the $33,000 19th century fingerless glove

[Kenny Wel]

I was familiar with the "Hauls of Shame" site, but didn't realize that the site owner was the same person at the center of the SI story. He certainly seems credible on his site. It was so much easier when the good guys wore white hats and the bad guys wore black hats!

Ken

[softball66]

Is it just me, the skeptic, who wonders how this fingerless glove has not aged much in a century - hardly at all. Leather tends to dry out, no matter what, the "perfect" conditions for 100 years and I've seen
various leather articles of that age. Hermetically sealed and moisturized??? Otherwise, except for the stamping, (and this might be able to be accomplished with some sort of die -- this glove just doesn't work for me that well. And what is the provenance?

[Number9]

It's not crazy for that glove to look the way it does. I wouldn't say that it looks brand new, because clearly, there are telltale signs of age when inspected closely. Any leather item that is unused and stored inside a climate controlled environment will last indefinitely. The wild card is how it is stored, and this one was clearly something that was important to someone for quite a while. A hundred years in a dresser drawer or similar storage, won't put too many miles on it.

[softball66]

Bill, I feel you have made a good point. We're looking at an image here with no tactile feel or close personal inspection and I derive from your post that you've seen and inspected the glove. Help me with some questions: what does the stamping say besides the patent number? Spalding Logo? What are the holes in the glove, done by the maker? What are the "signs of aging? that you've observed? Has anyone seen ANY gloves this age of a century or more in this kind of condition, example?? Hall of Fame?
I've owned a glove about this old for two years and I've seen a few more, nothing close to this. If I'm reading correctly this was owned and sold by Halper and Mastro? That's not exactly a confidence booster. Looking for more background and provenance.
I think Bill has hit on the key, how was this glove preserved. Was there climate controlled environments in the early 1900s, late 1800s? If so, what was the purpose in storing this. Are there other leather types, shoes, billfolds, purses, etc. that have been found like this that are maybe 100 to 120 years old?
Bill, what type of leather do you think this is, cowhide, calfskin, buckskin, other?
Looking for more background and provenance. Shall we call this the "Egyptian" glove?

[softball66]

Illuminating addition: Legends auction supplementary discussion.>>
Please Note: Since the release of the catalog, questions have arisen as to the dating of this glove. As such, we have done further research that brings us to two conclusions: (1) The offered glove dates to circa 1890, and (2) This glove was possibly used in a manufacturer’s exhibit at one time, or was used in application for a patent at the US Patent office. The following explains these conclusions in detail: Dating - Upon close inspection, although the button snap shows a patent date of 1883, the stamping on the interior shows a patent date of 1890. In addition, the glove is similar to the fingerless glove depicted in the 1891 Spalding Catalogue. Origin/Usage – Most production gloves display the Spalding trademark on the exterior, whereas this example displays the trademark on the interior along with a distinct, dated patent stamp. Obviously, very few fingerless gloves are known to exist so we wanted to ensure that our description and dating included as much information as we believed necessary to allow bidders to formulate an opinion.

Would it make sense that if this was in a manufacturer's exhibit, that it might have been made later than say 1890 and 30 or 40 years later by Spalding for an exhibit? Rawlings has/had done a similar exhibit
and I think including a fingerless glove and some of its early gloves like the Doak. Not sure when this was done but these showed up in a Rawlings catalog I believe.
And, if it were in an exhibit, it would have been better preserved? And Spalding if it replicated this , would have access to earlier stamping. Just speculating. . .

To me, the leather doesn't look right to the era.

[bing]

Interesting that the 1892 Boston bbc photo is listed by the haul of shame as one of the top ten missing basball artifacts. Unless I am crazy, that photo was listed for auction in the recent Legendary auction. I remember c hecking it out. I can't find it now though.

[Number9]

Joe, I haven't held that particular glove in my hands but there are several design and manufacturing traits that are consistent with other known genuine examples. In fact, the only detail that seems "off" is that it is so clean. But, based on the above scenario, which I don't think is all that far fetched, it is possible. Furthermore, it could have been cleaned, but I don't see any signs of that. Based on the photos, it appears to be constructed with a buckskin exterior and a horsehide interior. Buckskin is very stable over time, especially when conditions are controlled. By that I mean a house that is heated in the winter and storage that is not in a hot attic or damp basement. It doesn't have to be archivally perfect storage when the artifact in question is essentially unused and in stable condition.

As for signs of age, if you zoom in close, you'll see there are areas of the piping that are worn and show some of the expected dryness and cracking. The leather surface is not perfect and looks to have some abrasions and staining which are consistent with light use, and the surface has oxidized somewhat. There also appears to be some dry rot to the interior stitching, also consistent with light use. The stamp is appropriate for the time period, in both appearance and content/character. The stamp reads A.G. Spalding & Bros. N.Y. & CHI. around the Spalding baseball logo. The patent stamp appears to read April 1(?) 1890. The clincher for me, is the hardware. It's dead on accurate for the time period and is clearly genuine. I don't see the holes that you're referring to, but I do see the circular black stains. I really don't know what caused them. It could have been anything from ink to blood, who knows?

One thing that came up in private discussions of the glove, that could have been found by anyone who compared the Halper description and the Mastro description, is that the glove had some work done to it. When Halper owned it, the thumb was detached, either in whole or in part, I'm not sure. Also, there was some separation along the wrist strap, which I couldn't find in the photos. Both of those details were mentioned in the Halper auction description. So clearly there were some repairs, albeit minor, which do further point to the glove being genuine. The most unstable part of a glove like this going to be stitching. Any amount of water contact 100 years ago can dry out and potentially rot the cotton threads, eventually leading to popped seams. Again, if you zoom in, you'll see the thumb seam repair. It's minor, and probably not noticeable unless you're looking for it, but it's there.

[softball66]

Bill, wish you could examine the glove in person but your logic seems sound. I was not aware that Buckskin (Deer?) was more stable (let's say rather than cow or horsehide over a long period of time?)
I did note the areas of some wear as you pointed out. Are you still leaning that this was not made decade(s) later for part of a Spalding exhibit perhaps?
Also this has me stirred into delving into my catalog repro pages of 19th and turn of the century catalogs and know Bill and others will find this illuminating:
1. E. E. Bruce Wholesale 1903 --Catchers mits made from "Smoked Leather" Russet Leather, Eureka Horsehide with Brown Napa back (Murph, there's our Napa leather), also Drab Horsehide. Gloves from various horsehides.
2.A. J. Reach 1884 - gloves heavy Indian tanned Buck and ordinary buck. Back wrist utilizes tiny button fastener
3. Peck & Snyder 1882 (from Carmi Brandis) Indian tanned buckskin; Reindeer. Back utilizes criss cross lacing fastener
4. Spalding 188? Gloves: Drab Buckskin. Backs tiny button wrist fasteners, (also mentioned the Decker Catchers mits (sic) and Meacham infielders glove.
5. Wright & Ditson 1884 Gloves: Selected Buck, strongly padded. Thick bucksin, tiny wrist button fastener . . .Catchers Gloves "they have been severely tested by catchers of Boston, Providence, alsoWorcester clubs, also Harvard, Brown, Princeton, Yale and Darttmouth Colleges.
6. Peck & Snyder "Water Proof Catchers Gloves" > Heavy Buckskin, Indian tanned buckskin.
7. 1888 Spalding: catchers-fielders gloves>choice soft buckskin, lined with Kid. also many "Indian Tanned" leathers.
8. 1890 Spalding - Catchers Mitts: drab buckskin, another with Hog skin, backs hook and loop fastener. The Deckers in this catalog use "patented" heavy buckskin. small button fastener.
Generally, it seems, buckskins of various weights used (depending on the quality of the glove/mitt)

[Number9]

I also wish I could have spent a few hours with it. It's a great glove. It is possible that it was created years later for an exhibit of some kind, like a Spalding anniversary, but I doubt it. The 25th anniversary of AGS would have been 1901, and they had barely made it out of the crescent glove era at that point, leaving one foot in pool. So, hardly time for a retrospective. After the 1890's or so, hardware manufacturing changed and you don't see that type of ornate button being used any longer, I've never found another example anyway. Would there be leftover hardware and appropriate leather from the 1890's, in say the 1920's, for a 50th anniversary? Maybe. But between the leather, the stamping, the hardware, and all the other little details, I think it's right on the money for a glove produced in 1890's. Additionally, if it were specially created for an exhibit of some kind, I'd think that the Spalding stamp wouldn't be upside down. That's something that happens when someone is in charge of repeatedly placing stamps on a glove in a production line setting.

Different leathers react differently to moisture and other effects of time. Depending on the tanning methods, deer can be very resistant to moisture, particularly the early Indian Tanned hides. Those can actually go in the wash. Whereas cow and horse are better with abrasion resistance. However, I think that all goes out the window when the example in question is lightly used. We've all seen pristine, like-new gloves from the 50's and we've all seen crumbling examples from the 50's. It's all in how they're used and handled and whether they've been soaked in water or glove oil, etc.

I have the 1890 Spalding catalog and that states that this glove was buckskin, which matches up with the Mastro photo. To me, the interior looks like horsehide lining leather, but it's just a guess based on it's appearance. I could just as easily agree that it's all buckskin.

[softball66]

I'm so happy we've got some knowledgable and interested early day glove lads like Bill and Mike to elucidate us. Are you glovers listening in?
Bill the "Indian Tanning" is the old style vegetable tanning method and creates a more durable and better leather than the mass produced chrome tanning method that went into full swing in the early 1900s if I'm correct. It would aid in the preservation of this 33K glove. And the chrome process, I believe, is what got the American tanneries in trouble because of hazardous waste problems.
Every time I think about the "Indian Tanning" I harken to the practice in the old tribes of having the older Indians contribute by chewing the animal skin leather to soften it. Harken quote in "Scent of a Woman" movie by Al Pacino's character that he couldn't even chew the leather anymore.
I would love to delve into the history of this glove, like Bill alludes, to know just what its origin is. But with Halper initially involved and him long gone, we may never know. Is this, by the way, the most expensive "retail" glove we've experienced?
Keep those cards and letters coming in.

[Number9]

Indian tanning, as I'm familiar with it, uses the animal's organs and fat in the tanning process. The hide is then smoked to give it color and make it water proof. It's pretty wild. There are still a few specialists who keep the skill alive.

[murphusa]

I don't know what the big deal is, today I went to the Rawlings outlet store and they had one in their display. It looks like everyone has one

[murphusa]

and another popped up on ebay last night

item number

280611098717

[Number9]

Did Rawlings ever sell a repro fingerless glove? I've never seen one come up for sale.

[softball66]

I think the Rawlings replica was used in the Rawlings exhibit and display, never sold. Here's a related event that ties into this a little, an 1800s baseball on the antique road show.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/roadshow/archive/201003A17.html