Every Picture Tells a Story: The Stick

The Scorer

The Scorer

Yesterday we gathered in Cooperstown to celebrate the annual Baseball Hall of Fame Induction, honoring Ken Griffey Jr. and Mike Piazza. This day was about the players, and their fans, and the game, and the glimpse of immortality that baseball provides. It is about celebrating the past and its continuing vitality in our lives, symbolized in the plaques for these men that will speak to future generations of the glory that was theirs. They will become fixtures in the Hall of Fame Gallery, a magnet for fans, but a small part of the museum and library complex that links baseball’s present day with past times.

In an age of sabermetrics, analytics, and microscopic recording well beyond the simple statistics of a century ago, it is instructive to harken back to a time when Outs and Runs were the only categories tracked. Today we know that many things go into the manufacture or saving of outs and runs but, in the end, victory and defeat boil down to these same primitive measures.

The trade card shown at the left is part of a six-card series contrasting “New Style” (1880s) and “Old Style” (1870s). Depicting “The Scorer,” it casts light on an old mystery that I referenced many moons ago in my book Treasures of the Baseball Hall of Fame. I wrote:

We have heard the stories all our lives, and we share them warmly with our children. But we come to the Baseball Hall of Fame to see, to see the instruments of glory, the stuff of legend, the tangible remains of departed heroes and forgotten fields. This is a museum like no other because it is about baseball, that singular American institution by which we mark our days. Not simply historical relics, these artifacts spur us to recall to life an image dormant in our brains for decades. They connect us not only to our own childhood and to our parents, but also to a national, collective past, one whose presence we sense but whose details have been lost.

Time stops in the Museum in the same way it does at a baseball game. At the museum it attaches itself to those things that make us halt in our tracks and reflect upon their essence … and ours. Time doesn’t truly stop, of course; we do. We imagine that we bend time and somehow elude it through the pleasure of play and remembrance.

Which is where I come in, with a “memory” of King Kelly, whom I never saw play, as vivid as my recollection of Mickey Mantle, whom I did. There was a time, in 1980 or so, when during one of my frequent research trips to the National Baseball Library I held in my hand an object that had a story to tell, but I was not yet wise enough to hear it. Looking back, I believe this incident provided the germ of the idea for the Treasures book, and perhaps Baseball in the Garden of Eden too.

At that time, long before its 1993 enlargement, the library was cramped for space and pressed for cataloging services. Some large boxes were filled with unrelated items of mixed provenance and scant documentation. In one such box, packed loosely among some truly notable curios (I recall Cy Young’s rookie contract from 1890 and Christy Mathewson’s from 1899) was a thin wooden stick, with irregular hand-hewn notches along part of its perhaps ten-inch length. With the unquestioning confidence that only comes with ignorance, I snorted at finding this insignificant piece of kindling, in a plastic bag without any indication that it had been cataloged as a gift to the Museum. “I know you’ll take anything here,” I laughingly announced to some library staffers, “but I thought at least it had to have something to do with baseball!”

All of us were puzzled by the stick, and none of us had an answer as to how it had entered into the collections or why it was being retained. I thought no more about the stick for the next five years, until I was reading through Henry Chadwick’s scrapbooks, on deposit at the New York Public Library … and then the stick became The Stick, depicted as the “old style” of scoring in the trade card above. There, in Volume 20, which was dominated by cricket stories, I came upon the following innocuous note:

Previous to 1746, the score was kept by notches on a short lath: hence the term notches for runs. The notching-knife gradually gave way to the pen, and the thin stick to a sheet of foolscap.

The fool’s cap should have been placed on my head. I had dismissed as inconsequential what was surely a scorer’s stick from a very early game of baseball, an artifact perhaps earlier than Doubleday or Cartwright.

I offer this story to illustrate the difficulty of hearing the stories the artifacts have to tell, particularly the ancient ones. Large objects like statues and trophies and plaques may wag comparatively small tales, while small items like pins and ribbons and newsprint may speak volumes. Generally, the more removed the object is from the event that inspired or employed it, the less interesting it is to the historian and the less rich its associations with other events in baseball and the world. What is most fascinating and what moves us most deeply is seldom the stuff that was created in order to be treasured by future generations, although commemorative pieces (like the gifts for Lou Gehrig on his farewell day, July 4, 1939) can be beautiful and meaningful, too. But in my view, the best artifacts are the ones that were meant to be tossed aside yet improbably survived.

 

7 Comments

What an interesting story! I love the graphic as well. . with the Old School and New School. . . and as sophisticated as things are today, I wonder what the next 100 years will bring. And I wish I would be here to see it!

Wonderful! I live for the stuff toss aside…I hope to see you in Miami!Best regards,Tito

From: Our Game To: titorondon2002@yahoo.com Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 8:16 AM Subject: [New post] Every Picture Tells a Story: The Stick #yiv1460565715 a:hover {color:red;}#yiv1460565715 a {text-decoration:none;color:#0088cc;}#yiv1460565715 a.yiv1460565715primaryactionlink:link, #yiv1460565715 a.yiv1460565715primaryactionlink:visited {background-color:#2585B2;color:#fff;}#yiv1460565715 a.yiv1460565715primaryactionlink:hover, #yiv1460565715 a.yiv1460565715primaryactionlink:active {background-color:#11729E;color:#fff;}#yiv1460565715 WordPress.com | John Thorn posted: “Yesterday we gathered in Cooperstown to celebrate the annual Baseball Hall of Fame Induction, honoring Ken Griffey Jr. and Mike Piazza. This day was about the players, and their fans, and the game, and the glimpse of immortality that baseball provides” | | Respond to this post by replying above this line |

| | |

| New post on Our Game | |

| | | | Every Picture Tells a Story: The Stick by John Thorn |

The ScorerYesterday we gathered

Pingback: Discover: Monday Around the Horn « MLB.com Blogs

Fascinated to see reference to tally sticks in baseball. It is, I think, widely accepted that they were used in cricket, but they do seem also to be an important part of the image of the early game. We have paintings featuring scorers cutting (scoring) tally sticks even after we start to get detailed individual scores which, presumably, must have been recorded with pen and ink. This is not to say that the two methods couldn’t have been concurrent for some period. Medieval tournaments used scoring cheques which look quite similar to cricket scorecards but, again, that is not to say the peasant might not have scored a stick whilst the prince had pen and ink. I just wonder whether this might be an example of cricket and baseball rather romanticising their bucolic simplicity.

It’s my understanding that tally sticks were split down the middle, allowing a debtor and a creditor to retain records which could then be confirmed by matching up the two halves at a later date. Cricket scorebooks (and I presume, to some extent, baseball scorecards) are clearly very much like financial accounts, but the need to retain records for later settlement is rather less obvious.

Just out of interest, when did baseball box scores come into general use?

Great additional detail, Matt; thanks. The first published box score dates to October 1845 (see: http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2012/02/11/inventing-baseball/).

Thank you for that, John. So we have detailed baseball scores – scores for each batter and innings, at least – from the beginnings of inter-club matches, and certainly prior to there being a fixed number of innings or a fixed number of players on a side?

I note that the 1846 scorecard is printed. Might it be reasonable to think that there could have been hand-drawn versions in use from rather earlier?

No baseball scorebook earlier than that of the the Knickerbockers survives but it is reasonable to assume that folks were keeping score prior to the games of 1845.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: