1726.2 Ballplaying and Boston Common

Abstract

Sam. Hirst got up betime in morning, and took Ben Swett with him and went into [Boston] Common play Wicket.1Since 1634, Common has been celebrated as the outdoor stage on which many characteristic dramas of local life have been enacted.2 One such drama-cited in Protoball 1856.20 and 1858.35-was duel between Massachusetts version of baseball and that of New York. 1856 Olympic Club of conducted trial matches of Massachusetts game on Common3; in 1858, Common hosted first New England match by New York rules.4 Those games, unambiguously baseball, were culmination of two centuries of ball-play.Protoball 1700c.2 refers much earlier played on Common. Two histories present identical assertions, but neither gives source: Mary Farwell Ayer (1903) and Samuel Barber (1916) write that in late 1600s and early 1700s favorite games were and flinging bullet [bullit, in Barber's version, probably original spelling].5 (The latter involved throwing cannonballs. We know less about 17th century wicket.) Protoball 1700c.2 Protoball 1858.35, therefore, encompass ballplaying from New York game.Evidence that wicket was played in before 1700 comes from Cotton Mather's autobiographical manuscript Paterna. Born in 1663, Mather recalled that he began preaching at an Age wherein I See Many Lads playing their marbles or in street.6 Mather's remembrance places Wickets as early as mid-1670s. The name wicket could refer stumps in cricket, or arise from meaning well known time, i.e., small opening in fortified gate, large enough duck through. The term was often used as metaphor convey narrowness of opening through which one might enter heaven's gate. We don't see (or Wicket) again until fifty years later. his 1726 diary, in an entry that qualifies as primary evidence, Samuel Sewall expressed displeasure when his grandson, then 20, skipped morning prayers to play Wicket on Common.7H. L. Mencken defined Puritanism as haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy. Historians have painted more nuanced portrait of colonial attitudes toward pleasure and recreation, which, in moderation, had their place. If ball-play broke Sabbath, however, Reverend or Magistrate brought out his diary take note8; such disapproving voices have dominated historical record.One need not be Puritan regard life in New England as struggle: Winters were long; summers short. A man who stood watch on Beacon Hill in 1630s would have gazed east upon Atlantic and west into wilderness. His emotions cannot be known, but exhilaration and terror would have been reasonable. Would he have scouted for a place leavel enough play ball?9 Not yet, I suspect. A ceaseless labor awaited him, from which no one was exempt, not even his children.Some children were fortunate enough go school. 1635, Public Latin School opened on north side of School Street. Where students played then isn't clear, but Common beckoned. As conditions of life improved, and grandfathers and fathers pushed back wilderness, children had more of chance play. Of schoolboys in 1700s, Edward Ellsworth Brown wrote, In few hours that could be given out-door sports, they had skating and coasting in winter, and in summer swimming, and variety of games, including some with bat and ball.10 More schools started, more schoolboys flooded onto Common as classes let out. time, Latin's was that corner of Common lying between path from West Street Old Elm, and Park Street and Beacon Street.11As long as anyone could remember, Boston Common was playground of School Boys.12 1831, young Samuel Gray Ward observed, There are great many boys all time on Common now playing bat and ball. …