Blog Archives

WWII Veterans Honored on the Diamond: Ruptured Duck Patches for Baseball Uniforms

In the midst of researching for an article I was writing, I noticed search results that had a recurrent theme that pulled me away from the subject of my study and onto something that I knew nothing about. It isn’t saying much in regards to experiencing discoveries in terms of militaria or baseball as I am a relative newcomer to this area of collecting. What caught my attention was an image of three Chicago Cubs players wearing uniforms with a patch bearing a familiar military design that is affectionately known as the “Ruptured Duck.”

Like many returning World War II veterans, this sailor’s uniform was adorned with a ruptured duck patch (the small yellow patch located on the right breast) indicating that he had been discharged from active duty.

The patch emblem, for a collector of WWII military uniforms is one that is very familiar. However, unlike the regulation sized patch that was sewn onto the uniforms of discharged veterans returning from war service, this patch was several times larger and was sewn onto the players’ baseball uniform sleeves (on the left). My first encounter with the Ruptured Duck insignia was when my grandfather showed me his navy uniform when I asked about his time in the service during the war. I remember him smiling as he dragged it out from the closet and recalled some of the good, light-hearted stories. Having seen my grandparents’ wedding photos, I knew that he wore it on their wedding day. The first time I heard the Ruptured Duck term from him while describing the rating insignia and ribbons, for some reason, I never questioned why something that clearly looked like an eagle carried such a disparate nomenclature.

War-weary veterans returning home from service had only their uniforms (and any souvenirs they may have acquired) in their duffle bags. Upon their discharge, veterans were issued the Ruptured Duck patch to sew onto their uniforms which afforded an easily recognizable mark to indicate that they were no longer on active duty. Recalling my own time in service, a sailor, marine, soldier or airman is always on duty and therefor available for any ad hoc work detail that may arise. Imagine waiting for a standby seat aboard a military transport when a sergeant happens by to collect men to carry out a task and draws upon the idle men in the waiting room. Those wearing the Ruptured Duck could (if they chose) disregard the orders of the sergeant as they were no longer service members. There were other, more administrative reasons for the patch.

Veteran Ballplayers. Three Chicago Cubs catchers, Aaron Robinson, Mickey Livingston and Paul Gillespie wearing their ruptured duck patches in 1945. This photo clearly shows blue-backed version #2)

Upon seeing to photo of (a significantly larger version of) the patch sewn to a Chicago Cubs player’s uniform I was intrigued by what it could possibly indicate. I was intrigued to discover that the patch was an acknowledgement of the veteran status of this player – that he had served his country during the war to bring about an end to global fascism and tyranny – was authorized by Major League Baseball for wear on the field.

Through some tedious and careful searching, it appears that very view returning veterans opted to don the Ruptured Duck on their uniforms. According to The Story of the Ruptured Duck (on MLB.com) only four men (all Chicago Cubs) chose to display the patch: Harry “Peanuts” Lowrey (3b/OF) and three catchers, Aaron Robinson, Mickey Livingston, and Paul Gillespie. Further searching also reveals that a few players on the Milwaukee Brewers (of the AA International League) also donned the patch. “Each player returning from a stint in the armed service in 1945 received the Ruptured Duck patch on his jersey’s left sleeve,” Authors Rex Hamann and Bob Koehler wrote in The American Association Milwaukee Brewers (Images of Baseball). “

Notice the players in his 1945 image of the Milwaukee Brewers club with the ruptured duck patch affixed to their left sleeves.

There is some speculation as to why more players did not wear the patch on their sleeves. One prevailing notion is that by virtue of veterans wearing the patch, those who did not serve (either by choice or not being qualified for service) might have faced ostracization by the fans or even teammates or opposing players.  In a July 17, 1945 letter from the American League president that was sent to representatives of the four western American League ballclubs, Will Harridge wrote, “(the patch) may attract too much attention to players who, through no fault of their own, did not enter the service.” Harridge made mention that the Chicago Cubs had already moved forward with having players wear the emblem while leaving the decision to do so in the hands of each team.

Regarding the patch itself, there has been a lot of preliminary discussion among collectors surrounding what was initially thought to be an existence of a few versions. My oft-repeated caution regarding collectibles that lacking provenance, one should never take a seller’s word as truth or fact (even if you trust that person). In the absence of supporting evidence, sellers may make whatever claims they want in order to sell the piece. In regards to these large ruptured duck patches, the same guidance applies.

Baseball Ruptured Duck Versions and Variations

  • White-backed
    • Version 1 – The white wool base is embroidered with gold stitching. The features of the design appear to be more flattened and the patch’s backing seems to be of a canvas material. The width of these patches measures 5-1/2 inches.
    • Version 2 – This patch also has a white wool base however the backing material consists of a broad cheesecloth. The base material extends well beyond the gold embroidered outline and the details of the ruptured duck pattern appear more raised and contoured.
  • Yellow-backed

    • Version 1 – This patch is smaller (2-1/4 inches tall by 3 inches in width) than the three other versions. The overall design consists of a yellow canvas with a large-opening, cheesecloth backing. The image is embroidered in navy blue thread.
  • Blue-backed

    • Version 1 – The blue canvas base shares the same dimensions as the white-backed versions and has a white cheesecloth backing. The embroidery is a combination of both navy blue and gold thread forming the familiar eagle-shape and outline. The gold embroidery is employed as the base pattern with the blue embroidery providing the detail in the feathers and edges. This is THE ONLY version that has photographic evidence of major and minor league use following the end of WWII.
    • Version 2 – This patch is very similar to the previous blue version with the most apparent differences being most discernible when comparing them side-by-side. The fronts of each has very similar embroidery work. However this second variation seems to be slightly more rudimentary as if it is an overseas-made copy. In my opinion, it this is a knock-off of the very rare version one of the blue (read: most-authentic) baseball ruptured duck patch.
  • Cooperstown Collection – This patch is about 25% smaller than the other patch variations and is fully-embroidered (rather than embroidered onto a backing material); by computer-aided embroidery equipment. It was made for the commemoration of the original (blue-backed) patch that was worn on major league baseball uniforms in 1945. The patch bears very few similarities to the original. They were affixed to the information cards when they were distributed.

    Beware that there are, on occasion, online action listings of these reproduction patches that have been separated from the collector card. The accompanying printed card provides a history of the insignia.

The availability of these large (baseball uniform) patches varies but the most commonly listed (online auction) are the white-backed version 2 ruptured duck patches.

One of my militaria collector colleagues worked relentlessly to research and document the history (manufacture, usage, etc.) of these over-sized ruptured duck patches reaching out to the Baseball Hall of Fame (in Cooperstown, NY) and to a manufacturer that was making these patches at the end of the war. In his conversation with the Hall, the archivists there indicated that the only type of the “baseball ruptured duck” in the collection was the blue-backed version. It is speculated that the white versions were made to be worn on the home (white) uniforms as the blue version was designed for the road (gray). However, photos show the ball players in their home whites with the blue ruptured duck.

Others (including my colleague) have concluded that the white patch has nothing to do with baseball due to the evidence at hand. I, however, do believe that the white version was manufactured for the home white uniforms if, for nothing else, in anticipation of major league baseball requesting home and road differentiation.  Perhaps the idea was set aside as the patches were unpopular and some clubs were not in support of their war veteran players standing out from those who didn’t or couldn’t serve?

My colleague had a conversation with one of the online sellers of the white version 2 patches who disclosed an interesting fact regarding their stockpile of ruptured duck patches, “the box that they came in was an original World War II issue box with the original stock number.” However, the box has since been thrown out so I cannot get any manufacturer information from it.” The presence of a war department stock number indicates that they were most-likely made for the armed forces rather than for professional baseball.

Unfortunately, there is no evidence to support the other versions as having ties to the game.

In the absence of conclusive research and documentation, the questions surrounding the variations will continue in perpetuity. In my own pursuit of these elements of military baseball history, I will acquire what I believe to be authentic and make every attempt to provide evidence as to the validity of the artifacts. At present, I only have a single version

Advertisements

Marine Corps Baseball Caps: The End of My Drought?

Baseball is overwrought with comparisons and associations in terms of sayings, phrases and figures of speech. Listen to any radio broadcast or televised baseball game and you will invariably hear a plethora of soliloquies by the play-by-play announcer and the color commentator that are filled with analogies that help to illustrate points or, if you were born anytime after 2000, will leave you baffled as to the point being made. I find that I am guilty when it comes to infusing my articles with such comparisons and today’s will not fail to insert at least one such analogy.

My WWII Road Gray Marines Baseball Uniform includes the trousers. Some variations or trousers also have the red soutache running down the side of each pants leg. This was my first military baseball acquisition (source: eBay image).

Since I started actively collecting military baseball memorabilia, I have found myself alternating between the tortoise and the hare. There have been times that it seemed that I was grabbing up every photograph or piece of ephemera that surfaces – especially since they were pieces that were on the money in relation to the sort of items that interest me which felt as though I was sprinting through my sourcing and acquiring. However, finding (and being able to afford) uniforms and jerseys left me feeling much more like the tortoise as I was patient with the slowness of these items’ availability. I have a handful of jerseys at the moment and it has taken me more than a half-dozen years to accumulate them.

From the outset of my interest in this arena, there have been a few categories that have eluded me all together. One, being the aforementioned hunt for honest military baseballs (vice the frauds that dominate eBay such as these) and the other, vintage military baseball uniform caps. Throughout my years sifting throughout virtually every listing of anything remotely connected to military baseball, I have yet to see a listing for a baseball cap. I have nearly 100 vintage photographs detailing baseball play, team photos, GIs’ snapshots and press photos of games (ranging from just off the front line pick-up games to organized league and championships). Throughout my photo archive and those that are viewable online, I am very familiar with the caps worn by service members during WWII (and prior).  I have seen dozens of auction listings of baseball uniforms and not a single one was ever with a ball cap.

As time went on, I began to extrapolate from the absence of vintage military ball caps that these servicemen either wore them until they became tatters or the caps just didn’t make it home from The War. I likened the lack of caps to a severe drought – one like California suffered through for almost a decade. Last fall and winter, California’s landscape began to change. Aside from the devastating landslides suffered by many areas throughout the state during the massive rains that fell, green foliage began to fill the surrounding areas. Driving southbound from the Siskiyou Mountain Pass on Interstate 5 this spring, we noticed the green vegetation and the fullness of Lake Shasta. The green followed us down through the central part of the state. It was amazing to see that the drought had seemingly ended. Spring marked an end to another dry season for me, too!

In early spring, a military jersey was listed online that I had never seen before. Though it was a Marines jersey, the colors were far different from the two that I already have in my collection.  This one, instead of being a wool-flannel road gray with red trim and letter, was a home-white wool flannel with blue trim and lettering that was like a carbon-copy. I quickly submitted a bid and ended up winning it. When I got it home and professionally cleaned, I placed it with the gray/red jersey and they were clearly made to be used as home and road versions for the Marines team. On the red uniform, the button that is on the letter “I” is red to match. On the home uniform, the “I” button is blue to match. It was a fantastic find and one that I think caught other potential collectors off guard. What does this have to do with the end of dry season?

This wool flannel jersey shares design and construction with the grey and red uniform that launched my military baseball collecting. The blue cap with yellow “M” is seen the jersey.

Later in the spring, another auction caused me to pause and spend a lot of time pouring over countless photographs in order perform due diligence prior to making a decision. This particular listing was of a ball cap that the seller listed and described as being from the estate of a WWII USMC veteran. After asking the seller for specific information pertaining to the veteran in an effort to validate his claims, he was unable to give anything that would help me pursue identifying the original owner. He stated that the estate sale was facilitated by a third-party and that any personal information was unavailable. This meant that I had to place little value upon the seller’s claim and pursue another avenue. I turned to the photograph research that I had performed and took a chance based upon what I found.

This navy blue wool cap has seen better days (there is some damage to the middle of the bill). Note the wool yellow “M” and how it matches the blue lettering on the accompanying photograph.

There are several photographs of the “Marines” uniform being worn by men various settings. It is very difficult to discern which darker shade of gray is red or blue (considering the blue of my latest Marines uniform) is essentially indistinguishable, due to all of the WWII images being black-and-white. However, I can tell that the road gray Marines jersey is the most prevalent in photographs. There are at least two photos that could show Marines wearing the home white/blue uniform but it is impossible to confirm. There are a few different caps being worn – the most common appearing to be a road gray with a darker “M” and matching bill color (assumed to be red).  What is consistent across the photos is that the font of the “M” matches the same lettering on the jerseys. The auction cap, navy blue wool, has the same font lettering “M” as is seen on all three of my jerseys. My thought is that the color yellow was used as it contrasts the navy blue and is also a prevalent USMC color used in insignia and emblems. This cap very well could be what was worn with my home white/blue uniform but sadly, I have no definitive proof and no provenance. With the matching letter and matching navy blue, I pulled the trigger and added it to my collection.

As it has certainly rained in California over the course of their drought, one or two days of rain over such an expanse of dryness did not mark an end to their misery. Similarly, one cap over more than six years of searching does not signify an end to my ball cap dry season.

This Marines jersey is constructed from a cotton canvas material (known as “duck” or twill) and is more lightweight and breathable than the wool counterpart uniforms.

Another indication of the lettering material are the visible moth nips. The cotton material is flawless.

The design is very reminiscent of ball caps of the 1940s and 50s. (source: eBay image)

In the last few weeks, two more caps were listed (by different sellers) that caught my attention. Both were clearly Marine corps caps (red with yellow lettering) but they were different from each other. One of them is wool with the letters “M” and “B” and could refer to a few different USMC commands or team-centric organizations (perhaps, “Marine Barracks”). I watched this cap listed and go unsold now a few times (it is still for sale). It was the second cap that stood out like a sore thumb for me.

As I wrote earlier, I have three Marines baseball jerseys. The third one is very different from the home and road wool variants and is constructed from a light-weight cotton canvas material and red in color. The yellow soutache (trim) applied to the placard and on the sleeves appears to be rayon. What drew me to the second (of the two red ball caps) was the base material – also lightweight cotton canvas. The yellow letter “M” on he front panels is in the same font as the uniform lettering and also appears to be wool felt (which is consistent with the jersey). In my opinion, these similarities eliminates almost all of doubt and I couldn’t help but place the winning bid.

When this cap arrives, it will be the second military baseball cap added to my collection in less than three months. Should I declare that my cap-drought has officially ended? Perhaps it has concluded but there is still the matter of the lack of available vintage military baseballs.

Hot Stove League Winners and Losers

The hot stove league is just ramping up throughout Major League Baseball with the beginnings of player movement discussions. The winter meetings will be upcoming and trades will be discussed as teams seek to create their 2017 rosters in hopes of playing for the championship in a little less than a year from now. Fans’ emotions cycle through the spectrum as hopes are raised with each announcement, often times met with disapproval and disappointment.

The hot stove league is an excellent analogy for collecting baseball militaria. Watching for items that meet certain criteria poses many similar challenges. Does the item fit my collection? Is the item worth the asking price? Is it authentic (with provenance) Is there any room to negotiate? What impact will the item have in terms of how the piece might display? So many questions to be answered.

After the transaction has been completed and the anticipation (waiting the piece’s arrival) has subsided, were expectations met, exceeded or dashed? Similar to how fans and front office people alike spend time evaluating the if the acquisition was a worthwhile expenditure, collectors also review what they buy.

Baseball militaria has, so far, proven to be a very narrow field of focus for my collecting with so few items being available. I am open to acquiring artifacts from most time periods with my strongest interest lying in the 20 year-period leading up to the second World War. Very few artifacts ever become available beyond photographs (which are predominantly snapshots that are removed from personal photo albums). I have seen the occasional uniforms (two in the past three years come to mind) and a bat (that seemed to be dated closer, if not during WWII) outside of the smattering of ephemera and pictures.

A few weeks ago, I decided to pull the trigger on a group of press photographs of an army baseball team dating from World War II. The auction listing was titled,

“6 WWII FORT SILL OK US ARMY SIGNAL CORPS 70TH INFANTRY BASEBALL TEAM PHOTOS

This auction is for six World War II Fort Sill, Oklahoma US Army Signal Corps 70th Infantry Baseball Team Photographs. You will receive a photograph of the whole team and five team members in various fielding positions. Photos are stamped on the back:

‘FORT SILL, OKLAHOMA
NO OBJECTION TO REPRODUCING OR PUBLISHING THIS PICTURE PROVIDED CREDIT LINE PHOTO BY US ARMY SIGNAL CORPS APPEARS ON THE PHOTOGRAPH OR PAGE, EXCEPT THAT PERMISSION MUST BE OBTAINED FROM THE WAR DEPARTMENT IF IT IS DESIRED FOR USE IN COMMERCIAL ADVERTISING.’

Each measures 8″ by 10″ and other than some minor wear they are in excellent condition.”

The auction listing showed an array of posed photos and the coveted team picture. (Source: eBay)

The auction listing showed an array of posed photos and the coveted team picture. (Source: eBay)

The auction’s images showed that there were at least five photographs (the sixth was mostly obscured by the other photos) of various subjects – ballplayers in different staged action poses and a team picture.  I submitted my best offer which was accepted. When the package arrived a few days later, I was excited see the quality of the (what appeared to be professional) photos.

Extracting the large, silver gelatin prints from the plastic sleeve, I noted that there appeared to be more than the six as was described in the auction listing. As soon as I began to sort through the eight prints, I realized that the seller sent me four copies each of two of the staged action-poses. The image that I truly wanted – the anchor to this set – was absent.

I sent a message to the seller about the discrepancy and was given the bad news.  I wrote, “What happened? There are multiple copies of two poses. No team photo. No batting photo. I am not happy with this.”

The seller responded, “Hi. I’m so sorry about this. We are returning your money to your PayPal account.” She provided no clarification or details about what happened or where the missing photos were. I truly wanted that photo so I followed up in another message, “I still wanted the photos. What happened?”

I was hopeful that the other four photos were still sitting somewhere among the hundreds of other (currently for sale) articles in the seller’s house. Accordingly, she replied, “Hi. I goofed, we had two sets and I assumed they were identical. You know what that makes me. Please accept my apology.”

I was not happy with the bad news. I did recall watching the same auction for several weeks before I decided to pull the trigger. What I didn’t realize is that the earlier listing was most-likely a different set from what I received. The seller, I am assuming, acquired a set of photographs from an estate and divided it in to two groups to be sold. The set that I purchased was merely a group of extras.

Granted, the seller refunded the entire auction amount but I was without the photograph that I wanted. As of writing this, I haven’t left feedback on the transaction. If I let my frustration rule, I would leave negative feedback. However, the seller was polite and extremely prompt in taking corrective action. I have (four copies of) two professionally produced photographs that I didn’t pay a cent to acquire.

In the end, evaluating this transaction in terms of the hot stove league, it is akin to inviting (to spring training) a washed-up player who has been out of the league for a few seasons only to return to win a roster spot.

 

Major League Flannel in the Foxhole?

As we draw to a close of what has been an exciting baseball season at both the major league and minor league level (at least it has been for me and the teams that I follow), I am reminded that I have experienced some success of my own in acquiring selected military baseball items. I have been fairly silent with regards to writing (on this blog) and I thought that today would be a great time to pick things back up.

Overall, my collection has experienced growth, mostly with vintage photographs, since I last posted and a few of my subsequent post will be dedicated to discussing the various acquisitions. I was also successful in obtaining one uniform set while missing out on another, very special (and very complete) baseball uniform (still another post will be forthcoming to discuss these).

I have yet to dive down into the researching (the subjects of today’s post) beyond some cursory investigations. One (or both) of the photographs that I acquired recently tell a bit of a story about the connection between the major leaguers and their transition into the ranks.

United States Army Air Force ballplayers. There is a hodgepodge of uniforms on display in this image. In addition to the Cincinnati and "M" jerseys, the player in the front row (2nd from right) is wearing a uniform with thin, double-piping). The player in the bomber jacket (front row, far left) is wearing a 6 panel hat with piping outlining each panel.

United States Army Air Force ballplayers. There is a hodgepodge of uniforms on display in this image. In addition to the Cincinnati and “M” jerseys, the player in the front row (2nd from right) is wearing a uniform with thin, double-piping). The player in the bomber jacket (front row, far left) is wearing a 6 panel hat with piping outlining each panel.

The Cincinnati uniform in question. Is this from the MLB Reds team or, perhaps the University of Cincinnati Bearcats? Note the uniform features (lettering, lettering arch, piping trim placement and size).

The Cincinnati uniform in question. Is this from the MLB Reds team or, perhaps the University of Cincinnati Bearcats? Note the uniform features (lettering, lettering arch, piping trim placement and size).

When the (first) photo of the Army Air Force team arrived, I carefully examined it and noted that one of the players in the team was wearing a uniform with “CINCINNATI” stitched across his chest. The uniform was a dark shade of wool flannel (obviously gray) and piped in a darker contrasting material. This man’s uniform stood out against the others as it was one of two that was not a simple, plain gray flannel ensemble.

I wanted to see if I could pinpoint the uniform as the National League team, the Reds or rule it out as, perhaps, one from the University of Cincinnati. I turned to the National Baseball Hall of Fame’s Dressed to the Nines (uniform database) to search Reds’ uniforms from the 1930s and 1940s to find a match. Keeping in mind the features of the Air Force player’s uniform (block letters, single thick piping on the edges, sleeves and around the collar), I was unable to match the uniform. Cincinnati’s 1930s road uniforms had letters that had serifs and the piping appears to be thin lines. The block lettered jerseys from the 1940s and war years had the correct lettering and yet lacked piping altogether.

Judging by the parked heavy bomber (perhaps a B-17) and the close proximity combined with the landscape, I am betting that this photo was taken somewhere in England in 1943-1945.

Judging by the parked heavy bomber (perhaps a B-17) and the close proximity combined with the landscape, I am betting that this photo was taken somewhere in England in 1943-1945.

Paying close attention to the details of the photo, one must scan each player for specific elements that can help to identify where and when the photograph was taken which may give more research guidance when attempting determine facts (such as the identity of the two notable jerseys). In this photo, I can see the chalk-lines of the baseball diamond (in front of the team), the flat landscape along with a heavy bomber in the back ground. The close proximity of the aircraft to the ball field leads me to believe that the location of the photo is England (experience scouring a lot of photos helps to recognize familiar features).

Matching the facts of the photo, I may now attempt to identify one or more of the players. Scouring Gary Bedingfield’s Baseball in Wartime site (which has an extensive database of players), cross-referencing names and searching for player photographs (using Google). It is tedious work but the payoff is rewarding. So far, I have had no such success in identifying anyone, let alone the “Cincinnati” player.

The second photo that I acquired is also something of a mystery. When I purchased it, the seller listed the image as being from World War II. When I saw the listing, I knew that the photo and the uniforms (worn by the players) were from 1910-1920.  The handwritten information on the reverse identified the players as being from the U.S. Navy Bureau of Navigation (which would have been based in Washington D.C.; specifically, at the Washington Navy Yard).

This photo was most-likely shot during the Great War, if not a year or two earlier.

This photo was most-likely shot during the Great War, if not a year or two earlier.

Close inspection of the background of the image failed to reveal (to me, at least) anything that would indicate or confirm a specific location. In viewing the main subjects of the image, I focused on the players and their uniforms. Jerseys were dark and pinstriped possessing a darker trim along the button edge, collar and sleeve cuffs. The sleeves are all 3/4 length (some players have them pulled above their elbows). Their caps are short billed, low crown and appear to have eight panels (versus the normal six of later years) and a small white “W” on the front panel. One player stands out from the rest in that his uniform is significantly lighter in color (with the same construction features) yet different in that it has a large “C” on the left chest and a small white “C” on the front panel of a six-panel cap that is trimmed in white piping.

My first reaction to the odd uniformed player was that he is wearing a Cleveland Indians (or Cleveland “Naps” as they were named from 1903-1914) uniform. Again I went back to the HoF uniform database and conducted a broad search (1910-1925) in hopes to narrow this uniform down. The results were close but not definitive. Clearly the ball cap is very much the same as the 1917 Cleveland road cap, but the uniform more resembled the home uniform of the same vintage with the exception of the trim on the sleeves. In some of the photographic examples, I have discovered that in 1916, the Indians wore the dark cap (with white piping) with the pinstriped white home uniforms. My “Cleveland” player lacks the player-number on the left sleeve as seen in the 1916 photo above.

This style of collar began to appear with the New York Giants in 1906 and became more commonplace by 1911 across most teams. The 3/4 sleeve was a departure from the full-length long sleeves of the late 19th century. These uniforms also feature pinstripes and a darker material that follows the button strip and continues upward and around the collar.

This style of collar began to appear with the New York Giants in 1906 and became more commonplace by 1911 across most teams. The 3/4 sleeve was a departure from the full-length long sleeves of the late 19th century. These uniforms also feature pinstripes and a darker material that follows the button strip and continues upward and around the collar.

Regarding the rest of the team’s uniforms. the white “W” appears to vary from cap to cap in size and placement and, since doesn’t directly correlate to what is written on the back of the photo (“U.S. Navy Bureau of Navigation”), it could stand for the unknown team name or simply, “Washington.”

Since this photo is very clearly earlier than World War II, there is no reason to search (as with the above photo) for any correlation to MLB players going to the military (times were different) from the their professional careers and there is some data available to pour through on the Baseball Reference site. Turning to Baseball in Wartime, Bedingfield has, for WWI, a list of ball players who were killed or died during their service. Of those, five served in the Navy, none of which were major leaguers.

In both photographs, the (seemingly) major league uniforms could be the result of major (or minor) league teams donating uniforms to the armed forces for recreation use as they are past their serviceable, professional lives. I will continue to research both of these photos and hopefully uncover details as they become available or surfaces in the coming years.

%d bloggers like this: