1883 Cincinnati (Cincinnatis, Red Stockings)
This rendering is based on written documentation for uniform style and color. No visual documentation is known and an artist’s conceptualization is used to create the rendering.
Rendering accuracy:Year: documented Team: documented
Was Cincinnati in 1883 the first team to wear uniform numerals?
A case history on history – an example of how information gets misconstrued over time.
As you can see in the rendering above, the Reds of 1883 wore a white uniform, a shield on their shirt, and parti-colored caps. Some have written that this Cincinnati team was also the first to wear numbers to identify players. A big uniform milestone, for sure — but is it true?
For an answer, let’s turn to the Dressed to the Nines pages at the Baseball Hall of Fame website. The content there is wonderfully rich, remarkably researched, and expertly presented. The site includes this page, which says the following:
—“While rumor has it that uniform numbers were first used in the 19th century, the earliest verified instance in which a team experimented with numbering its players occurred in 1907.”
Sorry Cincinnati, you’re just a rumor. In fact, all known efforts to find a contemporary newspaper account of Cincinnati wearing numerals before 1900 have proven fruitless. Many researchers have looked, not a single mention has been found. So, where did the Cincinnati story come from?
Tracking down the rumor.
Let’s go backwards, from the present to the past, and try to separate rumor from reality.
In this century, writers and journalists have retold the Cincinnati story. For example, Mike Shannon in his 2008 book on Cincinnati baseball wrote: “[Team president Aaron] Stern put numbers on the backs of Reds uniforms, but the players, noting that prison inmates wore numbers, objected and convinced Stern to discontinue the experiment.” Shannon stated this event took place in 1883.
In 2002, the Chapel Hill (NC) Herald published an article on uniform numbers. They stated the same story from 1883, adding that the Reds wore “numbers on their sleeves” and that “fans thought the players were being ranked according to ability.” The Herald also noted that in 2002 they received their information from the Hall of Fame.
In The Cooperstown Symposium on Baseball and American Culture, 2000, editors William M. Simmons and Alvin H. Hall noted that in Cincinnati “the experiment failed because the numbers were difficult for fans to see.”
20th-century versions.
Before the internet, the story was passed between newspaper columnists. In 1992, Hal Lebovitz of the Mansfield (OH) News-Journal wrote that “the first team ever to wear numbers was the Cincinnati Red Stockings of the National League in 1883.” (Of course, Cincinnati was in the American Association in 1883.) Syndicated columnist Jim Caple in 1990 also told the story, noting that “the numbers were small, and only on the sleeves, and they didn’t catch on.”
Those articles may have derived from ones published in the early 1970s. In 1973, Bob Sullivan, Sports Editor of the Springfield (OH) Daily News, wrote that “modern baseball did not number its players until the Yanks adopted a system in 1929, although the Cincinnati Red Stockings had numbered their uniforms in 1883.” Bob Barnet of the Muncie (IN) Star Press said the same thing in 1970.
None of these reports were substantiated, and were likely to have been based on still earlier unsubstantiated reports. In 1963, Hal McCoy of the Dayton (OH) Journal Herald wrote that numerals were first worn in Cincinnati in 1883. Likewise, Neal Russo of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch said in 1962 that Cincinnati “used numerals in 1883, but dropped them after that season.”
The first telling?
It’s possible the story first came to light decades earlier in 1923. A story was published in the Sporting News on March 1, 1923, at about the same time the St. Louis Cardinals were experimenting with player numbering. The SN wrote that around 1883 there was a suggestion for “uniform attire with each player numbered,” and that “at least one club tried out the scheme, to see how it would take with the fans. It did not have a moral effect and was abandoned after one game.”
As the 1923 Sporting News piece did not mention Cincinnati by name, it’s possible there were other published stories during this period that did. There surely are more versions of the story yet to be discovered.
Interestingly, a team in the 19th century did consider uniform numbers and newspapers did report on it. In December 1894, Chicago team owner Jim Hart floated the idea, stating that the numbers will find a “conspicuous place on the uniform, and also the score card.” Obviously, the intent was to sell more score cards, however Hart was soon to drop the idea.
More questions than answers.
At the start of the 1883 season, one newspaper noted that “the Cincinnatis will have the same uniform as last season [1882], retaining the parti-colored cap.” These caps were of different colors and each color was meant to identify a player by his position. Question — if the caps were meant to identify players, why then the need for numbers? Second question — did the team abandon the cap system sometime in 1883 and switch to a numbering system?
As stated, there are no known contemporary reports from 1883, or any nearby year, of the Cincinnati team experimenting with uniform numbers. So, where did this story come from?
Ahhhhh — maybe it came from here.
On May 13, 1883, the Cincinnati Enquirer wrote the following:
—“The managers of the Cincinnati Club have decided to abolish the system of selling reserved seats in the grand stand by numbers. Hereafter a certain portion of the grand stand will be set apart for the occupation only of ladies, children and their escorts. Here, as elsewhere, however, no special seats will be reserved, but it will be a case of ‘first come, first served.‘ The system of numbering seats caused a great deal of confusion.”
It seems Cincinnati was not numbering uniforms in 1883, they were numbering seats!
It’s clear that history gets all jumbled up over the years, changing and morphing with each decade, with each retelling. Is that what has happened here? If you have an opinion, a correction, or more research to share on this subject, please send it my way.
Thanks for your time. —-Craig
Chapel Hill Herald, Mansfield News-Journal and Springfield Daily News research from Peter Reitan. Sporting News and Cincinnati Enquirer research from Ed Morton. For more on these references, see written descriptions below.
Visual documentation on this uniform:
None
Written documentation on this uniform:
March 1883: “Spalding & Bros., of Chicago, will make the Cincinnatis’ uniforms this year. They will be similar to that of last season [1882] with the exception that ‘Cincinnatis’ [sp] will be displayed on the shirt fronts.” From the Cincinnati Enquirer, March 4, 1883. Research from Ed Morton.
April 1883: “The St. Louis’ new uniforms are identical with the Cincinnatis and trouble will ensue over their similarity.” From the Louisville Courier-Journal, April 8, 1883.
April 1883: “The Cincinnatis will have the same uniform as last season [1882], retaining the parti-colored cap. The word, Cincinnati, in red letters will curve around the shirt shield.” From the Boston Globe, April 12, 1883. Research from Chuck McGill.
April 1883: “The Cincinnati team has parti-colored uniforms.” From The Sporting Life, April 22, 1883.
May 5, 1883, Cincinnati v. Eclipse, Louisville, at Cincinnati: “The Louisvilles were retired in one, two, three order and for the fourth time in the week, the Red Stockings were victorious.” From the Cincinnati Enquirer, May 6, 1883. A reference to the team’s stocking color.
May 1883: “The managers of the Cincinnati Club have decided to abolish the system of selling reserved seats in the grand stand by numbers. Hereafter a certain portion of the grand stand will be set apart for the occupation only of ladies, children and their escorts. Here, as elsewhere, however, no special seats will be reserved, but it will be a case of ‘first come first served.‘ The system of numbering seats caused a great deal of confusion.” From the Cincinnati Enquirer, May 13, 1883. Research from Ed Morton. Did this effort to number seats become misconstrued over tie to be a story about uniform numbers? See summary below on uniform numbers.
July 10, 1883, Cincinnati v. Eclipse, Louisville, at Louisville, Twenty-eighth street park: “The visitors [i.e., Cincinnati], with the exception of [John] Reilly and [John] Corkhill, left their uniforms at the hotel, and were compelled to play in the fancy suits furnished by the Eclipse Juniors.” From the Cincinnati Enquirer, July 11, 1883. Research from Ed Morton.
1883, uniform numbers.
There have been many non-contemporary mentions of the 1883 Cincinnati team wearing identifying numbers on their shirts:
—From 1923: “[The] idea of different suits [i.e., color-coded uniforms in 1882] did not last long, however, and it was followed by suggestions for uniform attire with each player numbered. There was more controversy over that then than there has been this winter [1923]. At least one club tried out the scheme, to see how it would take with the fans. It did not have a moral effect and was abandoned after one game.” From “Numbering Scheme Not Half as Bizarre as One Old Idea,” published in the Sporting News, March 1, 1923. Research from Ed Morton.
—From 1962: “The Cincinnati Red Stockings, baseball’s first professional team, used numerals in 1883, but dropped them after that season.” From Neal Russo, “Baseball Cardinals to Have Names on Uniforms this Year,” published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, January 11, 1962.
—From 1963: “Ever since the Cincinnati Red Stockings appeared on the baseball field with numerals on their uniforms in 1883, athletic teams have used numbered jerseys for identification.” From Hal McCoy, “Polo Jersey Numbers Reveal Inside Story,” published in the Dayton (OH) Journal Herald, August 2, 1963.
—From 1970: “[Players] didn’t always wear uniform numbers, with the first numerals appearing on Cincinnati Reds players in 1883.” From Bob Barnet, “Some Historic Firsts,” published in the Muncie (IN) Star Press, July 12, 1970. No reference documentation given.
—From 1973: “Modern baseball did not number its players until the Yanks adopted a system in 1929, although the Cincinnati Red Stockings had numbered their uniforms in 1883.” From Bob Sullivan, Sports Editor of the (Springfield, OH) Daily News, “Sports Numbers Losing Identity and Personality,” published in the Springfield (OH) News-Sun, September 19, 1973. No reference documentation given. Research from Peter Reitan.
—From 1990: “The first professional baseball club, the Cincinnati Reds, were also the first team to place numbers on their jerseys, way back in 1882. But the numbers were small, and only on the sleeves, and they didn`t catch on.” From Jim Caple, Knight-Ridder Newspapers, “Uniform Numbers Tell Interesting Tales,” published in the Twin Falls (ID) Times-News, May 10, 1990, and “Baseball Has Its Own Numbers Game,” published in the Chicago Tribune, May 13, 1990. This syndicated story was published numerous times in May 1990. No reference documentation given. Caple stated 1882 as the year, not 1883.
—From 1992: “The first team ever to wear numbers was the Cincinnati Red Stockings of the National League in 1883. Nobody followed suit until the Indians put them on their sleeves 33 years later [1916].” From Hal Lebovitz, Mansfield (OH) News-Journal, July 4, 1992. No reference documentation given. Research from Peter Reitan.
—From 2001: “The 1882 Cincinnati Reds placed numbers on the jersey for the first time. Unfortunately, the experiment failed because the numbers were difficult for fans to see.” From The Cooperstown Symposium on Baseball and American Culture, 2000, edited by William M. Simmons and Alvin H. Hall (2001). Reference documentation not available on digital copy. This book stated 1882 as the year, not 1883.
—From 2002: “[The Chapel Hill Herald] received the following information from the National Baseball Hall of Fame: […] ‘In 1883, the National League Cincinnati Red Stockings had their players wear numbers on their sleeves, but they protested. The players thought they looked like prisoners, and fans thought the players were being ranked according to ability.’” From The Chapel Hill (NC) Herald, “White Sox first team to put their names on uniforms,” published April 21, 2002. Research from Peter Reitan.
—From 2008: “In 1882, [Cincinnati Club President] Stern sought to brighten up the diamond by having each of his players wear a different colored uniform. Bad idea, quickly abandoned. A year later [1883] Stern put numbers on the backs of Reds uniforms, but the players, noting that prison inmates wore numbers, objected and convinced Stern to discontinue the experiment.” From Mike Shannon, The Good, the Bad & the Ugly: Heart-Pounding Jaw-Dropping & Gut-Wrenching Moments from Cincinnati Reds History (2008). No reference documentation given.
—Note that there were reports from before the beginning of the 1895 season that Chicago President Jim Hart was considering putting numbers on Chicago uniforms for the upcoming season. See those reports here.
—To date, no contemporary reports have surfaced to confirm the occurrence of uniform numbering in 1883 (or 1882). To see the documented history of numbers on uniforms, go the the Baseball Hall of Fame’s Dressed To The Nines website, Numbers & Names page here.
Team genealogy: Cincinnati 1881-
Cincinnati was formed in 1881 to join the American Association (AA) for its inaugural season in 1882. The AA was a major league operating between 1882 and 1891. Cincinnati played in the AA throughout the 1880s and then joined the National League (NL) for the 1890 season. The NL began operation in 1876. Cincinnati has played every year in the NL from 1890 to present time. Information from wikipedia.com.
1883 Cincinnati summary
Uniform: white, red stockings and parti-colored caps
First worn:
Photographed:
Described: March-May
Material:
Manufacturer: Spalding & Bro., Chicago
Supposition: cap style, shirt style, lettering style
Variations: may have worn identifying numbers on uniforms for one game as an experiment, two players wore Louisville uniforms on July 10
Other items:
Home opener report: no, May 1 v. St. Louis
Rendering posted: May 17, 2020
Diggers on this uniform: Chuck McGill, Ed Morton, Peter Reitan,