On Jan 27, 10:10=A0am, Jack Linthicum
wrote:
> On Jan 27, 9:52=A0am, "Richard R. Hershberger" wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 26, 11:25=A0am, "Richard R. Hershberger"
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 26, 5:55=A0am, Jack Linthicum
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 25, 8:42=A0pm, Stan Boleslawski
m>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 25, 5:35=A0pm, Matt Giwer wrote:
>
> > > > > > Straha wrote:
> > > > > > > With a POD after 1815 your challenge if you choose to accept =
it is to
> > > > > > > make Cricket be the big american sport instead of baseball, w=
ith
> > > > > > > baseball being a new england regional sport.
>
> > > > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Would not the first thing to ask be what were t=
he rules of Cricket in 1815?
> > > > > > And were there related base and ball games in England? There do=
es not appear
> > > > > > to have been a standard game in the US until decades later.
>
> > > > > IIRC both baseball and cricket developed out of Rounders,
> > > > > which had been played in the US during colonial times into
> > > > > the early 19th century. Baseball developed along different
> > > > > lines than cricket did, but they both came from the same
> > > > > game.
>
> > > This is incorrect. =A0The baseball/rounders connection is
> > > oversimplified, but serviceable. =A0(A better characterization is tha=
t
> > > "baseball" and "rounders" were dialectal variant names for the same
> > > game.) =A0Cricket is much more distantly connected. =A0Cricket is wel=
l
> > > documented to the late 17th century. =A0The earliest clear documentat=
ion
> > > for baseball/cricket is from the mid 18th century. =A0Writers try to
> > > trace both games much futher back, but there are at best snippets of
> > > actual data. =A0It is entirely likely that baseball and cricket are
> > > related, but they are cousins, not siblings.
>
> > Correction of thinko: =A0The earliest clear documentation for *baseball=
/
> > rounders* is from the mid 18th century. =A0It was called baseball at
> > that time. =A0The term rounders arose in the early 19th century.
>
> > > > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 If all we have are different versions developin=
g along local lines there is
> > > > > > no way to make them the same. It would be like how do you make =
tennis and
> > > > > > badminton or croquet and golf the same game.
>
> > > > > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Trivia, Abner Doubleday, hero of Ft. Sumter, wa=
s read into the imaginary
> > > > > > history of baseball because of his military fame.
>
> > > > > And to create more tourism for Cooperstown.
>
> > > In fairness, the people who concocted the Doubleday story didn't care
> > > about Cooperstown. =A0That was a side effect.
>
> > > > > The first recorded baseball game ever was played in Hoboken, NJ ;
> > > > > what happens if the Doubleday story is never created or never
> > > > > catches on and Hoboken becomes known as baseball's birthplace?
> > > > > Given Hudson County's status as the de facto "sixth borough" NYC
> > > > > probably takes the credit.
>
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Stan B.
>
> > > > A guy named Alexander Cartwright in OTL took up baseball as a fanat=
ic.
> > > > He traveled across the country, giving out the rules, preaching the
> > > > game, reached California, ("Casey at the bat" is about an all-star
> > > > game in Stockton, CA), and finally Hawaii.
>
> > > Most of this story has been pretty thoroughly debunked. =A0See the
> > > recent biography of Cartwright by Monica Nucciarone for the "Johnny
> > > Appleseed of baseball" myth. =A0It involves Cartwright's journal bein=
g
> > > "improved," probably by his grandson. =A0Cartwright is known to have
> > > been a prominent member of the Knickerbocker Base Ball Club from its
> > > founding in 1845 through 1848, and served terms as an officer of the
> > > club. =A0There is a plausible story from the 1860s that he was the on=
e
> > > who suggested forming the club (which was not, contrary to the usual
> > > version of history, the first baseball club). =A0The only evidence fo=
r
> > > his being involved with the actual rules is highly questionable, and
> > > the evidence for his involvement from the 1850s on is at best
> > > speculative.
>
> > > In other words, the Cartwright story is not the outright invention we
> > > see in the Doubleday story, but it is vastly improved beyond the
> > > evidence.
>
> > > Richard R. Hershberger- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> 1344?
>
> http://www.tradgames.org.uk/games/rounders.htm
>
> and 1700 for baseball.
The 1344 picture depicts some sort of ball-and-bat game. The author
of the webpage speculates that it was an ancestor of rounders. It
might even be true, but this is just another way of saying that
rounders wasn't played in 1344. I am skeptical of attempts to trace
baseball/rounders/cricket that far back. The documentary evidence is
thin, and it isn't even clear what sort of taxonomic model we should
be applying. Something like an evolutionary tree is commonly applied,
but when we get into the area of vaguely defined folk games I suspect
the better model is like a stew of bacteria exchanging genetic
material.
As for that 1700 quote, it is an "improved" version. The actual quote
is "Maidstone was formerly a very profane town, in as much as I have
seen morrice-dancing, cudgel-playing, stool-ball, cricketts, and many
other sports openly and publicly indulged in on the Lord=92s Day."
If you are interested in early cites of various such "safe haven"
games, take a look at http://retrosheet.org/Protoball/chron.htm. It
has them in glorious detail. Some of the entries are poorly sources,
but most are well done.
Richard R. Hershberger |
