A McCreachery Card Theory

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by jcmtiger

I was wondering when this thread would turn.

Joe

Not yet, hopefully. I am contacting some gaelic language experts to see if they can register an opinion. Unfortunately, the semester is over and most likely they won't be back until late Jan., but maybe some of them check their email/voicemail.

[RCMcKenzie]

It is funny. I can barely tie my shoe, but I have an HP Deskjet 3520 from Best Buy for $70. Slabs are ugly. But, Hey. What are ya gonna do?

[RCMcKenzie]

I recently received the OJ book in the mail, and have had a chance to look at the Deacon White portrait card pictured on page 87 of the book. I looked at the name under a magnifying glass and I believe that the third letter is a "G" and not a "C". The third letter is printed in the same way that it is printed on this Jack McGeachy card that I just got in the mail from JVSC on ebay.... (pardon the blurry scans, I still need one of those cce scanners or whatever they are called to scan the sgc holders without a blur)



n172mcgeachy.jpg

n172mcgeachyclose.jpg



My opinion had shifted throughout the earlier portions of this thread, and after reviewing the higher resolution picture on page 87 and reading more about the n172 Poorman card. I have changed my opinion again to some degree, although I cannot draw any conclusions.


The Poorman card is clearly an intentional joke. It is spelled with two words, "poor" "man" and the photo has the player posed like a beggar, bowing with his head down and hands outstretched and cupped. So, it is clear that the producers of the cards would, on occasion, make puns and jokes with the captions and the photos.

I'm not sure what to make of the card now, except that I am convinced that the name in the bottom caption is "McGreachery" and not "McCreachery"

I would also highly recommend the OJ book to anyone interested in early baseball cards and/or history.

[benchod]

I don't see an R in his last name at all

[Joe_G.]

BUMP - New Information Available

After close inspection, the owner of the Deacon White N172 portrait has confirmed that the spelling on the card is in fact . . .

McGreachery (a "G", not a "C")

While I enjoyed this thread, a riddle is no longer likely unless, of course, McGreachery is an error and Goodwin really intended McCreachery

Thank you to the card's owner, cyseymour, and others who helped make this an interesting thread.

[cyseymour]

Thank you, Joe, for getting the owner of the card to look at it, and thank you to the owner for taking the time. It is highly appreciated and certainly provides some clarity.

It is fun to have theories about cards, and even if they are disproven later on, it was a great conversation that I enjoyed immensely. Thank you to everyone who took the time to participate.

Probably we'll never have a true explanation for the card, but it seems like it may have been a misspelling of Jack McGeachy, who was the manager of Indianapolis at the time.

The only thing we know for sure is that it is one cool card!!!

[RCMcKenzie]

Thanks for the update. Since the last time we visited this topic, I was able to buy a better scanner. Here are some better scans of McGeachy. I believe it was determined that he was the indy CF at the time and I had proposed that he could have been a player/manager towards the end of the season even at 23 yrs of age, but it is just conjecture. Fun topic..................
mcgreacheryname056.jpgmcgeachyrhh057.jpg

mcgeachyname058.jpgmcgeachy3103059.jpg

[deadballfreaK]

Just read through 11 pages. Good stuff. I am nearly 100% Irish myself and we are not just "reputed" to be drinkers. We can put it away! And I am going to tip a glass to both Mr. White and the mysterious McWhatever.

[Tanman7baseball]

Well... Just put it this way, I wish I read the last page before I read the entire thread... At least I freshened up on my Gaelic English, French, and Greek...

Some of the references and facts used to prove the McGreachery name being a riddle was comparable to Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas trying to explain how gun control will lead to same sex marriage and sex with animals... Very comical to say the least. Although, some points to the riddle were plausible..

All in all, I enjoyed the critical thinking (mostly done by Cy). It is something that is seldom done in my generation of people. I rather read a thread like this than watch a mindless sitcom on TV. But now it looks like my Irish heritage is telling me to pour a glass of Dewar's scotch whiskey to take away the headache I've developed reading it. Thanks for Bumping this

[cyseymour]

I hate to bring up an old can of worms, but I was thinking about this thread this morning, and it dawned on me to research the name "McGrea". It turns out that "McGrea" is in fact the same name as "McCrea". They are just variable spellings. In fact, according to this website, are stem from the same name.

http://www.surnamedb.com/Surname/McGraw

Therefore, the name "McGreachery" could very well still mean "Dear Son of God". In fact, the counter-theory for this card was that the confusion of the card was that it was really intended to write McGeachy, after Jack McGeachy of the Indianapolis team.

But the thing is that Jack McGeachy's name also means "Son of God"

McGea - son of God
Chy - child

Gaelic was a very rough language with many different spellings. That's why you are seeing variations of this word "Crea" in the form of "Gee", "Kee" (as in D. Mc.Kee), Crea, Grea, Graw, etc.

In light of this discovery, it is very unlikely that the name "McGreachery" was a misspelling. My view is that it was probably done intentionally. Also, when you take into context the player involved, the card, and the name on it, was almost certainly a joke. Deacon White was a very well-known player - the greatest third baseman of the 19th century. Goodwin and Co. took seven other photos of Deacon White - they must have had a very good idea of whom he was. Remember, Deacon White had been in the league for over fifteen years by that time. He was also known for his wacky religious beliefs in an era, like today, of growing atheism. Also, keep in mind that most people were given a classical education in latin and french back then, and the word for God (crea/grea/graw/cray, however you want to pronounce it) is a vary basic word.

Knowing all that, I just find it very hard to believe that the McGreachery name was written as some sort of accident. One of the reasons why we had the confusion between C and G for the card is that they look alike. They must look alike because those two letters were used almost interchangably in ancient times. So in retrospect, I don't believe that the fact that the name is McGreachery instead of McCreachery really makes it a flawed theory after all.

[oldjudge]

Good theory Jamie; I like that. BTW, here is the only other card with this Deacon White image, the proof used to create the N172. As far as I know, both the N172 and the proof are unique.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Good theory Jamie; I like that. BTW, here is the only other card with this Deacon White image, the proof used to create the N172. As far as I know, both the N172 and the proof are unique.

Old Judge,

Thank you very much for sharing that image. I am sure that other members also truly appreciate it.

Seeing as though he was inducted into the HOF this summer, Deacon White's baseball career has been viewed again, in a positive light. I, for one, think his inclusion is warranted.

Best Regards,

Eric

[Joe_G.]

Thanks for the bump Jamie, I do find it interesting although I would still classify it as a theory. But much of what we write about the set is just that.

Great cabinet Jay. I do find it somewhat interesting that out of the 9 proofs that have surfaced (which account for all 9 N172 poses Deacon enjoys), the portrait is the only one in which his name is not written on the negative. "White 3d B., Detroit." appears on all other 8 negatives/photos.

[RCMcKenzie]

Great cabinet, Jay.

Jaime, without checking to see if I'm contradicting myself, my problem with your theory is that the makers of the riddle would have to have intentionally created one of the most obscure inside jokes of all time. It would have taken 120 years and sabr-esque research to unveil their joke on a single tobacco insert, that appears to have been discontinued after a single printing.

I remember making a Rodney Dangerfield reference from 'Easy Money', as he played a photographer in that movie.

[oldjudge]

Joe--as always, an excellent observation. Do you think that because there was no name on the proof that a Goodwin employee screwed up the name on the N172, or are you of the mind that it was a joke?

[Joe_G.]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Joe--as always, an excellent observation. Do you think that because there was no name on the proof that a Goodwin employee screwed up the name on the N172, or are you of the mind that it was a joke?

Jay, just making an observation that might help explain how the wrong name wound up on the N172, riddle or not; there may have been some confusion (merely another theory). We see many mistakes within the N172 set that should have been avoided, even when names were present on the negative.

I do believe the card makers did know who the portrait was however. Deacon was very recognizable figure. I do think they were poking fun at him by calling him a manager. As for the riddle in the name, there is merit in Jamie’s theory, it is quite possible the name plate was a joke on a couple levels . . ., son of God/child, better suited to be a Manager than player, etc. But Goodwin may have thought better of the card and stopped producing it after a very short run (ie may have stopped when Goodwin & Co. management realized what they were printing).

I will say however that Deacon's religious beliefs were not "wacky". He was one of many bible following citizens at the time although not many could be found in the baseball ranks (teammate Lady Baldwin being an exception, another bible quoting and following player). Deacon was generally looked up to, not made fun of. There was a great deal of respect for him, he was recognized as perhaps the greatest player of the 1870s (best catcher in a decade were catching was the single most important position) and he wasn't too shabby at 3rd base either (his "second" career during the 1880s). Most in the baseball world, players and press alike, found his beliefs and morals refreshing (not wacky), role model like.

[cyseymour]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Jaime, without checking to see if I'm contradicting myself, my problem with your theory is that the makers of the riddle would have to have intentionally created one of the most obscure inside jokes of all time. It would have taken 120 years and sabr-esque research to unveil their joke on a single tobacco insert, that appears to have been discontinued after a single printing.

Rodney Dangerfield references aside, Rob you make a decent point.

Jay, thanks for sharing the stunning cabinet of Deacon White, and I agree that Joe makes an excellent observation about Deacon's name/team not being on this card.

As much as I would like to think that it's a joke, because I love the story of it being a joke, that does suggest that, once again, I may be mistaken that the card is a joke. Definitely the OJ book got it in my mind that the card was a joke, but staring the cold reality in the face, this could very well just be perhaps the oldest and rarest error card.

Since White's name wasn't enscrolled on the cabinet, that does suggest to me a case of mistaken identity. Couple that with the very small print run (one card in existence) and that is another characteristic of an error card. Even modern error cards often have very low print runs, so the McGreachery does fit in that category of an error card just in the behavior of the card.

So I would say that, in the plain light of day, Rob must be correct that this was not intended as a joke. That said, as wild as my theories were, they did at the very least created the conversation needed to observe certain things about the card that could help us come to a logical conclusion, such as the spelling of the name and characteristics of the cabinet.

I really would have liked the card to have been a joke. But I am afraid that in spite of my logic above, the card may not have been a joke after all. But it is still truly a spectacular card, and the mother of all error cards.

[cyseymour]

Okay, I didn't see Joe's post #116 before I made my post #117. Let me just say that we'll probably never know. I guess that's the best way to put it.

As far as White's religious beliefs go, from what I've read, White believed the world was flat, and tried to convince any who would listen that the world was flat. This was a very strange belief for 1887. Per the OJ book, White was one of the first catchers to stand directly behind home plate, and since it was the 1870's, that was almost certainly without any headgear. It is likely that because of this, he was suffering from dementia, as was sadly common with many 19th century catchers.

This doesn't mean he wasn't respected as a human being and player, but his religious beliefs were way outside the norm. It was a time period where people thought religion was dead - that science was going to shed light on the world and that rational, scientific perspective would assume dominance over the world. We know now that, for better or worse, than never fully happened.

[cyseymour]

Let me also say that, another factor is that every team seems to have a photo of their manager, and Indy didn't have a manager. Since the White card was unmarked, perhaps someone assumed that it was the manager card for Indy since their was no Indy manager card, not realizing that Indy didn't have a manager, and assuming White was the manager since he is old and is wearing formal clothing in the photo. Then the mistake was quickly realized and the card was pulled. That doesn't fully explain how the name McGreachery got on there, but it may have been associated with McGeachy, just a corruption. If the person didn't recognize who Deacon White was, then clearly they could have screwed up the spelling of McGeachy as well. It may have been done by an individual in the studio who was not that knowledgeable of baseball. The person may have asked the name of the Indy manager, been told it was McGeachy, mispelled it as McGeachery and thought White was McGeachy. Then the mistake was found and the card was quickly pulled. That might be the most logical explanation for the entire thing.

[cyseymour]

Another problem with the "Dear Son of God" theory is that all these names, McGeachy, McKee, McGee, McGreachery, McGraw, McCray... that are all variant spellings and corruptions of the same name, which was "crea" which meant God in Gaelic. The word stems from the Greek "Gaia" (pronounced Gay-ah). Gaia also have variant spellings such as Graia, Gaea, etc. The trouble is that these spellings are transliterations. So if someone were to misspell the name McGeachy, it will almost invariably still mean Son of God since that is spelled in so many different ways.

As far as the part of whether White as the mgr. of Indy is a joke, as I was writing earlier, it must have been a case of mistaken identity. That the cabinet doesn't have White's name inscribed is very strong evidence, along with the very short print run, that this card is the mother of all error cards. Someone must have thought he was Jack McGeachy. I believe that McGeachy was the player/manager of Indy for a tad. Someone must have assumed that McGeachy was old and that the White photo was McGeachy.

Another reason for this is that in spite of the fact that we view these players faces all the time, media wasn't so prevalent back then. A players face may have been published in the newspaper once a year. It's not like modern times where we are bombarded with images.

So, in retrospect, I am pretty sure I was wrong in my theory in just about every way imaginable, and the card is an error card. I know that I have changed my mind a few times now, but as new information arises, it must be integrated. Thank you for everyone who participated in this thread, and in fact I think the story of this card is only enhanced by this thread and that this card is the mother of all error cards.

[steve B]

Interesting stuff whichever way it seems.

A couple points.

Spelling, at least in English was not consistent right into the early 1800's, maybe later. It's not unusual to see things written by even the well educated that have the same word spelled different ways on the same page. Printers probably corrected for books but written letters often were a bit sloppy.
So I'd expect spelling of words in languages without Latin roots to be even less consistent.

The classics were taught rather solidly, most advanced education included Latin. Especially in catholic schools since the Mass was in Latin.

I'm not sure about the flat earth thing being religious. I thought the religious one was a earth centric instead of Copernican heliocentric model of the planets?

It's hard to tell if the people who made up the negatives and did the photo printing would have been well educated or catholic, but since photography was a developing technology(Unintended pun, but I'll go with it ) It's likely they were more than simply trained workers.

Steve B