which used bases, and rounders, which Henderson identified
as English base ball and used four bases arranged in a square.15
Carver
mentioned that base ball, goal ball and round ball used four bases laid out in a
diamond.16
The earliest known instance of bases being used in a bat and ball game
may come from the 14th century, when a game called oink was played in
Romania.17
In the 1600s, German schlagball was played in Prague and the
description of the game mentioned that a batter “attempted to make a circuit of
the bases” after hitting the ball.18 The first known use of bases in ball game in
America comes from 1609 when pilka palantowa was played at Jamestown.19
There is no doubt that the uses of bases in bat and ball games predates the
Knickerbocker rules by several centuries and there is evidence that games such
as ball-paces, balle au camp, goal ball, lapta, theque, tut-ball, the cat family and
various forms of town ball all used bases.
It is evident that, by 1845, the use of bases in bat and ball games was
centuries old and there does not appear to be anything original or innovative in
Knickerbockers’ adoption of rule four.
14 Henderson, Robert; Bat, Ball and Bishop; p 163.
15 Clarke, William; The Boy’s Own Book; 1849 edition; p 27-28.
16 Carver, Robin; The Book of Sports; p 38.
17 Protoball Chronology entry 1310.1 (http://protoball.org/1310.1).
18 Protoball Chronology entry 1600c.1 (http://protoball.org/1600c.1).
19 Protoball Chronology entry 1609.1 (http://protoball.org/1609.1).
10
Rule 8: The game to consist of twenty-one counts, or aces; but at the
conclusion an equal number of hands must be played.
John Thorn has noted that there are some who believe that this rule is
unique in the respect that, for the first time, the conditions for victory in a baseball
game were explicitly laid out.20
While this may be true, in the sense that this is
the oldest surviving record that notes the condition of victory, it seems unlikely
that the Knickerbocker Club invented the idea of winning a baseball game by
scoring more runs than your opponents. The more significant aspect of this rule
seems to be the denotation of the run (or count or ace) as the way in which a
club scored. How many runs were needed for victory or in what time frame one
had to score the runs is not as relevant as the idea that the run was the principle
way in which a team scored. This may be evident in the fact that by 1857, the
first-to-21 rule was replaced by most-runs-in-nine-innings. The conditions of
victory changed with the adoption of the 1857 rules but the idea of the run as the
way in which a team scored remained. The idea of the run is at the heart of rule
eight and the scoring of runs or the prevention of the scoring of runs is at the
heart of baseball.
Block wrote that “It is interesting to note that the Knickerbockers did not
define what was meant by ‘count’ or ‘ace.’ Perhaps by that time the terms were
so commonplace that no explanation was necessary. It remains a mystery,
though, why the club did not choose the word ‘run’ to identify a score in rule 8,
20 Thorn; Baseball in the Garden of Eden; p 73
11
even though that term appeared on their preprinted score sheets in 1845. ‘Run,’
like several other baseball terms, had been borrowed from cricket.”
Both Clarke and Carver21 insinuate that a complete circuit of the bases
constituted a run, implying that the modern definition of a run scored was in place
by at least 1829 and the run as a unit to tally scores were used in predecessor
games such as barn ball, long ball, town ball, round ball and tip-cat. There is a
reference to runs scored in a game of wicket in 181522 and there is the possibility
that wicket matches in New England in 1840 were played to a specified number
of runs.23
The idea of the run as a tally was something that, as Block noted, was
common in cricket going back to the mid-eighteenth century and Henderson
quotes a description of baseball from the 1744 edition of the Little Pretty PocketBook that is as good a description of scoring a run as any:
The Ball once struck off,
Away flies the Boy
To the next destin’d Post,
And then Home with Joy.24
While the specifics of the first-to-21 rule may be a unique invention of the
Knickerbockers, the idea of the run, the run scored and victory by outscoring
one’s opponent certainly predated the 1845 rules. Run scoring and run
21 Clarke, pp 27-28, and Carver, p 38.
22 Protoball Chronology 1815.4 (http://protoball.org/1815.4)
23 Protoball Chronology 1840.22 (http://protoball.org/1840.22)
24 Henderson, p 133.
12
prevention is the essence of baseball and the Knickerbockers certainly did not
invent that concept. They did not invent the idea of victory in a baseball game.
What is unique or original in rule eight was made irrelevant by the 1857 rules
while those things that are at the core of the rule predate the Knickerbockers.
Rule 9: The ball must be pitched, not thrown, for the bat.
There are numerous predecessor games that involved a player initiating
game-play by pitching or throwing a ball to a batter. The cat family, town ball,
German schlagball and stool ball all involved pitching a ball to a batter and Block
mentions two books, one published in 1811 and the other in 1835, that depict
underhand pitching in a ball game.25
Block also specifically states that pitching
“was evident in all known descriptions of early baseball before 1845.”26
The idea
of pitching was not, in any way, the invention of the Knickerbocker Club.
As to the specifics of the Knickerbockers’ pitching rule, William Wheaton,
in 1887, noted that the idea of underhand pitching predated the Knickerbocker
Rules. Wheaton stated that he and his friends “found cricket too slow and lazy a
game. We couldn’t get enough exercise out of it. Only the bowler and the batter
had anything to do, and the rest of the players might stand around all the
afternoon without getting a chance to stretch their legs.”27
The underhand
pitching rule was used by Wheaton and the Gothams to increase the action in the
game, making it easier for a batter to strike the ball and put it in play. “The
25 Protoball Chronology 1811.4 (http://protoball.org/1811.4) and 1835c.12 (http://protoball.org/1835c.12).
26 Block, p 84.
27 San Francisco Examiner, November 27, 1887.
13
pitcher really pitched the ball, and underhand throwing was forbidden. Moreover,
he pitched the ball so the batsman could strike it and give some work to the
fielders.”28
There is also evidence of a ball game played in North Carolina
around 1840 where the pitcher was required to pitch the ball high or low,
depending on the desire of the batter, showing, again, that the idea of “pitching
for the bat” was not something invented by the Knickerbockers in 1845.29
As noted, the Knickerbockers did not invent pitching, pitching underhand
or “pitching for the bat.” There is nothing unique or original about rule nine.
Rule 10: A ball knocked out of the field, or outside the range of the first
and third base, is foul.
The introduction of the concept of foul territory into American baseball is
often cited by historians as one of the unique contribution of the Knickerbocker
Club to the game. Block calls it “a radical concept”30 and Morris considers the
rule to be “revolutionary.”31
But there is evidence that the idea of foul territory
was not particularly radical, that the introduction of the concept into pre-modern,
American baseball was not particularly revolutionary and that the use of foul
territory in baseball predates the 1845 rules.
In Baseball Before We Knew It, Block, himself, noted that foul territory was
not an original idea, although he did state that the introduction of the idea into
28 Ibid.
29 Protoball Chronology 1840c.33 (http://protoball.org/1840c.33).
30 Block, p 85.
31 Morris, p 28.
14
baseball was innovative.32
There is some evidence that foul territory was used in
bat and ball games in the 18th century, particularly in trap ball. Clarke mentions a
from of trap ball play where “Two boundaries are formed, equally placed, and at
a great distance on each side of the trap, between which it is necessary the ball
should pass when struck by the batsman; if it fall outside either of them he is
out.”33
Joseph Strutt, in a book published in 1801, also noted the use of foul
territory in trap ball, writing that “It is usual in the present modification of the
game, to place two boundaries at a given distance from the trap, between which
it is necessary for the ball to pass when it is struck by the batsman, for if it falls
withoutside of either, he gives up his bat and is out.”34
Besides trap ball, there were other bat and ball games that employed the
use of foul territory. A 1743 source regarding a game of cricket insinuates the
use of foul territory by stating that “All play was forward of the wicket…”35
Clarke’s description of rounders, or English base ball, also suggests foul territory
by noting that a batter was out if “the ball, when struck, falls behind home…”36
The Boy’s Own Book, in its description of the game feeder, specifically states
that “One ‘foul’ is out…”37
Finally, there is reference to a base ball game played
in Ontario in 1838 that specifically mentions foul lines, although there is some
questions about veracity of the source.38
32 Block, p 85.
33 Clarke, p 27.
34 Strutt, Joseph; The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England; 1801; pp 99-100.
35 Protoball Chronology 1743.3 (http://protoball.org/1743.3).
36 Clarke, p 29.
37 Henderson, p 154.
38 Protoball Chronology 1838.4 (http://protoball.org/1838.4).
15
Based upon this evidence, there is no doubt that foul territory was not the
unique invention of the Knickerbocker Club and that it was a feature of trap ball
play in the 18th century. It’s also possible that it was used, to some extent, in
games such as cricket and feeder. As far as the idea that the Knickerbockers
were the first to apply the concept to baseball, Clarke’s description of English
base ball and the possibility that foul territory was used in an 1838 baseball game
in Canada brings that into doubt. However, generally speaking, foul territory was
not a feature of pre-modern, American baseball games prior to the Knickerbocker
Rules and they should be given some credit for popularizing its use. It should
also be noted that there is no known antecedent for the ninety degree foul
territory set-up used in modern baseball and this may have been the unique
contribution of the Knickerbockers, although, again, the idea of foul territory was
not itself unique.
Rule 11: Three balls being struck at and missed and the last one caught, is
a hand-out; if not caught is considered fair, and the striker bound to run.
The three-strikes/out rule appears to have been a well established rule in
baseball games prior to 1845. Block states that “In the half century preceding the
Knickerbocker rules of 1845, every published description of early baseball
embraced some variant of the three-strikes rule as a fundamental tenet of play.”
He specifically mentions the Medieval English game of “kit-cat,” the cat family,
trap ball and English base ball as games that used some form of the rule.39
39 Block, pp 85-86.
16
Clarke mentioned trap ball, where “if the striker miss the ball when he
aims at it, or hits the trigger more than twice without striking the ball, or makes
‘an offer’ (the trigger to be touched but once, he is out…”40 as well as rounders,
where the “in-player is also out if he miss striking the ball.”41
Carver wrote that in
base or goal ball “If [the batter] miss three times…he is out…”42
In the
description of feeder from The Boy’s Own Book, the batter was out “if he miss
three times” and Henderson speculated that this was where the three-strikes rule
originated.43
The Boy’s Book of Sports, in its description of base ball, stated that
“If the striker miss the ball three times…he is out…”44
There are also several
sources that mention the rule being used in town ball.45
The three strikes/out rule was well established in baseball games prior to
1845 and it can in no way be seen as a unique contribution of the Knickerbocker
Club.
Rule 12: If a ball be struck, or tipped, and caught, either flying or on the
first bound, it is a hand out.
This was not only another well established baseball rule prior to 1845 but,
as Block has noted, it “is, perhaps, the oldest in the game. [The rule]
characterized all of baseball’s ancestors, including stool-ball, trap-ball, and most
40 Clarke, p 27.
41 Clarke, p 29.
42 Carver, p 38.
43 Henderson, p 154.
44 Henderson, p 159.
45 Protoball Chronology 1835.4 (http://protoball.org/1835.4)
45 and 1840.24 (http://protoball.org/1840.24).
17
varieties of cat…”46
Specifically, he was talking about catching a ball on the fly
and noted that the Knickerbockers’ use of the bound rule was unique. However,
there is ample evidence that the bound rule predated the 1845 rules and Block
did note the 1733 poem “Stool Ball, or the Easter Diversion” where the goal of
the fielders was:
To seize the ball before it grounds,
Or take it when it first rebounds.47
Based upon this, it is evident that the bound rule was likely used in stool
ball in the first half of the 18th century.
William Wheaton stated that the bound rule was “an old rule,” although his
Gotham Club discarded it in the 1830s and used only the fly rule in their games.48
Larry McCray, writing about the history of the bound rule, noted a contemporary
source where the rule was used in a game of wicket that was played in
Connecticut in 1841 and he stated that:
Several other references to pre-1845 use of the bound rule appear in retrospective
accounts. Historian Harold Seymour associates the practice with the old-cat games (but does not
give a source), and a recollection of such games around 1840 in Illinois recalls a one-bounce
rule. The rule is remembered for ballgames played in the 1820s in New York State, and in 1840
46 Block, p 86.
47 Ibid.
48 San Francisco Examiner, November 27, 1887.
18
in accounts from Georgia and North Carolina. In New England, one account attributes the bound
rule to the traditional ballgame called base.49
Clarke mentions that the rule was used in trap ball and rounders while
Craver states that it was used in base and goal ball.50
The rule that a batter was out if a fielder caught the batted ball on
the fly or the bound, without a doubt, predates the Knickerbocker Rules and is in
no way a unique contribution to the game.
Rule 13: A player running the bases shall be out, if the ball is in the hands
of an adversary on the base, or the runner is touched with it before he
makes his base; it being understood, however, that in no instance is a ball
to be thrown at him.
The elimination of soaking or plugging and the introduction of the tag-out
and the force-out is commonly believed to be one of the Knickerbockers’ most
unique and important contributions to baseball. Morris has written that the rule is
revolutionary51 while Thorn has stated that “This rule forms the key distinction
between the Knickerbocker game and other forms of base ball…”52
Rule
thirteen, according to Block, was “the Knickerbockers’ single greatest contribution
to the game of baseball,” and “a critical step in sculpting the balance and grace of
the modern game.” He went on to call the rule “sparkingly original…”53
49 McRay, Larry; “1845.1 The Knickerbocker Rules – and the Long History of the One-Bounce Fielding
Rule”; Base Ball, Volume 5, Number 1; p 95.
50 Clarke, pp 27-29 and Carver, p38.
51 Morris, p 28.
52 Thorn, Baseball in the Garden of Eden, p 75.
53 Block, p 87.
19
However, there is one important source that contradicts this claim to
sparking originality. William Wheaton, former Knickerbocker, when talking about
the 1837 formation of the Gotham Club, stated that “The first step we took in
making baseball was to abolish the rule of throwing the ball at the runner and
ordered instead that it should be thrown to the baseman instead, who had to
touch the runner before he reached the base.”54
Based upon Wheaton’s
testimony, the tag-out rule predates the Knickerbocker Rules by almost a
decade.
Given that baseball historians have universally agreed that rule thirteen is
one of the Knickerbocker Club’s most unique and important contributions to the
game and that the Wheaton article is the only known source that impeaches this
position, it is important that Wheaton’s testimony be questioned. The article
appeared in the San Francisco Examiner in 1887 when Wheaton was seventythree years old and it is entirely possible that his testimony is confused and that
his memory is faulty. It is possible that he confused the activities of the Gotham
Club with those of the Knickerbocker Club. There is also the possibility that,
within the article, Wheaton, when talking about the introduction of the tagout/force-out, was talking about the activities of the Knickerbockers, although,
given the context of his statement, this is unlikely.
With that said, the Wheaton article, at the very least, casts doubt on the
idea that the Knickerbockers were the fathers of the tag-out/force-out. If one
accepts Wheaton’s testimony to be true, the rule predates the Knickerbockers by
54 San Francisco Examiner, November 27, 1887.
20
eight years. It should also be noted that Wheaton did not say that the Gotham
Club invented the rule or that it was unique to them. His testimony leaves open
the possibility that the rule predates the formation of the Gotham Club in 1837.
Given this, one is unable to state, unequivocally, that tag-outs/force-outs were
unique to the Knickerbocker Rules of 1845.55
Rule 14: A player running who shall prevent an adversary from catching or
getting the ball before making his base, is a hand out.
A prohibition against both fielder and batter’s interference is found in 18th
century cricket rules56 and Block, who notes the possibility that this rule was first
introduced into baseball by the Knickerbockers, believes, based upon his
knowledge of early baseball, that it was an old rule. His reasoning is interesting.
He writes that “the game was an activity for children or teenagers and was
played with a soft ball on a field considerably smaller than in modern baseball.
There is no indication from any source that it was a rough-and-tumble sport.
Given this, it seems unlikely that the practice of disrupting or preventing a fielder
from catching a ball would have been tolerated in fair play.”57
Given Block’s belief that general fair play and sportsmanship would
preclude any form of interference and the 18th century references to interference
rules in bat and ball games, it seems unlikely that this rule was the unique
55 It should also be noted that there may have been other attempts to eliminate or mitigate the impact of
soaking. The use of the cross-out, whereby a runner was out if a ball was thrown between him and the base
he was running to, is a known feature of pre-modern, American bat and ball games such as town ball. It is
unknown how old this rule is or how prevalent its use was but, like the tag-out and the force-out, the crossout can be seen as a rule developed to eliminate an unpleasant aspect of pre-modern baseball.
56 Protoball Chronology 1704.4 (http://protoball.org/1704.4) and 1774.1 (http://protoball.org/1774.1).
57 Block, p 88.
21
contribution of the Knickerbockers. While the Knickerbockers were gentlemen, it
would seem a stretch to credit them with the invention of sportsmanship and fair
play.
Rule 15: Three hands out, all out
Along with the rules introducing foul territory and tag-outs/force outs, this
rule, putting in place the three-out inning, helped define the modern game of
baseball and Block notes that it was “a break from the most common [method of
terminating a team’s at-bat.]”58
The most common methods used in American
baseball games were the one-out/all-out rule, whereby any out would end a
team’s turn at-bat, and the all-out/all-out rule, whereby all members of a side got
a turn at bat. But there is some evidence that the three-out inning predated the
Knickerbocker Rules.
Wheaton noted that “In the old game when a man struck out those of his
side who happened to be on the bases had to come in and lose that chance of
making a run. We changed that and made the rule which holds good now.”59
While he appears to be talking about the one-out/all-out rule and the introduction
of the three-out inning, it is not exactly clear within the context of the source if he
is talking about his time with the Gothams or the Knickerbockers. But the
possibility exists that the three-out inning was used by the Gothams in the late
1830s. Block writes about two games that appear to have used the three-out
inning and predates the 1845 rules. Specifically, he mentions the game of kit-cat
58 Ibid.
59 San Francisco Examiner, November 27, 1887.
22
where “it may be previously agreed that three put outs shall end the innings” and
a New York game called “three out, all out”.60
The possibility also exists that the
three-out inning was also used in games of wicket played in Western New York
and in baseball games played in Canada prior to 1845.
There appears to be sufficient evidence to state that the three-out inning
was used in bat and ball games prior to 1845 and John Thorn states simply that
“it is not a Knickerbocker innovation.”61
Rule 16: Players must take their strike in regular turn.
Block calls this “an obvious and intuitive rule that flows from the order of
the game. Without it, teams could simply have their best players bat over and
over.”62
He goes on to state that the rule was a common feature of early
baseball games.
Clarke mentions that, in trap-ball, players bat “in order”63 and that, in
rounders, the players took their turns at bat “in rotation.”64
Carver, in his
description of base ball, states that players were to bat “by turns.”65
This is sufficient evidence to state that rule sixteen was not the unique
invention of the Knickerbocker Club.
60 Block, p 90.
61 Thorn, Baseball in the Garden of Eden, p 78.
62 Block, p 90.
63 Clarke, p 27.
64 Clarke, p 29.
65 Carver, p 39.
23
Rule 17: All disputes and differences relative to the game, to be decided by
the Umpire, from which there is no appeal.
This is another rule that predates the Knickerbocker.
In the 1838 Constitution of the Olympic Ball Club of Philadelphia, it is
noted that the team recorder “shall be umpire between the captains on Club
days, in the event of a disputed point of the game, and from his decision there
shall be no appeal, except to the Club, at its next stated meeting.”66
Wheaton
stated that the Gothams had a scorekeeper “and it was he who decided all
disputed points.”67
There are also several 18th century references to umpires
used in cricket matches.68
Rule 18: No ace or base can be made on a foul strike.
Block states that this rule “has no precedent among any of the earlier
descriptions of baseball and related games.”69
However, if we accept that foul
territory was not the invention of the Knickerbocker Club and that this rule is the
natural extension of the foul territory rule then it is probable that this rule predates
1845, although no evidence exists supporting this conclusion.70
Rule 19: A runner cannot be put out in making one base, when a balk is
made on the pitcher.
66 Block, p 91.
67 San Francisco Examiner, November 27, 1887.
68 Protoball Chronology 1727.2 (http://protoball.org/1727.2) and 1744.1 (http://protoball.org/1744.1).
69 Block, p 91.
70 One interesting implication of this rule is that a foul strike would not count as an out, unlike some of the
other pre-modern bat and ball games that utilized foul territory. It is unknown if this was a unique
contribution of the Knickerbocker Club or if there is some precedent for the implied rule.
24
If any of the 1845 rules can be considered unique and the original
invention of the Knickerbockers, it is the balk rule. It is possible to argue that, like
the interference rule, it may have come from generally accepted practices of
sportsmanship but there is no evidence supporting this idea. It is interesting to
note that the modern meaning of the word “balk,” in the sense of “to stop short,”
comes from late 15th century England and this was about the same time that
games such as stool ball, trap ball and the cat family were developing in the
country.71
That may simply be a coincidence but, since we know so very little
about the origins of the balk rule, it is something to consider.
Rule 20: But one base allowed when a ball bounds out of the field when
struck.
Block has stated that this was a “relatively inconsequential rule” but that it
“appears to be original to the Knickerbockers.”72
Thorn had a rather provoking thought about this rule, writing that “For
years I had thought the intent of this rule was to keep the ball out of the river,
which the Knickerbocker outfield adjoined, owing to the expense and difficulty of
ball manufacture. Today, I am inclined to think that this rule reflects the wish that
the hallmark of the New York game should be fielding, not running or batting or
throwing.”73
If he is correct in his thinking, it brings in the possibility that this rule
could have been used by the Gothams in 1837, as Wheaton stated that the
71 Search results for “balk” at the Online Etymology Dictionary
(http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=balk).
72 Block, p 92.
73 Thorn, Baseball in the Garden of Eden, p 77
25
pitching rules the Gothams put in place were designed to “give some work to the
fielders,” in contrast to other bat and ball games were “the players might stand
around all afternoon without getting a chance to stretch their legs.”74
While there is no evidence that this was not an original Knickerbocker rule,
there exists the possibility that the Gothams may have used the rule first.
Conclusion
There is no real desire to challenge the historical legacy of the
Knickerbocker Club and the importance of the 1845 rules. But it is always a
good idea to put our beliefs to the test and learn what we actually know about a
given subject as compared to what we believe we know. While it appears that
most of what we base their legacy upon is wrong, the Knickerbocker Club was no
Abner Doubleday. They were one of the most important pioneer clubs in
baseball history and their rules helped shape the modern form of the game. Of
this, there is no doubt. But the club and their rules do not deserve the place of
primacy that has been given them by historians over the years. The
Knickerbocker Club was not the first baseball club and they were not the first
baseball club to write down a set of playing rules. The testimony of William
Wheaton, by itself, proves that to be the case.
None of that is particularly groundbreaking news and most contemporary
baseball historians know that to be true. However, the Knickerbockers still enjoy
the reputation of having crafted a unique game – the New York game, the
74 San Francisco Examiner, November 27, 1887.
26
Regulation game, the modern game. They are credited with the revolutionary
introduction of foul-territory, of tag-outs and force outs, and of the three-out
inning into the American game of baseball. But a close analysis of the historical
antecedents of the Knickerbocker Rules show that there is very little that is
revolutionary about their rule set. For the most part, they are a collection of
known baseball rules that had been around for decades, if not centuries. Except,
perhaps, for the introduction of the balk rule, the specific use of ninety-degree
foul territory and, perhaps, the do-over foul, there is nothing particularly
revolutionary about the Knickerbocker Rules.
What the 1845 rules represent is the consolidation of evolutionary trends
in American baseball. We see antecedents to the foul territory rule, the tag-out
rule, the three-outs per inning rule, and almost all of the significant Knickerbocker
Rules but the game that developed in New York in the 1830s and early 1840s
was unique in that it contained all of these evolutionary elements. There were
variants of American baseball being played at the same time that contained each
of these elements but none, except for the New York game, that contained all of
them. The baseball players of New York were creating a unique version of
baseball out of the evolutionary strands of games like trap ball, stool ball,
schlagball, kit-cat, oina, English base ball and countless American baseball
variants. The Knickerbocker Rules of 1845 represents a singular moment in that
creation process. They do not represent the beginning of the process just as
they did not mark the end of the process. Their significance is not that they were
revolutionary, because they were not. The significance of the Knickerbocker
27
Rules of 1845 is that they provide us with a unique snapshot of the evolutionary
development of baseball. And that is more than enough to secure the historical
legacy of the Knickerbocker Base Ball Club.
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 18:32, 10 March 2021

Original Analytics
Writing.png
By Jeffrey Kittel
1845 Knickerbocker Rules
1857 Rules
What Was Rounders, Anyway?
What Was The Massachusetts Game, Anyway?
What Was Town Ball, Anyway?
Original Writers
Bill Humber
Bob Tholkes
Bruce Allardice
Corky Gaskell
Debbie Shattuck
Howard Burman
Jeffrey Kittel
Larry McCray
John and Kay Price
Mark Brunke
Richard Hershberger
Rob Loeffler
Tom Gilbert
Protoball Search Aid
Add an Original Analytic
Add an Original Analytic with a Version Number

Evolution or Revolution? A Rule-By-Rule Analysis of the 1845 Knickerbocker Rules

by Jeffrey Kittel, April 2013
Download Document

Toggle Subnav
Retrieved from "https://protoball.org/index.php?title=1845_Knickerbocker_Rules&oldid=2142014"

Comments

<comments voting="Plus" />