What Do You Consider the First Baseball Card(s)?

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Dan-CdV stands for Carte de Visite. This was the main type of photographic card before being supplanted by cabinet cards.

Thank you sir!

[tedzan]

Well, these 1871 Troy Haymakers cards aren't old enough to be the first BB cards; but, they sure are rare.
Ten such cards were issued in 1871 - 1872 portraying players on this National Association team.


William "Clipper" Flynn (1871 - 1872)





Tom York (1871 - 1885)





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[MVSNYC]

Ted, those are pretty amazing. Are they yours?

[tedzan]

Not any more, Mike.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Well, these 1871 Troy Haymakers cards aren't old enough to be the first BB cards; but, they sure are rare.
Ten such cards were issued in 1871 - 1872 portraying players on this National Association team.


William "Clipper" Flynn (1871 - 1872)





Tom York (1871 - 1885)





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Very nice; similar in format and year to the Mort Rogers Cards.

[Mungo Hungo]

Out of curiosity, why are the 1869 Peck & Snyders so often considered the first as opposed to some of those from earlier years?

The 1866 CDV Unions of Lansingburgh cards, for example, look very much like cards to me. What is it that disqualifies them?

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by Mungo Hungo

Out of curiosity, why are the 1869 Peck &

The 1866 CDV Unions of Lansingburgh cards, for example, look very much like cards to me. What is it that disqualifies them?

Speaking only for myself, the question of how they were distributed and for what purpose. If a member of say, the Brooklyn Atlantics, walked into a photography studio in 1860 dressed in his baseball garb and had a CdV made of him, that in and of itself would not make it a baseball card UNLESS for some commercial purpose the public was made known of its existence and offered an opportunity to acquire one.

I do not think it is known how and whether studios made their baseball CdVs available to the public. Maybe only the player(s) depicted had the opportunity to acquire one. So for that reason some people do not regard them as baseball cards.

I will add calling something a baseball card does not preclude also calling it something else. The Jordan & Co. cards are a good example. They were used to gain entry to a three-game cricket/baseball match. For half the price the public could buy a ticket without the player image on it. So for those tickets that included a player photo, they also are "sports cards". To go further, inasmuch as the games played included cricket, in addition to baseball, the only Jordan & co. ticket I regard as a true baseball card is the solo image of Harry Wright. There is one where he is depicted with his father, who was a known cricket player and who is holding a cricket bat. That image would seem to stress the cricket component of the matches, as too are the ones of other players who seem depicted more in cricket than baseball attire. In contrast, the solo one of Harry Wright, who was regarded at the time as a prominent baseball player and who is neither attired nor holding any equipment clearly indicative of cricket, stresses baseball much more than the other known images, and for that reason I regard that ticket as a more clear cut representation of a baseball card.

[oldjudge]

As can be seen from this discussion, there is no clear cut definition of what constitutes a baseball card. Rather, each of us has his own, possibly self serving, definition. I believe that the 1859-1860 Atlantic's CdV is the first. It portrays the preeminent team of the time and is known in multiple copies. I also believe that all 1863 Grand Match tickets, not just the Harry Wright, are baseball cards. The exhibition included not just cricket but also baseball. Thus, Hammond and Crossley(other card subjects), as well as Harry Wright, were baseball players for that event. Also, Harry is wearing basically the same outfit in both his single card and the card with his dad. Personally, I prefer the card with Sam, but that is a matter of taste.
I thought this would be a great time to show a card that ties to the Grand Match. In 1859, a group of professional cricket players from England embarked on the first overseas cricket tour to Canada and the U.S. They played a series of matches, with the U.S. team featuring the same four players later featured in the 1863 Grand Match (Harry, Sam, Crossley and Hammond). The touring cricket players also played a baseball game in Philadelphia. The CdV below was sold at one of the matches. Since the cricket players did play baseball some might call this the first baseball card; I would not. However, it is an incredibly historic and important CdV.

[Leon]

Jay, great card. Tickets are tickets though.