End Of Story: The 1912 New York Yankees.

This post contains new material and much reworked from Friday’s.

I thought we had cleared this up yesterday, but evidently not. Now my old friend Joe Buck has repeated a mistake that has unfortunately attained the aura of official history. Simply put, when the Boston Red Sox opened Fenway Park 100 years ago Friday, the faithful would have called the visiting team “The New York Yankees” – not “The New York Highlanders” (we’ll leave out any more troublesome things they might’ve called them).

The April 12, 1912 edition of The New York Times wrote of the club’s home opener: “The Yankees presented a natty appearance in their new uniforms of white with black pin stripes.”

Below you’ll see the 1911 baseball cards issued with the brands of the American Tobacco Trust, labeling the New York players “Yankees,” plus a newspaper supplement from 1907 showing a team picture of the New York Yankees.

My friend Marty Appel is just out with his comprehensive history of the franchise, Pinstripe Empire. He has some succinct insight into the etymology of the New York American League club’s name:

“Today we think the field was commonly called Hilltop Park, and the team commonly called the Highlaners. But in the first decade…the team was also better known as the New York Americans or the Greater New Yorks. On opening day (1903), the Telegram called them the Deveryites. Sam Crane in the Evening Journal was determined that they be the Invaders. In those days, team nicknames were far less formal. It was, for example, more common to say the Bostons or the Boston Americans than to call them the Red Sox or the Pilgrims.

“Hilltoppers was also used on occasion, and as early as April 7, 1904, the Evening Journal used YANKEES BEAT BOSTON in a headline. (“Highlanders” didn’t even appear in the New York Times until March 1906).”

Appel also quotes a piece from the legendary writer and historian Fred Lieb, from Baseball Magazine, in 1922:

“(Highlanders) was awkward to put in newspaper headlines. Finally the sporting editor at one of the New York evening papers exclaimed ‘The hell with this Highlanders; I am going to call this team ‘the Yanks’ that will fit into heads better.’

“Sam Crane, who wrote baseball on the same sheet, began speaking of the team as the Yankees and Yanks. When other sporting editors saw how much easier ‘Yanks’ fit into top lines of a head, they too (decided against) Highlanders, a name which never was popular with fans.”

The further back you go before the rust formed around the official history, the further it becomes clear that until the owners officially christened the team in 1913, they were known informally by many names. “Yankees” seems to have been an early favorite, “Americans” being the default second choice (just as it would’ve been for the Cleveland “Americans” or the Detroit “Americans” or – translated to the other league – for the Philadelphia “Nationals”). “Highlanders,” “Hilltoppers” and “New Yorks” brought up the rear.

It’s also pretty clear that the New York team we know as the Yankees was never formally called “Highlanders.”

I first heard the story of the slow evolution from “Gordon’s Highlanders” (the name of a famed British army regiment of the time, which stuck because the first team president was named Joseph Gordon, and because their ballpark was at one of the highest spots in New York) to the Yanks in Frank Graham’s first version of The New York Yankees in 1943. At that time, a lot of people who had seen the full 40-year history of the franchise were still alive – Graham, who became a sportswriter in 1915, included. I read the copy my father had had since childhood, either in 1967 or 1968.

The relevant passage is on Page 16:

“With 1913 coming up, there was an almost complete new deal. Jim Price, Sports Editor of the New York Press, had been calling the team the Yankees because he found the name Highlanders too long to fit his headlines; and by 1913 the new name had been generally adopted.”

So the Yankees were the last people to call themselves the Yankees and as Graham wrote nearly 70 years ago, the nickname had been generally adopted before the club went through the formality – in 1913.

The key to all this is Appel’s observation that nicknames were informal until the clubs began to realize they were marketing and merchandising opportunities, which probably didn’t take place until the 1920’s. Official MLB history and fans have totally reversed the team name equation. It used to be all about the cities (the 1889 World Series was “The New Yorks versus The Brooklyns”) and this is something that just does not compute to the modern mind. In fact, think of the Dodgers, who began as a new franchise in the then-major league American Association in 1884 with the uninspired nickname “Grays.” By 1888, after a spate of players got married in the off-season, they were the Brooklyn Bridegrooms. In 1899 when Ned Hanlon took over as manager, there was a famous vaudeville troupe called “Hanlon’s Superbas”- thus they became the Brooklyn Superbas. The name outlasted Hanlon, and only faded when Wilbert Robinson took over as manager in 1914 and the name changed again: Brooklyn Robins. Throughout this whole time, the fans and sportswriters used, as a kind of alternative nickname, the term applied to Brooklyn fans who were in constant danger from the labyrinth of streetcar lines throughout the city: “The Trolley Dodgers,” or, simply “Dodgers.” So when Robinson left after the 1931 campaign, the club formally declared themselves “The Dodgers” (but didn’t put the name on the uniforms until 1938). How did the Dodgers treat this confusing history? They declared their 100th anniversary to be 1990, which wiped out the 1884-89 time frame and the team’s first trip to the World Series.

And just think, we can go through this entire history controversy year after next. 2014 will be the 100th Anniversary of Wrigley Field. Only it wasn’t called Wrigley Field in 1914 and the Cubs didn’t play there until 1916.

First, back across the country and the Yankee photographic evidence.

Tip of the cap to my fellow SABR member Mark and this evidence-filled blog on the issue. He gives prominent attention to headlines from the New York Sun about the 1912 “Highlanders.” Getting lesser play? This clip from the New York Tribune, which echoes the aforementioned Times headline:Interestingly the Sun folded in 1950. The Tribune was still breathing (after a series of mergers) in 1966. The Times is still in business.

Then there’s this from 1907:

That is a postcard advertising the following Sunday’s edition of The New York American newspaper, which was to include a full-sized version of the 1907 Yankees team picture. This was just after 1907’s opening day, five years before the christening in The Fens.

Below, the 1911 baseball cards. In some of the biographies (as shown in the lower left hand corner) there are references to “Highlanders.” But the fronts tell the story:

By the way, “Quinn” in the top row? That’s Jack Quinn, whose oldest-victory mark was just broken by Jamie Moyer. These are 1911 cards. Quinn is also in the 1933 set.

In point of fact, the Yankees were the Yankees before the Red Sox were the Red Sox. Created in 1901 when the American League was founded, the Boston team was known variously as the Pilgrims, and simply “The Americans” (as opposed to “The Nationals”), the new team drew much of its talent from the successful, but eminently cheap National League team in Boston. From its earliest days in the National Association (1871) and N.L. (1876) that team had worn red stockings, and were once formally known by that name.

In 1907, the N.L. team’s manager Fred Tenney became worried about the threat of blood poisoning supposedly posed by the red dye in the socks getting into spike wounds. By year’s end, he had convinced owners John and George Dovey to eliminate the color from the uniforms. A block away, where the nascent A.L. team was struggling to gain a foothold in what was still a National League town, owner John I. Taylor immediately jumped on the opportunity and announced his team would don “the red socks” in 1908 – and a name was born.

The Yankees were the Yankees by 1906. The Red Sox weren’t the Red Sox until 1908.

Parenthetically, the N.L. team’s next nicknames – the Doves, for the Dovey Brothers, and, in 1911, the Rustlers (because Doves increasingly sounded stupid) – didn’t catch on. The Doveys sold out in 1912 to a bunch of New York politicians from Tammany Hall. Since that organization had a Native American for its logo, its operatives were known as “braves” – and thus the Boston N.L. club adopted that name, and have carried it since. In fact, a week ago Wednesday was the 100th Anniversary of the first appearance of the Braves.


  1. ShoeBeDoBeDo

    Surprised Ken Burns hasn’t chimed in on this topic. Or maybe he has. Always wondered how the Dodgers came by their team name. That’s a much appreciated bit of info for this California Girl.

  2. Mark A

    Well done, sir.

    The Highlanders only got the prominent attention because I searched for them first. The Yankees got the same amount of attention. The Tribune just gave them fewer inches.

    Again, well done.

  3. Pingback: End Of Story: The 1912 New York Yankees. « Baseball Nerd | Yankees News Source
  4. willv

    What newspapers call them is irrelevant. Everyone might have been calling them the Yankees. Until they actually changed their name, that wasn’t who they were.

  5. willv

    By this, I don’t mean the history isn’t relevant, only Highlanders is what appears in any statistical records. They might have not had an “official” name, but that’s official enough for me.

  6. clarence3935

    Isn’t this what is known in the psychitric feld as an OCD. Or would it be a Highlander complex. Goody goody for Jim Price.

  7. Phil Hendrie

    Keith, great history but the fact is you were looking, lovingly, through a scrapbook filled with white faces. No black players so no real major leagues until the 1950’s. And nothing to get weepy or nostalgic about.

  8. Patricia Ellyn Powell

    Now that this here Yankee baby has been put to bed, I wanted to mention that there was a controversy on Jeopardy not long ago. A woman responded to an answer with a question about the early baseball cards that were related to the tobacco industry. It seems this woman knew that connection and at first she was considered wrong. Later, Alex came back and gave her credit. The poor lady was almost penalized for KNOWING the truth about the history. This issue seems straight enough now, unless someone wants to end up in a straight-jacket over it. The truth will out. Thanks, Keith! As George S. said this morning on THIS WEEK, you are one of the two greatest baseball minds…in my book, you are THE greatest baseball mind! Happy Sunday!

  9. Bishop Knight

    The Brooklyn took their name because of the trolley cars of the time, and people had to constantly ” Dogde” them as pedestrians

  10. Ed Fazio

    Love the Post of History….. THIS Is Your REAL CALLING… Tv Show of Baseball HISTORY, Produced & Told by “Keith Olbermann.” Beats “H” Out of Politics…

    Ed Fazio

    • Patricia Ellyn Powell

      Ed, dynamite idea! Our public TV had a show about the history of baseball here in our town and told the story of Andy Strong, who was struck by lightning through the metal pin on the top of his cap. Changed the caps for all! Bringhurst Field is right down the street from me and I learned stuff I never would have known! He could do a program, like put one per week in a can and tell the history of ballparks, famous players and plays from the past. Folks would love it!

  11. george

    Keith while this is a very cool historical baseball story, I want to know why American liberals are such wimps. It sad that you allow yourself to be effectively censored, despite the fact that there are viewers interested to listen to your point of view. Sure, I get without money to fund a team, you can’t be the same. Anyway, surrender if you want. That’s what American liberals do. They surrender. They are even afraid to call themselves liberals and allow their opponets to strawman and misrepresent them to death.

  12. toddradom

    Keith-good points on the slippery designations assigned to franchises a century ago (witness the fact that the Red Sox club was never ever popularly called “Pilgrims,” despite what many think.) One correction to make-the 1932 and 1933 Brooklyn Dodgers featured “Dodgers” on their home jerseys, then switched to “Brooklyn” both home and road through 1937.

  13. Rick Worth

    My name is Rick Worth. I’m the author of BASEBALL TEAM NAMES – published by McFarland in January 2013. My book explores in detail the origin of 10,000 professional baseball teams names from 1869 to date. Thank you!

  14. Pingback: TAKING CHANCE: Tinker to Evers to . . . $120,000 | Retropundit
  15. Augustine Archdale

    I do agree with all the ideas you have presented to your post.

    They’re really convincing and will certainly work.
    Nonetheless, the posts are too quick for starters. May just you
    please extend them a little from next time?

    Thank you for the post.

  16. Douglas Kibbee

    Thank you for sharing excellent informations. Your site is
    so cool. I am impressed by the details that you¡¦ve on this blog.
    It reveals how nicely you understand this subject. Bookmarked this web page, will come back for extra articles.
    You, my pal, ROCK! I found just the info I already
    searched everywhere and just couldn’t come across.
    What an ideal website.

Leave a Reply to Douglas Kibbee Cancel 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 )

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s