Samuel Lipschutz

Date: 26 Apr 2008 12:59:11
From: RookHouse
Subject: Samuel Lipschutz

Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the USA
in 1880 at the age of seventeen. His chess career started to blossom
in 1883, as he was chosen to participate in high level chess club
matches, representing New York against Philadelphia ...........

Click here to read the whole article: http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=189

Date: 30 Apr 2008 08:43:27
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 11:39=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> I don't think you are a bad guy at all. But respect for the subject,
> which is also respect for the reader, requires you to have some reason
> for a statement other than ' I heard it somewhere'. I strongly suggest
> reading articles by John Hilbert and Edward Winter, along with Dr.
> Spinrad's and Anders Thulin's. Note that even when they speculate,
> there's some basis to it, and it's based on their research in both
> primary and secondary source material.
>
> If you prefer, I'll continue the discussion privately. However, I
> return emails only a little more frequently than Dr. Spinrad does, so
> please be gentle with me if I don't respond right away. :-)
>

All duely noted. I may take you up on that eventually. Thanks for
clearing the air on this.

Best Regards

Date: 30 Apr 2008 08:39:02
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 10:26 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 30, 11:17 am, The Historian <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I don't see anything "nice" about ill-informed historical writing.
> > Yes, it it's a minor thing, but it implies the rest of your research
> > is of a like nature.
>
> > BTW, I'm a heck of a lot nicer than Edward Winter would be.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Look, I am fairly new to this and I don't claim to be this great chess
> historian.

I certainly don't claim to be great either.

This is purely a small hobby for me. My intent is not to
> spew "ill-informed" facts. I've seen your credentials on your blog
> and I am not even in the same league with you with respect to chess
> history.

Thank you, but we are working in the same field, which makes us on the
same level. You are my peer, as much as I am, I hope, Dr. Spinrad's
peer.

> If you feel I can improve on various things that I post, then I am
> happy to hear criticism from someone as well informed as you. I just
> don't think you need to attack me in the manner that you have chosen.
> I'm really not a bad guy, just a novice.

I don't think you are a bad guy at all. But respect for the subject,
which is also respect for the reader, requires you to have some reason
for a statement other than ' I heard it somewhere'. I strongly suggest
reading articles by John Hilbert and Edward Winter, along with Dr.
Spinrad's and Anders Thulin's. Note that even when they speculate,
there's some basis to it, and it's based on their research in both
primary and secondary source material.

If you prefer, I'll continue the discussion privately. However, I
return emails only a little more frequently than Dr. Spinrad does, so
please be gentle with me if I don't respond right away. :-)

Date: 30 Apr 2008 08:30:35
From:
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 10:00=A0am, zdrakec <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 3:07=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 29, 2:11=A0pm, "[email protected]"
>
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Brooklyn Chess Chronicle Volume 2 pg ~18 give his first name as
> > > Salomon
>
> > > Brooklyn Eagle Mar 20, 1898 gives Simon
>
> > > NY Times April 11, 1892 gives Samuel
>
> > > But then I can even find others if you just believe everything in news=

> > > papers eg William S Lipschutz is given in the Brooklyn Eagle of Jan 5,=

> > > 1890, and I can find what are almost certainly misprints LS Lipschutz,=

> > > R =A0and J Lipschutz.
>
> > I've come across the same dilemma. =A0The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, American=

> > Chess Bulletins, British Chess Magazines, American Chess Magazines, NY
> > Times Archives, and most of the historical chess books in my
> > library ............ almost all refer to Lipschutz in a slightly
> > different manner.
>
> > I pretty much gave up and just decided to refer to him as Samuel
> > Lipschutz from now on.
>
> How does Gaige list him?

From "Chess Personalia," page 251:

Lipsch=FCtz, S[=E1muel?]
* 04-07-1863 Ungv=E1r, HUN
+ 30-11-1905 Hamburg BRD
Elo historical rating: 2510
ACB, 1905, p. 357 [Simon]
ACB, 1906, p. 31 [Solomon]
ACB, 1907, p. 14
ACM, July, 1892, p. 103-4
Barcza, vol. I, p. 235-238 [Samuel]
BCM, 1906, p. 15 [Simon]

Several other references are listed, which refer to him variously as
Simon or Samuel.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 08:29:14
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 11:20=A0am, David Richerby <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> I'd assumed you knew that, as well. =A0It just reminded me of the
> uncyclopedia page, which I find rioutously funny and thought outhres
> might enjouy, touou, oeven though it's ouff toupique.
>
> Dave.
>

I see from your link that you are a technology guy as well. We're a
fun "lot", aren't we?

Date: 30 Apr 2008 08:26:07
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 11:17=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> I don't see anything "nice" about ill-informed historical writing.
> Yes, it it's a minor thing, but it implies the rest of your research
> is of a like nature.
>
> BTW, I'm a heck of a lot nicer than Edward Winter would be.- Hide quoted t=
ext -
>

Look, I am fairly new to this and I don't claim to be this great chess
historian. This is purely a small hobby for me. My intent is not to
spew "ill-informed" facts. I've seen your credentials on your blog
and I am not even in the same league with you with respect to chess
history.

If you feel I can improve on various things that I post, then I am
happy to hear criticism from someone as well informed as you. I just
don't think you need to attack me in the manner that you have chosen.
I'm really not a bad guy, just a novice.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 08:17:37
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 9:23 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 30, 9:57 am, The Historian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > It does. So you specialize in picking up bits of flotsom from the
> > Internet and cobbling it together as 'history.' Typical.
>
> Ouch!! Guilty as charged.
>
> When I was putting together some of the main website, the "Champions"
> portion proved more time consuming than I thought, so I did take some
> shortcuts on a few of the player bios just to get them up there until
> I get time to write a better piece on each of them.
>
> All of the "Events" pages are written from scratch.
>
> You're just not going to let up on me, are you? I'm trying to be nice
> here.

I don't see anything "nice" about ill-informed historical writing.
Yes, it it's a minor thing, but it implies the rest of your research
is of a like nature.

BTW, I'm a heck of a lot nicer than Edward Winter would be.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 07:44:26
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 10:00=A0am, zdrakec <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> How does Gaige list him?- Hide quoted text -
>

I'm not sure. I have some of his books on the way, so I will check
this when I receive them.

Thanks

Date: 30 Apr 2008 07:30:37
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 9:40=A0am, David Richerby <[email protected] >
wrote:
> RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
> > ``[Morphy] went down to have bisquit and a drink...''
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ^^^^^^^^^http:=
//uncyclopedia.org/wiki/English-American_Dictionary
>

I didn't write that, it's a quote from somebody else.

I know it's spelled "biscuit", but I'm not in the habit of correcting
the grammar of other people.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 16:20:13
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby <[email protected]> wrote:
>> RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> ``[Morphy] went down to have bisquit and a drink...''
>> ^^^^^^^^^
>> http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/English-American_Dictionary
>
> I didn't write that, it's a quote from somebody else.

I know.

> I know it's spelled "biscuit", but I'm not in the habit of
> correcting the grammar of other people.

I'd assumed you knew that, as well. It just reminded me of the
uncyclopedia page, which I find rioutously funny and thought outhres
might enjouy, touou, oeven though it's ouff toupique.

Dave.

--
David Richerby Generic Drink (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ refreshing juice beverage but it's
just like all the others!

Date: 30 Apr 2008 07:23:21
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 9:57=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> It does. So you specialize in picking up bits of flotsom from the
> Internet and cobbling it together as 'history.' Typical.
>

Ouch!! Guilty as charged.

When I was putting together some of the main website, the "Champions"
portion proved more time consuming than I thought, so I did take some
shortcuts on a few of the player bios just to get them up there until
I get time to write a better piece on each of them.

All of the "Events" pages are written from scratch.

You're just not going to let up on me, are you? I'm trying to be nice
here.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 07:00:21
From: zdrakec
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 3:07=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 2:11=A0pm, "[email protected]"
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Brooklyn Chess Chronicle Volume 2 pg ~18 give his first name as
> > Salomon
>
> > Brooklyn Eagle Mar 20, 1898 gives Simon
>
> > NY Times April 11, 1892 gives Samuel
>
> > But then I can even find others if you just believe everything in news
> > papers eg William S Lipschutz is given in the Brooklyn Eagle of Jan 5,
> > 1890, and I can find what are almost certainly misprints LS Lipschutz,
> > R =A0and J Lipschutz.
>
> I've come across the same dilemma. =A0The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, American
> Chess Bulletins, British Chess Magazines, American Chess Magazines, NY
> Times Archives, and most of the historical chess books in my
> library ............ almost all refer to Lipschutz in a slightly
> different manner.
>
> I pretty much gave up and just decided to refer to him as Samuel
> Lipschutz from now on.

How does Gaige list him?

Date: 30 Apr 2008 06:57:52
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 7:25 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 10:10 am, The Historian <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Speaking of facts, I've read your well-written article on Morphy, and
> > I have a question:
>
> > "it was said that Louis Paulsen was an extremely slow player and that
> > made Morphy nearly cry while playing with him)."
>
> > What was your source for the "nearly cry" statement?
>
> It appears that I picked up that statement from an old Wiki about
> Morphy. I received some form of confirmation through this statement
> from someone on another chess site:
>
> "Yes, Morphy won this game tactically, positionally, and technically.
> There was only one factor to consider, if Paulson moved that same hour
> morphy would have took the quicker roads to mate. He in my opinon took
> the long ways to checkmate because he knew his opponent would
> apprecciate it so he could burn all his brain cells to decide to make
> an obvious move. Why do you need one hour and 15 or so minutes to make
> such a apparent recapture?? It's no wonder why this made Morphy cry
> one day during a game. He was waiting for the notoriusly slow Paulson
> to move and went down to have bisquit and a drink when he declared
> that Paulson would never when another game from him and indeed he
> never did again in his lifetime."
>
> I believe he said that this information was from "Paul Morphy: The
> Pride and Sorrow of Chess", but I'm not sure. I personally do not own
> that book, as it is very expensive.

Libraries have it.

> Hope that answers your question. Thanks.

It does. So you specialize in picking up bits of flotsom from the
Internet and cobbling it together as 'history.' Typical.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 05:31:15
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 8:23=A0am, David Richerby <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> Yes, `tch'. =A0In French, `ch' is pronounced like the English `sh' as in
> `shoe': this is why `Chicago' and `Chopin' are pronounced/spelt as
> they are, for example. =A0In the past, English followed the French and
> tended to use `tch', as in `Tchaikovsky'; the trend more recently
> seems to be to use `ch', as in `Chernenko' and `Chernobyl'
> (`Tchernenko' and `Tchernobyl', in French).
>
> So my guess is that `Tchigorin' will be more common in older
> publications and `Chigorin' in more recent ones. =A0`Kortchnoi' (and,
> worse, `Kortschnoj') are occasionally used in English but I'd hazard
> that this is mostly due to the use of French and German sources and
> not thinking about how the names should be transliterated.
>

Dave,

Your statements will actually help me quite a bit, as I am often
questioned about this whenever I make mention of these players in a
posting.

Thanks for the solid explanation.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 05:25:20
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 10:10=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> Speaking of facts, I've read your well-written article on Morphy, and
> I have a question:
>
> "it was said that Louis Paulsen was an extremely slow player and that
> made Morphy nearly cry while playing with him)."
>
> What was your source for the "nearly cry" statement?
>

It appears that I picked up that statement from an old Wiki about
Morphy. I received some form of confirmation through this statement
from someone on another chess site:

"Yes, Morphy won this game tactically, positionally, and technically.
There was only one factor to consider, if Paulson moved that same hour
morphy would have took the quicker roads to mate. He in my opinon took
the long ways to checkmate because he knew his opponent would
apprecciate it so he could burn all his brain cells to decide to make
an obvious move. Why do you need one hour and 15 or so minutes to make
such a apparent recapture?? It's no wonder why this made Morphy cry
one day during a game. He was waiting for the notoriusly slow Paulson
to move and went down to have bisquit and a drink when he declared
that Paulson would never when another game from him and indeed he
never did again in his lifetime."

I believe he said that this information was from "Paul Morphy: The
Pride and Sorrow of Chess", but I'm not sure. I personally do not own
that book, as it is very expensive.

Hope that answers your question. Thanks.

Date: 30 Apr 2008 14:40:38
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> ``[Morphy] went down to have bisquit and a drink...''
^^^^^^^^^
http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/English-American_Dictionary

Dave.

--
David Richerby Unholy Devil Windows (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a graphical user interface that's
possessed by Satan but it's also a
crime against nature!

Date: 30 Apr 2008 05:18:28
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 30, 8:01=A0am, David Richerby <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> Perhaps there was some reason for wanting to be over 18, rather than
> immigrate as a minor?
>

Good point Dave. That same scenario may have "skewed" the age of
several chess players from that era.

Thanks

Date: 29 Apr 2008 13:07:46
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 2:11=A0pm, "[email protected]"
<[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Brooklyn Chess Chronicle Volume 2 pg ~18 give his first name as
> Salomon
>
> Brooklyn Eagle Mar 20, 1898 gives Simon
>
> NY Times April 11, 1892 gives Samuel
>
> But then I can even find others if you just believe everything in news
> papers eg William S Lipschutz is given in the Brooklyn Eagle of Jan 5,
> 1890, and I can find what are almost certainly misprints LS Lipschutz,
> R =A0and J Lipschutz.
>

I've come across the same dilemma. The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, American
Chess Bulletins, British Chess Magazines, American Chess Magazines, NY
Times Archives, and most of the historical chess books in my
library ............ almost all refer to Lipschutz in a slightly
different manner.

I pretty much gave up and just decided to refer to him as Samuel
Lipschutz from now on.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 11:11:07
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 27, 12:27=A0pm, "[email protected]"
<[email protected] > wrote:
> I have a strange possible explanation I would like to run by, and see
> what anyone thinks of it.
>
> Before giving the theory, let us think of Lipshutz's last name. There
> are two spellings, which are used interchangeably; Lipschutz and
> Lipschuetz. Which is correct? Although one of these is probably the
> name on official US records, they are obviously both correct, since he
> no doubt considered the true spelling of the name Lipsch u umlaut tz.
> When transcribing the u umlaut, some people write u, and others write
> ue.
>
> Could it be possible that we have the same situation with his first
> name? How could one name be given in so many different forms, however?
>
> Although I have never used it, I also have a second given name. Each
> child in my family has a Hebrew name, as well as an American name. The
> Hebrew name is simply the Hebrew name of the person I am named after.
> In my case, this would be my great-uncle Isaac, or Yitzchak. My
> "standard" name is only tenuously related; a name was chosen such that
> it shares the same first letter as a Hebrew name as Yitzchak.
>
> By my generation, this Hebrew name is purely vestigial; I don't ever
> use it, and I doubt that my children even know I have such a name.
> Could it be that in Lipschutz's time, however, he considered his true
> name his Hebrew name, and basically answered with any name which
> started with an S when asked? Of course, in old sources the name is
> usually given simply as S. Lipschutz; it is only rarely that a first
> name is assigned.
>
> Perhaps someone who knows about Jewish naming custome of the time
> could day whether this makes any sense.
>
> Would it make sense to collect all the old sources in which a name is
> given for Lipschutz, to see whether any name is really more common
> than any other? I think I have references to all the names listed,
> though IIRC Salomon rather than Solomon is given in my source.

For what it is worth, here are some old references which assign a
first name to Lipschutz

Brooklyn Chess Chronicle Volume 2 pg ~18 give his first name as
Salomon

Brooklyn Eagle Mar 20, 1898 gives Simon

NY Times April 11, 1892 gives Samuel

But then I can even find others if you just believe everything in news
papers eg William S Lipschutz is given in the Brooklyn Eagle of Jan 5,
1890, and I can find what are almost certainly misprints LS Lipschutz,
R and J Lipschutz.

As for his brother, who was a much more minor chess player, he is
listed about equally often as F Lipschutz and P Lipschutz; I believe
this is because he would go by Filip or Philip depending on the
circumstances, backing up the theory that an exact spelling of a first
name just wasn't that important.

Other references of some interest; a police complaint by Samuel
Lipschutz leading to an arrest is covered in the Brooklyn Eagle of Dec
22, 1892; an address of 131 Monroe St is given, if anyone has another
reference to where he lived.

The New York Times of Jan 9, 1896 says that Lipschutz is one of the
best canvassers for a petition to liberalize Sunday laws; no doubt his
signature would be on many documents there if anyone really wants to
dig for them.

Most of the time, well known players are not listed by first names;
thus, the reason his name is given in the Brooklyn Chess Chronicle was
that he was just an unknown class B player at the time. However,
Lipschutz first name does strike me as being given even less
frequently than other top players, for whatever reason.

Jerry Spinrad

>
> Jerry Spinrad
>
> On Apr 26, 7:19=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 26, 3:59=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the USA
> > > in 1880 at the age of seventeen. =A0His chess career started to blosso=
m
> > > in 1883, as he was chosen to participate in high level chess club
> > > matches, representing New York against Philadelphia ...........
>
> > > Click here to read the whole article:http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=
=3D189
>
> > =A0 There's still uncertainty about Lipsch=FCtz's actual first name, is
> > there not? Gaige gives references that call him variously Samuel,
> > Simon, and Solomon. Has the correct name ever been determined?- Hide quo=
ted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Date: 29 Apr 2008 07:43:21
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

Date: 29 Apr 2008 07:10:47
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 8:57 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 9:50 am, The Historian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'm not stirring anything up. I'm commenting on a posting to the
> > Internet. If you didn't want comment, don't post in front of the world.- Hide quoted text -
>
> And I've replied to your comments with facts. Are we done??

Speaking of facts, I've read your well-written article on Morphy, and
I have a question:

"it was said that Louis Paulsen was an extremely slow player and that
made Morphy nearly cry while playing with him)."

What was your source for the "nearly cry" statement?

Date: 29 Apr 2008 07:05:15
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 10:01=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] >
wrote:
> On Apr 29, 8:57 am, RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 29, 9:50 am, The Historian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I'm not stirring anything up. I'm commenting on a posting to the
> > > Internet. If you didn't want comment, don't post in front of the world=
.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > And I've replied to your comments with facts. =A0Are we done??
>
> We have been for a while now. If you don't think it's vulgar to call
> someone such as Dr. Spinrad a liar, then there's nothing else to say.

This is pointless. Have a nice day.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 07:01:26
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 8:57 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 9:50 am, The Historian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'm not stirring anything up. I'm commenting on a posting to the
> > Internet. If you didn't want comment, don't post in front of the world.- Hide quoted text -
>
> And I've replied to your comments with facts. Are we done??

We have been for a while now. If you don't think it's vulgar to call
someone such as Dr. Spinrad a liar, then there's nothing else to say.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 06:57:33
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 9:50=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> I'm not stirring anything up. I'm commenting on a posting to the
> Internet. If you didn't want comment, don't post in front of the world.- H=
ide quoted text -
>

And I've replied to your comments with facts. Are we done??

Date: 29 Apr 2008 06:50:36
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 7:53 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 8:47 am, The Historian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > . "To
> > ignore and lie to someone who has never wronged you in any way is
> > pretty weird and inappropriate. " - "Rookhouse" to Dr. Spinrad.
>
> Exactly, I stated facts, not insults To offer something and then to
> ignore e-mails and not follow through is "weird and inappropriate".
>
> Jerry basically agreed and responded:
>
> "Sorry, I am often bad about emails. I am in the process of trying to
> get the notes made available on chesscafe, which would save me work
> in
> sending it to individuals. I should have answered directly though;
> sorry"
>
> So, he and I are fine. Stop trying to stir things up that are none of
> your business.

I'm not stirring anything up. I'm commenting on a posting to the
Internet. If you didn't want comment, don't post in front of the world.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 05:53:08
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 8:47=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> . =A0"To
> ignore and lie to someone who has never wronged you in any way is
> pretty weird and inappropriate. " - "Rookhouse" to Dr. Spinrad.
>

Exactly, I stated facts, not insults To offer something and then to
ignore e-mails and not follow through is "weird and inappropriate".

Jerry basically agreed and responded:

"Sorry, I am often bad about emails. I am in the process of trying to
get the notes made available on chesscafe, which would save me work
in
sending it to individuals. I should have answered directly though;
sorry"

So, he and I are fine. Stop trying to stir things up that are none of
your business.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 05:47:00
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 7:42 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 29, 8:26 am, The Historian <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > And it's a bit vulgar to insult Dr. Spinrad.
>
> ?????????? I didn't insult him, I was trying to get some clarity on
> an odd situation.
>
> If he thought it came across as insulting (which I don't believe he
> did), then I would gladly apologize to him.

. "To
ignore and lie to someone who has never wronged you in any way is
pretty weird and inappropriate. " - "Rookhouse" to Dr. Spinrad.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 05:42:57
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 29, 8:26=A0am, The Historian <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> And it's a bit vulgar to insult Dr. Spinrad.
>

?????????? I didn't insult him, I was trying to get some clarity on
an odd situation.

If he thought it came across as insulting (which I don't believe he
did), then I would gladly apologize to him.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 05:26:44
From: The Historian
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 28, 6:03 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 27, 8:59 pm, "[email protected]"<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, I am often bad about emails. I am in the process of trying to
> > get the notes made available on chesscafe, which would save me work in
> > sending it to individuals. I should have answered directly though;
> > sorry
>
> No problem, it was just a bit confusing, that's all.

And it's a bit vulgar to insult Dr. Spinrad.

Date: 29 Apr 2008 04:45:35
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 28, 11:00=A0pm, "Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)"
<[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Anyway, many names got transliterated first from
> Polish to Russian or German, than over a hundred
> years later back to Polish, after WWI (my grandma
> was educated hence it was her task to translate
> the Russian and German demographical data - I mean,
> of individuals and families - into Polish; many
> people were busy this way at the time).
>

Not to mention the names being altered when many people immigrate to
America. My great grandmother was from Poland and her name was
changed from Morowski to Morock when they arrived here.

My great grandfather came over from Sicily when he was 17 and while
his name was still spelled the same, it is now pronounced drastically
different.

Date: 28 Apr 2008 20:00:56
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 28, 3:23 pm, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
>
>
> > While it didn't "solve" in the sense of providing
> > specific circumstances for each of the first names
> > of Mr. L., it put things in historical perspective,
> > and it has demoted the issue from the "MYSTERY"
> > status to "mildly interesting trivia".
>
> Agreed. It's amazing how much time and effort can be spent in search
> of the most obscure historical facts. I wish I had more time to look
> into some of these things more closely.

My point that people in the past didn't treat their
names the way we do today was not really random,
and was not too speculative. One may follow the
signatures and addressing themselves by Mozart
or Chopin (Szopen, etc) family to get an illustration.

Going back in the past of Europe, educated Europeans
would use a loocal flavor of their name as well as
the latin version. They would sign their correspondence
differently for correspondents from different countries,
as Copernicus would.

In the Eastern Europe the national boundaries
varied wildly and widely. You could live
in Russia, then in Rumunia then under the Austrian
empire, or in Poland; then there was also Ukraine.
Things were variable also up North: Poland,
Lithuania, Russia, Prussia, ... This is why
the first name of Akiba Rubinstein was not firmly
or uniquely establishe: Akiba or Akiva or ... ?

Anyway, many names got transliterated first from
Polish to Russian or German, than over a hundred
years later back to Polish, after WWI (my grandma
was educated hence it was her task to translate
the Russian and German demographical data - I mean,
of individuals and families - into Polish; many
people were busy this way at the time).

Best regards,

Wlod

Date: 28 Apr 2008 15:26:05
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 28, 11:58=A0am, Anders Thulin <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0It's quite unsatisfactory -- it should have been complemented with =
similar
> material from both US (National Archives, say) and Germany (where he
> died) and perhaps even Austrian/Hungarian if they still exist. I would,
> for instance, very much want to know where he was buried -- the burial
> records should be useful data.
>

Well, I thought your findings were informative and they showed a real
dedication to finding the truth.

To attempt to access all of the resources your mentioned above, just
to track down a name is definitely going "above and beyond".

Date: 28 Apr 2008 15:23:23
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 28, 11:44=A0am, "Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)"
<[email protected] > wrote:
>
> In general, you are among the most constructive
> and cultural "users" around here, who on the top
> of it avoids personal conflicts. I welcome your
> presence on rgcm.
>

Well I really appreciate the compliment and always look forward to
your correspondance as well. Thank you.

>
> While it didn't "solve" in the sense of providing
> specific circumstances for each of the first names
> of Mr. L., it put things in historical perspective,
> and it has demoted the issue from the "MYSTERY"
> status to "mildly interesting trivia".
>

Agreed. It's amazing how much time and effort can be spent in search
of the most obscure historical facts. I wish I had more time to look
into some of these things more closlely.

Date: 28 Apr 2008 08:44:32
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 28, 4:11 am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:

> I'm very sorry that the word "mystery"
> seems to have made you angry.

Not at all. Why should I be angry?
Not at the word "mystery", and not
for any other reason. Your post was fine and nice.

In general, you are among the most constructive
and cultural "users" around here, who on the top
of it avoids personal conflicts. I welcome your
presence on rgcm.

>
> Several credible historians have made mention
> of Lipschutz's first name being unknown and
> misunderstood.

It's a mystery why credible historians do so.
I randonmly speculate that they want to be important,
they want to have serious problems to tackle.
But this one is but a curiosity.

> Your random and speculative explanation of his
> many first names still does not solve our little
> "MYSTERY".

While it didn't "solve" in the sense of providing
specific circumstances for each of the first names
of Mr. L., it put things in historical perspective,
and it has demoted the issue from the "MYSTERY"
status to "mildly interesting trivia".

Best regards,

Wlodek

Date: 28 Apr 2008 04:44:14
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 27, 3:04=A0pm, Anders Thulin <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0Me, I would probably go for official sources first: naturalization =
records?
> death certificate? passports (both in the US and in Austria/Hungary, if po=
ssible)
> and so on.
>
I just came across this January 2005 post from Edward Winter's chess
history website, researched and submitted by our own Anders Thulin.

"Lipsch=FCtz participated in the London, 1886 tournament, which ended on
29 July. The passenger lists should consequently feature a Lipsch=FCtz,
arriving in New York in August or possibly September that year. They
show that a Mr S. Lipschutz, aged 25, arrived in New York on 18 August
1886 on the ship Wisconsin from Liverpool.

This is presumably our Lipsch=FCtz, even though he seems slightly older
than expected; he should be 22-23 years of age if he was born in 1863.
But unfortunately there is only the initial S., and not a full name.
No occupation, just =93gent=94.

According to the biographical feature in the Chess Monthly (December
1891, page 98), Lipsch=FCtz emigrated to the US when aged about 17=BD;
this means around 1880, assuming that he was indeed born in 1863.
Thus, another list entry should exist from that time.

There is a record stating that Salom. Lipschutz, 19 years old, born in
Hungary, arrived in New York on 4 September 1880 on the ship Cimbria
from Hamburg and Le Havre. Again, he is slightly older than expected,
but seems to be the same age as the Lipsch=FCtz from 1886.

A check for other Lipsch=FCtzes =96 particularly anyone named Simon or
Samuel =96 produces nothing quite as good for these dates. (One =93Samuel
Lipsch=FCtz=94, born around 1861, a turner, arrived on 12 August 1891, on
the ship State of Nebraska, apparently via Glasgow from Russia. A
=93Simon Lipsch=FCtz=94, a worker, from Galicia, aged 28, arrived on 8
January 1884, from Hamburg.)

On the assumption that S. Lipsch=FCtz did enter the United States of
America through New York (almost certain), and was aged 19 in
September 1880 (or had reasons for claiming so at the time), and that
the records are complete, it seems likely that his first name was
=93Salomon=94, possibly =93Solomon=94 or a near equivalent.

The difference in age between S. Lipsch=FCtz in the Chess Monthly
article and the Lipschutz who appears on the passenger lists is
irritating, however."

VERY impressive bit of research Anders, nicely done.

Date: 28 Apr 2008 15:58:21
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

RookHouse wrote:

> I just came across this January 2005 post from Edward Winter's chess
> history website,

It's quite unsatisfactory -- it should have been complemented with similar
material from both US (National Archives, say) and Germany (where he
died) and perhaps even Austrian/Hungarian if they still exist. I would,
for instance, very much want to know where he was buried -- the burial
records should be useful data.

The main reason I submitted it was that I hoped it would point other
researchers towards standard genealogical archives -- such as passenger lists,
naturalization records, census reports, etc. Finding a name that was
not 'Samuel' or 'Simon' helped a bit, though.

--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/

Date: 28 Apr 2008 04:11:22
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 28, 3:08=A0am, "Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)"
<[email protected] > wrote:
>
> I don't see any "mystery". The preoccupation
> with the pedantic spelling of names is modern.
> In the old day the idea of the name was to describe
> a person realtively uniquely, in the context
> of the person life and possible travels. Thus
> those who travelled and lived in different
> countries used to spell their names just to
> describe themselves, i.e. to identify themselves,
> and they would do so to make the things easy
> for the people around them. Thus most likely
> the original Lipschutz's =A0first name was Jewish,
> perhaps Shmuel. And next he used a name which would
> life easier for his new neighborhoods.
>
> While the story of his name might be left with some
> white space, it doesn't mean that it is a mystery
> story. We don't know whether or not I had a headache
> on January 1 of 1964 but it's not a mystery.
>
I'm very sorry that the word "mystery" seems to have made you angry.
"Mystery" is defined as "something not understood or beyond
understanding".

Several credible historians have made mention of Lipschutz's first
name being unknown and misunderstood. Your random and speculative
explanation of his many first names still does not solve our little
"MYSTERY".

Date: 28 Apr 2008 04:03:20
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 27, 8:59=A0pm, "[email protected]"
<[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Sorry, I am often bad about emails. I am in the process of trying to
> get the notes made available on chesscafe, which would save me work in
> sending it to individuals. I should have answered directly though;
> sorry
>
No problem, it was just a bit confusing, that's all.

Date: 28 Apr 2008 00:08:23
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 26, 4:19 pm, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:

> Another unresolved mystery on Lipschutz
> is his actual first name. It has been
> listed as Samuel, Salomon, and Simon.
> Nobody seems to know for sure which one
> is correct. Edward Winter even concedes
> this fact in his 2006 book, Chess Facts
> and Fables.

I don't see any "mystery". The preoccupation
with the pedantic spelling of names is modern.
In the old day the idea of the name was to describe
a person realtively uniquely, in the context
of the person life and possible travels. Thus
those who travelled and lived in different
countries used to spell their names just to
describe themselves, i.e. to identify themselves,
and they would do so to make the things easy
for the people around them. Thus most likely
the original Lipschutz's first name was Jewish,
perhaps Shmuel. And next he used a name which would
life easier for his new neighborhoods.

While the story of his name might be left with some
white space, it doesn't mean that it is a mystery
story. We don't know whether or not I had a headache
on January 1 of 1964 but it's not a mystery.

***

RookHouse, about your other post:

"It's the same with several prominent chess
players. Unexplained examples of this would
be Chigorin often being spelled Tschigorin
and Victor Korchnoi often being spelled
Viktor Kortchnoi."

Not at all! - it is NOT the same.
Chigorin and Korchnoi (in Russia)
always used one last name, spelled in
one way. Different WESTERN spellings
of their names are due to the different
transliteration conventions from Russian
to English (and similar).

REMARK. I was always of the opinion that
======= Russian names in the West should be
spelled the way they are spelled in Poland.

Date: 27 Apr 2008 17:59:45
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 27, 3:46=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 27, 1:27=A0pm, "[email protected]"
>
>
>
>
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I have a strange possible explanation I would like to run by, and see
> > what anyone thinks of it.
>
> > Before giving the theory, let us think of Lipshutz's last name. There
> > are two spellings, which are used interchangeably; Lipschutz and
> > Lipschuetz. Which is correct? Although one of these is probably the
> > name on official US records, they are obviously both correct, since he
> > no doubt considered the true spelling of the name Lipsch u umlaut tz.
> > When transcribing the u umlaut, some people write u, and others write
> > ue.
>
> > Could it be possible that we have the same situation with his first
> > name? How could one name be given in so many different forms, however?
>
> > Although I have never used it, I also have a second given name. Each
> > child in my family has a Hebrew name, as well as an American name. The
> > Hebrew name is simply the Hebrew name of the person I am named after.
> > In my case, this would be my great-uncle Isaac, or Yitzchak. My
> > "standard" name is only tenuously related; a name was chosen such that
> > it shares the same first letter as a Hebrew name as Yitzchak.
>
> > By my generation, this Hebrew name is purely vestigial; I don't ever
> > use it, and I doubt that my children even know I have such a name.
> > Could it be that in Lipschutz's time, however, he considered his true
> > name his Hebrew name, and basically answered with any name which
> > started with an S when asked? Of course, in old sources the name is
> > usually given simply as S. Lipschutz; it is only rarely that a first
> > name is assigned.
>
> > Perhaps someone who knows about Jewish naming custome of the time
> > could day whether this makes any sense.
>
> > Would it make sense to collect all the old sources in which a name is
> > given for Lipschutz, to see whether any name is really more common
> > than any other? I think I have references to all the names listed,
> > though IIRC Salomon rather than Solomon is given in my source.
>
> > Jerry Spinrad
>
> > On Apr 26, 7:19=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 26, 3:59=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the US=
A
> > > > in 1880 at the age of seventeen. =A0His chess career started to blos=
som
> > > > in 1883, as he was chosen to participate in high level chess club
> > > > matches, representing New York against Philadelphia ...........
>
> > > > Click here to read the whole article:http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?=
p=3D189
>
> > > =A0 There's still uncertainty about Lipsch=FCtz's actual first name, i=
s
> > > there not? Gaige gives references that call him variously Samuel,
> > > Simon, and Solomon. Has the correct name ever been determined?- Hide q=
uoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Hey .... it's Jerry Spinrad ..... I thought you fell off the face of
> the Earth.
>
> Jerry, you offered to share some of your research with me on American
> chess history a few months ago, for which I thought that I had
> appropriately expressed my gratitude. =A0You then decided for some
> reason to blow me off and refused to answer any of my e-mails.

Sorry, I am often bad about emails. I am in the process of trying to
get the notes made available on chesscafe, which would save me work in
sending it to individuals. I should have answered directly though;
sorry

Jerry Spinrad
>
> Yet, now you participate in my thread as if this never happened. =A0I
> would very much like to know why you would treat a fellow chess
> historian in this unacceptable manner. =A0If you had second thoughts on
> sharing any of your research, then that's all you had to say. =A0To
> ignore and lie to someone who has never wronged you in any way is
> pretty weird and inappropriate.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Date: 27 Apr 2008 17:57:58
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 27, 2:04=A0pm, Anders Thulin <[email protected] >
wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Could it be that in Lipschutz's time, however, he considered his true
> > name his Hebrew name, and basically answered with any name which
> > started with an S when asked?
>
> =A0 =A0You mean, any name at all? Perhaps, in everyday situations -- but i=
n
> more formal situations, there are certain disadvantages to it. If passport=
s
> were required at this time, the name used in those would probably be
> a kind of 'official' name.

The any name at all is probably a bit extreme. But if he had both an
official name he picked up on Ellis Island, and a Hebrew name he used
which got translated several ways into English, it would explain
several names being used. Krakow changing hands might have meant a
Polish name as well. I could imagine, for example, a Hebrew name like
Schlomo which translates to Solomon, a name Samuel being given on
immigrating, and some name like Semyon [sp?] turning into Simon.

I should say I don't really think of this as a theory in the sense
that I believe it is true, but instead in the sense I would like to
throw it out as a possibility.

>
> =A0 =A0It strikes me that Steinitz adopted the name 'William' on naturaliz=
ation.
> Was Lipschutz also naturalized US citizen? If he was, he might have done
> something similar -- and that might have helped add to the confusion over
> his name, particularly if he exchanged an old-world name for a new-world o=
ne.
>
> > Would it make sense to collect all the old sources in which a name is
> > given for Lipschutz, to see whether any name is really more common
> > than any other? I think I have references to all the names listed,
> > though IIRC Salomon rather than Solomon is given in my source.
>
> =A0 =A0I think that depends on what hypothesis is being tested. The 'any n=
ame
> beginning with S' won't really be tested this way, except perhaps negative=
ly
> (an uneven distribution might help disprove it). The 'most common
> is probably the actual name' works only if the reporters are sufficiently
> early in the transmission chain, and reasonably 'close'. A writer in San F=
rancisco
> might simply have copied a name from a report in a New York paper, and so =
may
> accumulate a mistake, rather than add independent confirmation.
>
> =A0 =A0Another possibility would be to look for corrections. Anyone writin=
g in and
> saying that 'you got his name wrong' may have reason for believing a
> certain name is more correct than another. If the corrections tend to poin=
t
> one way, especially if there is corroboration from official sources, it sh=
ould be
> a pretty strong indication. (Of course, if they don't ... there's probably=

> reason for concluding Lipschutz was careful about revealing his name.)
>
> =A0 =A0Me, I would probably go for official sources first: naturalization =
records?
> death certificate? passports (both in the US and in Austria/Hungary, if po=
ssible)
> and so on.
>
> --
> Anders Thulin =A0 =A0 anders*thulin.name =A0 =A0http://www.anders.thulin.n=
ame/

Date: 27 Apr 2008 13:54:12
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 27, 3:04=A0pm, Anders Thulin <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0It strikes me that Steinitz adopted the name 'William' on naturaliz=
ation.
> Was Lipschutz also naturalized US citizen? If he was, he might have done
> something similar -- and that might have helped add to the confusion over
> his name, particularly if he exchanged an old-world name for a new-world o=
ne.
>
It's the same with several prominent chess players. Unexplained
examples of this would be Chigorin often being spelled Tschigorin and
Victor Korchnoi often being spelled Viktor Kortchnoi.

I believe the nationalistic spellings of these names have varied
through interpretation over the years.

It may be similar to the sporatic American way of calling someone Jack
whose name is actually John (i.e. President Kennedy). Jackson
Showalter was similarly referred to as Jack or John in several of the
older newpaper clippings.

Date: 28 Apr 2008 15:51:55
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

RookHouse wrote:

> It's the same with several prominent chess players. Unexplained
> examples of this would be Chigorin often being spelled Tschigorin and
> Victor Korchnoi often being spelled Viktor Kortchnoi.

This is much easier to explain. Transcription (from one language or
alphabet to another) is always done in terms of the receiving language
and its phonetical quirks.

The first letter of his surname (Ч, I think it is) is thus transcribed to
the corresponding letters in the receiving language, In German, it's 'Tsch'.
In English, it's 'Ch', or 'Tch'. In French it's 'Tch', I believe. In Swedish,
it's 'Tj' -- unless you're a library, and must follow the ISO transcription
scheme, when it becomes 'Č'. Much the same muddle exists over Tchaikovsky.

Then, if the US periodical X cites German periodical Y or French book Z
without bothering about reversing these transcription problems, you'll get
German or French forms in an English language periodical, which is very much
the wrong place for them. And vice versa, of course.

No mystery here: just different transcriptional forms.

--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/

Date: 30 Apr 2008 13:23:18
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

Anders Thulin <[email protected] > wrote:
> RookHouse wrote:
>> It's the same with several prominent chess players. Unexplained
>> examples of this would be Chigorin often being spelled Tschigorin
>> and Victor Korchnoi often being spelled Viktor Kortchnoi.
>
> This is much easier to explain. Transcription (from one language or
> alphabet to another) is always done in terms of the receiving
> language and its phonetical quirks.
>
> The first letter of his surname (Ч, I think it is) is thus
> transcribed to the corresponding letters in the receiving language,
> In German, it's 'Tsch'. In English, it's 'Ch', or 'Tch'. In French
> it's 'Tch', I believe.

Yes, `tch'. In French, `ch' is pronounced like the English `sh' as in
`shoe': this is why `Chicago' and `Chopin' are pronounced/spelt as
they are, for example. In the past, English followed the French and
tended to use `tch', as in `Tchaikovsky'; the trend more recently
seems to be to use `ch', as in `Chernenko' and `Chernobyl'
(`Tchernenko' and `Tchernobyl', in French).

So my guess is that `Tchigorin' will be more common in older
publications and `Chigorin' in more recent ones. `Kortchnoi' (and,
worse, `Kortschnoj') are occasionally used in English but I'd hazard
that this is mostly due to the use of French and German sources and
not thinking about how the names should be transliterated.

Dave.

--
David Richerby Moistened Umbrella (TM): it's like an
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ umbrella but it's moist!

Date: 27 Apr 2008 13:46:58
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 27, 1:27=A0pm, "[email protected]"
<[email protected] > wrote:
> I have a strange possible explanation I would like to run by, and see
> what anyone thinks of it.
>
> Before giving the theory, let us think of Lipshutz's last name. There
> are two spellings, which are used interchangeably; Lipschutz and
> Lipschuetz. Which is correct? Although one of these is probably the
> name on official US records, they are obviously both correct, since he
> no doubt considered the true spelling of the name Lipsch u umlaut tz.
> When transcribing the u umlaut, some people write u, and others write
> ue.
>
> Could it be possible that we have the same situation with his first
> name? How could one name be given in so many different forms, however?
>
> Although I have never used it, I also have a second given name. Each
> child in my family has a Hebrew name, as well as an American name. The
> Hebrew name is simply the Hebrew name of the person I am named after.
> In my case, this would be my great-uncle Isaac, or Yitzchak. My
> "standard" name is only tenuously related; a name was chosen such that
> it shares the same first letter as a Hebrew name as Yitzchak.
>
> By my generation, this Hebrew name is purely vestigial; I don't ever
> use it, and I doubt that my children even know I have such a name.
> Could it be that in Lipschutz's time, however, he considered his true
> name his Hebrew name, and basically answered with any name which
> started with an S when asked? Of course, in old sources the name is
> usually given simply as S. Lipschutz; it is only rarely that a first
> name is assigned.
>
> Perhaps someone who knows about Jewish naming custome of the time
> could day whether this makes any sense.
>
> Would it make sense to collect all the old sources in which a name is
> given for Lipschutz, to see whether any name is really more common
> than any other? I think I have references to all the names listed,
> though IIRC Salomon rather than Solomon is given in my source.
>
> Jerry Spinrad
>
> On Apr 26, 7:19=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 26, 3:59=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the USA
> > > in 1880 at the age of seventeen. =A0His chess career started to blosso=
m
> > > in 1883, as he was chosen to participate in high level chess club
> > > matches, representing New York against Philadelphia ...........
>
> > > Click here to read the whole article:http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=
=3D189
>
> > =A0 There's still uncertainty about Lipsch=FCtz's actual first name, is
> > there not? Gaige gives references that call him variously Samuel,
> > Simon, and Solomon. Has the correct name ever been determined?- Hide quo=
ted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hey .... it's Jerry Spinrad ..... I thought you fell off the face of
the Earth.

Jerry, you offered to share some of your research with me on American
chess history a few months ago, for which I thought that I had
appropriately expressed my gratitude. You then decided for some
reason to blow me off and refused to answer any of my e-mails.

Yet, now you participate in my thread as if this never happened. I
would very much like to know why you would treat a fellow chess
historian in this unacceptable manner. If you had second thoughts on
sharing any of your research, then that's all you had to say. To
ignore and lie to someone who has never wronged you in any way is
pretty weird and inappropriate.

Date: 27 Apr 2008 10:27:04
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

I have a strange possible explanation I would like to run by, and see
what anyone thinks of it.

Before giving the theory, let us think of Lipshutz's last name. There
are two spellings, which are used interchangeably; Lipschutz and
Lipschuetz. Which is correct? Although one of these is probably the
name on official US records, they are obviously both correct, since he
no doubt considered the true spelling of the name Lipsch u umlaut tz.
When transcribing the u umlaut, some people write u, and others write
ue.

Could it be possible that we have the same situation with his first
name? How could one name be given in so many different forms, however?

Although I have never used it, I also have a second given name. Each
child in my family has a Hebrew name, as well as an American name. The
Hebrew name is simply the Hebrew name of the person I am named after.
In my case, this would be my great-uncle Isaac, or Yitzchak. My
"standard" name is only tenuously related; a name was chosen such that
it shares the same first letter as a Hebrew name as Yitzchak.

By my generation, this Hebrew name is purely vestigial; I don't ever
use it, and I doubt that my children even know I have such a name.
Could it be that in Lipschutz's time, however, he considered his true
name his Hebrew name, and basically answered with any name which
started with an S when asked? Of course, in old sources the name is
usually given simply as S. Lipschutz; it is only rarely that a first
name is assigned.

Perhaps someone who knows about Jewish naming custome of the time
could day whether this makes any sense.

Would it make sense to collect all the old sources in which a name is
given for Lipschutz, to see whether any name is really more common
than any other? I think I have references to all the names listed,
though IIRC Salomon rather than Solomon is given in my source.

Jerry Spinrad

On Apr 26, 7:19=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Apr 26, 3:59=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the USA
> > in 1880 at the age of seventeen. =A0His chess career started to blossom
> > in 1883, as he was chosen to participate in high level chess club
> > matches, representing New York against Philadelphia ...........
>
> > Click here to read the whole article:http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=3D=
189
>
> =A0 There's still uncertainty about Lipsch=FCtz's actual first name, is
> there not? Gaige gives references that call him variously Samuel,
> Simon, and Solomon. Has the correct name ever been determined?

Date: 27 Apr 2008 19:04:21
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

[email protected] wrote:

> Could it be that in Lipschutz's time, however, he considered his true
> name his Hebrew name, and basically answered with any name which
> started with an S when asked?

You mean, any name at all? Perhaps, in everyday situations -- but in
more formal situations, there are certain disadvantages to it. If passports
were required at this time, the name used in those would probably be
a kind of 'official' name.

It strikes me that Steinitz adopted the name 'William' on naturalization.
Was Lipschutz also naturalized US citizen? If he was, he might have done
something similar -- and that might have helped add to the confusion over
his name, particularly if he exchanged an old-world name for a new-world one.

> Would it make sense to collect all the old sources in which a name is
> given for Lipschutz, to see whether any name is really more common
> than any other? I think I have references to all the names listed,
> though IIRC Salomon rather than Solomon is given in my source.

I think that depends on what hypothesis is being tested. The 'any name
beginning with S' won't really be tested this way, except perhaps negatively
(an uneven distribution might help disprove it). The 'most common
is probably the actual name' works only if the reporters are sufficiently
early in the transmission chain, and reasonably 'close'. A writer in San Francisco
might simply have copied a name from a report in a New York paper, and so may
accumulate a mistake, rather than add independent confirmation.

Another possibility would be to look for corrections. Anyone writing in and
saying that 'you got his name wrong' may have reason for believing a
certain name is more correct than another. If the corrections tend to point
one way, especially if there is corroboration from official sources, it should be
a pretty strong indication. (Of course, if they don't ... there's probably
reason for concluding Lipschutz was careful about revealing his name.)

Me, I would probably go for official sources first: naturalization records?
death certificate? passports (both in the US and in Austria/Hungary, if possible)
and so on.

--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/

Date: 26 Apr 2008 17:47:35
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 26, 8:19=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> =A0 There's still uncertainty about Lipsch=FCtz's actual first name, is
> there not? Gaige gives references that call him variously Samuel,
> Simon, and Solomon. Has the correct name ever been determined?
>
I referred to this at the end of my previous post above.

Despite the uncertainty over his name, I referred to him as Samuel in
the post on my blog, as that is the name I recall seeing most often.

Date: 26 Apr 2008 17:19:57
From:
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 26, 3:59=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the USA
> in 1880 at the age of seventeen. =A0His chess career started to blossom
> in 1883, as he was chosen to participate in high level chess club
> matches, representing New York against Philadelphia ...........
>
> Click here to read the whole article:http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=3D18=
9

There's still uncertainty about Lipsch=FCtz's actual first name, is
there not? Gaige gives references that call him variously Samuel,
Simon, and Solomon. Has the correct name ever been determined?

Date: 26 Apr 2008 16:19:38
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

On Apr 26, 5:16=A0pm, Anders Thulin <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0I wonder what source the other date and age (1863 and 17 in 1880) a=
re based on.
>
My primary sources for this were The Oxford Companion to Chess
(Hooper, Whyld) and the December 1905 issue of the American Chess
Bulletin.

Dates this far back are very difficult to substantiate sometimes. An
example of this would be the birth date of Jackson W. Showalter. All
of the chess historian experts (Whyld, Winter, Hilbert, etc.) have
published this as February of 1860 (some of them vary on the exact
day). They are all absolutely incorrect, as I have been to his
gravesite and had the luxury of looking at the Showalter family bible.

Another unresolved mystery on Lipschutz is his actual first name. It
has been listed as Samuel, Salomon, and Simon. Nobody seems to know
for sure which one is correct. Edward Winter even concedes this fact
in his 2006 book, Chess Facts and Fables.

Date: 27 Apr 2008 05:24:57
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

RookHouse wrote:

> My primary sources for this were The Oxford Companion to Chess
> (Hooper, Whyld) and the December 1905 issue of the American Chess
> Bulletin.

I'm sorry -- I wasn't clear here. I wasn't wondering what your
sources were, but what they had for *their* sources. Was it Lipschutz
himself, or someone else's recollections of what Lipschutz said, in turn,
several years ago?

> Another unresolved mystery on Lipschutz is his actual first name. It
> has been listed as Samuel, Salomon, and Simon. Nobody seems to know
> for sure which one is correct. Edward Winter even concedes this fact
> in his 2006 book, Chess Facts and Fables.

That same passenger list that I mentioned (first entry to US) says "Salom."
or possibly "Solom." But as I don't know how it was produced, I can't evaluate
the likelihood of errors. As it's a standard source for genealogical research, I
am fairly certain there is some account or estimate of error sources
somewhere.

--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/

Date: 26 Apr 2008 21:16:15
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

RookHouse wrote:
> Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the USA
> in 1880 at the age of seventeen.

It's curious, though, that the passenger list from his entry (or what
appears to be his entry) to the US puts his age at 19. Of course, a passenger
list doesn't have quite the strength of a birth certificate, but another
record from his later travels show a similar difference: in a list from 1886, returning
from England, he (or who someone very much appears to be him) is listed as being 25
years of age.

There may be an explanation for this -- perhaps it was better to be 19 than
17 on entry to the US at the time? But it's a bit odd that the same difference should
be maintained six years later.

I wonder what source the other date and age (1863 and 17 in 1880) are based on.

--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/

Date: 30 Apr 2008 13:01:49
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

Anders Thulin <[email protected] > wrote:
> RookHouse wrote:
>> Samuel Lipschutz was born in 1863 in Hungary but emigrated to the
>> USA in 1880 at the age of seventeen.
>
> It's curious, though, that the passenger list from his entry (or what
> appears to be his entry) to the US puts his age at 19.

Perhaps there was some reason for wanting to be over 18, rather than
immigrate as a minor?

> Of course, a passenger list doesn't have quite the strength of a
> birth certificate, but another record from his later travels show a
> similar difference: in a list from 1886, returning from England, he
> (or who someone very much appears to be him) is listed as being 25
> years of age.

If you've lied once to immigration, it's probably a good idea to keep
up the lie, in case they cross-check.

Dave.

--
David Richerby Homicidal Moistened Newspaper (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a daily broadsheet but it's
moist and it wants to kill you!

Date: 30 Apr 2008 13:39:10
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Samuel Lipschutz

David Richerby wrote:

> Perhaps there was some reason for wanting to be over 18, rather than
> immigrate as a minor?

And vice versa, of course -- perhaps there was some reason for being
thought to be under the age of 18 once in New York.

I would be surprised if it had anything to do with age of majority,
though: in those days that was usually 21.

--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/