![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I want to also add that I'm pretty sure Peck & Snyder produced mammoth plate photographs of some of the key teams, such as the 1869 Red Stockings, but it doesn't appear any of them survived.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Kevin's ad mentions "separate" players? Could there have been individual cdvs or trade cards? Interesting that there is no mention of Creighton?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I noticed that too Gary, and I'm picturing those composite CdV's that REA had several years back. But I'm not sure.
And I don't believe that Peck & Snyder issued the Jim Creighton. Corey would need to answer, but as I recall there is no store advertising on the reverse. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Part of the problem in analyzing what would constitute a card for this discussion would be which of the following are viable candidates to be considered cards:
distributed contemporaneously alongside product distributed in a product available as a premium for buying a product used in an exchange such as a ticket or currency sold as novelty or memento As I collect "insert" cards and the discussion is baseball - I think the N167 OJ's best fit the bill. There are depictions of base ball on the pages of books followed chronologically by steel engravings and CDV's, tintypes, the trade cards, and finally the tobacco/gum inserts. I prefer to keep each distinct. Should we also be discussing the manufacturer's motivation to define a card? Does an items size, construction, or production edify our definition? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Henry- a thought about the N167: They depict only NY Giants, Goodwin and Co. was based in New York, they clearly were issued in a very small quantity compared to the N172....so is it possible they were only available in the New York metropolitan area and virtually unknown anywhere else? If that is the case, then it cannot be considered the first nationally distributed set. That honor would go to N172.
I do consider N167 to be a very early baseball card set, but perhaps a regional one, and not unlike the Peck and Snyder issue. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
but I zeroed in on commercially produced in OP and kind of lost track of where the thread had morphed. I'm not really a base ball guy too much anymore - and my OJ book not at hand. What is the earliest attributed date for a card of a base ball player from the N172 set? Did the first series of cards pre-date the N173 cabinets initial production?
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I would lean towards N167 myself as the first true insert baseball card.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
JimB |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Jim--there are several definitions that could be used to denote the first baseball card, and by neither would I consider Peck and Snyder to be it. By the broad definition I think Rob was right and the 1863 Grand Match souvenir tickets are the first. By a more conventional card definition, I think that the 1886 issues are the first. This would include New York Kalamazoo Bats and N167s.
Last edited by oldjudge; 04-08-2014 at 12:19 AM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Oldest Baseball Card | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 129 | 04-09-2024 01:53 PM |
Show Your Oldest Card.... | bcookie | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 38 | 04-13-2013 03:26 PM |
I think I just completed the oldest signed Baseball card team set of the 20th century | milkit1 | Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports | 29 | 07-28-2012 09:23 AM |
The Oldest Known Baseball Cards? | M's_Fan | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 16 | 10-08-2010 07:31 AM |
What is the oldest baseball "card" that you own? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 22 | 06-29-2007 04:56 PM |