Brian, doc, Andy, esd, all good stuff. Nice to see so much energy being put into solving these possibly insoluble
not-quite-really-cards-and-what-the-hell-are-they.
Brian, we consulted some typographical experts as well, and, well, they're still not quite sure what the font is.
It very strongly resembles Caslon 540, we're told, but it's not a perfect match. In any case, the Caslon family
(dozens of increasingly modernized variations were developed over the years) dates back centuries, and
there was quite a revival of several variations of Caslon around 1900-1905, so we'll concede that the strips
could date back that far. Still doesn't mean they couldn't have been produced at a much more recent date, either.
We'll politely disagree on "commercially printed" and "machine cut" as certainties. A couple of us worked
for years in in-house graphics and printing operations, and we could easily have turned out a better-looking
result with little time and effort (granted, we had computerized copiers to facilitate some of the pre-press
work, which obviously wouldn't have been available to someone making these in 1910, if in fact
that's when they were made) -- but the basic procedures would have been the same, with just
a little more done-by-hand effort involved. And anyone with a metal straightedge and a razor
can cut a piece of cardstock well enough to make it appear appear machine-cut.
However, along with esd's reminder that these are printed front-and-back, the apparent presence of
a second Chance on one strip does suggest some attempt at multiple sets for distribution.
The notion that the strips were part of some prototype for a game that never actually went into production
is plausible. We just finished checking patents granted between 1908 and 1913, though, for games
that were in fact never manufactured, but none of them, unfortunately, involved any suggestion of
player-figures or markers of any kind for fielders or baserunners.
Damn, this is intriguing...
|