| |
Main
Date: 21 Apr 2008 02:47:03
From: RookHouse
Subject: Steinitz Obituary
|
As reported by the New York Times on August 14, 1900:
http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=177
|
|
| |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 14:41:26
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 22, 3:20=A0pm, Anders Thulin <[email protected] >
wrote:
>
> =A0 =A0A pity -- that means that the information may be as confused as som=
e
> of the more well-known descriptions of his mental health: some parts OK,
> some parts not so OK.
>
I know I already posted the NYT link here, but here is the second part
of the obituary (along w/ a couple of Steinitz pics).
http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=3D182
Did you guys know that some American newspapers had pronounced him
dead in 1897, while he was in the Moscow sanitarium? They posted
retractions 3-4 days later. Pretty BIG mistake, wouldn't you say?
|
| |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 07:47:27
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 22, 9:59=A0am, Anders Thulin <[email protected] >
wrote:
> RookHouse wrote:
> > As reported by the New York Times on August 14, 1900:
> >http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=3D177
>
> =A0 =A0Do you have any information at all about who wrote the stuff?
>
> --
> Anders Thulin =A0 =A0 anders*thulin.name =A0 =A0http://www.anders.thulin.n=
ame/
>
I cannot find the name of the author of this article. The NY Times
archives only list the date of each article.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=3D9E06E4DC1039E733A25757C1A96=
E9C946197D6CF&scp=3D1&sq=3Dsteinitz+dead&st=3Dp
|
| | |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 19:20:10
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
RookHouse wrote:
> I cannot find the name of the author of this article. The NY Times
> archives only list the date of each article.
Thanks for the link.
A pity -- that means that the information may be as confused as some
of the more well-known descriptions of his mental health: some parts OK,
some parts not so OK.
The regular chess reporting in NYT didn't start until 1901 (Whyld), so
there's no knowing who it might have been, either.
--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/
|
| |
Date: 22 Apr 2008 13:59:30
From: Anders Thulin
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
RookHouse wrote:
> As reported by the New York Times on August 14, 1900:
> http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=177
Do you have any information at all about who wrote the stuff?
--
Anders Thulin anders*thulin.name http://www.anders.thulin.name/
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 16:01:14
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 6:11=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
> =A0 Looking further, I see Landsberger devotes a half-page to a Hedwig
> Steinitz, daughter of Wilhelm's half-brother Bernard, who lived in
> Prague and apparently never came to the USA. Landsberger writes:
>
> =A0 "In a letter of August 9, 1893, Steinitz wrote that the two oldest
> children of Bernard, a boy and a girl, had arrived at his house [the
> boy was named Josef -- TK] ... At one time Hedwig told a reporter that
> she was not only Steinitz's niece but his adopted daughter; the
> reporter quoted her as calling him 'Papa.'"
>
> =A0 So I wonder if the two children mentioned in the obituary were
> Hedwig and Josef? Seems possible, though at the time of Steinitz's
> death Josef would have been about 25 and Hedwig 22, a bit old to be
> dependent children still.- Hide quoted text -
>
The mystery continues. I will scour my collection of American Chess
Bulletin volumes and see if there is any further information on this.
Thanks for all of your help on this Taylor.
Morphy
www.rookhouse.com
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 15:11:43
From:
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 5:12=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 21, 4:45=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > =A0 As far as I know, Steinitz had only one child, a daughter, Flora,
> > born to him and his first wife Caroline in 1866. The daughter
> > predeceased Steinitz, dying of endocarditis in 1888, which greatly
> > grieved her father. Wife Caroline (n=E9e Golder) was of English birth,
> > and nine years younger than Steinitz. I don't know anything else about
> > her.
> > =A0 I know even less about his second wife, just that she was born in
> > Switzerland. Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" has a few documents
> > that indicate she got some money from charitable friends of Steinitz
> > to help with his hospital costs. Perhaps some of this money was still
> > there when he died in August 1900.
>
> Flora is indeed mentioned in the obituary, but so are his two children
> with his second wife:
>
> =93About two months ago Mrs. Steinitz, in order to maintain her two
> children, opened a small candy store at 505 West Twenty-Sixth Street,
> just beyond Tenth Avenue.=94
> =93Prior to his being sent to hospital for the insane, Steinitz lived
> with his second wife and two young children at 1555 East One Hundred
> and Third Street.=94
>
> So, I guess the current mystery is whether these children were hers
> from a previous marriage (or from Steinitz) and what happened to them
> after Steinitz passed away.
I based my comments on "The Steinitz Papers," which mentions only
Flora, but it's certainly conceivable he had other children. I don't
know if Steinitz was the father of these two mentioned in the obituary
or not. Landsberger has 34 pages of brief bios of people "whose lives
touched that of William Steinitz," but neither wife is there, nor any
children besides Flora.
Looking further, I see Landsberger devotes a half-page to a Hedwig
Steinitz, daughter of Wilhelm's half-brother Bernard, who lived in
Prague and apparently never came to the USA. Landsberger writes:
"In a letter of August 9, 1893, Steinitz wrote that the two oldest
children of Bernard, a boy and a girl, had arrived at his house [the
boy was named Josef -- TK] ... At one time Hedwig told a reporter that
she was not only Steinitz's niece but his adopted daughter; the
reporter quoted her as calling him 'Papa.'"
So I wonder if the two children mentioned in the obituary were
Hedwig and Josef? Seems possible, though at the time of Steinitz's
death Josef would have been about 25 and Hedwig 22, a bit old to be
dependent children still.
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 14:19:57
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 5:08=A0pm, SBD <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> You know, a lot of our champions have led really crappy lives. Poor
> Steinitz....
>
The similarities of Steinitz and Morphy in their final years is kind
of scary. Morphy spent his final years depressed and wandering around
the French Quarter of New Orleans, talking to people no one else could
see.
The only glaring difference was that Morphy had more than enough
money, thanks to his family fortune.
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 14:12:44
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 4:45=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> =A0 As far as I know, Steinitz had only one child, a daughter, Flora,
> born to him and his first wife Caroline in 1866. The daughter
> predeceased Steinitz, dying of endocarditis in 1888, which greatly
> grieved her father. Wife Caroline (n=E9e Golder) was of English birth,
> and nine years younger than Steinitz. I don't know anything else about
> her.
> =A0 I know even less about his second wife, just that she was born in
> Switzerland. Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" has a few documents
> that indicate she got some money from charitable friends of Steinitz
> to help with his hospital costs. Perhaps some of this money was still
> there when he died in August 1900.
>
Flora is indeed mentioned in the obituary, but so are his two children
with his second wife:
=93About two months ago Mrs. Steinitz, in order to maintain her two
children, opened a small candy store at 505 West Twenty-Sixth Street,
just beyond Tenth Avenue.=94
=93Prior to his being sent to hospital for the insane, Steinitz lived
with his second wife and two young children at 1555 East One Hundred
and Third Street.=94
So, I guess the current mystery is whether these children were hers
from a previous marriage (or from Steinitz) and what happened to them
after Steinitz passed away.
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 14:08:04
From: SBD
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 3:45 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> On Apr 21, 3:02 pm, RookHouse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 21, 12:37 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > > Yes, his minus score (+8 -12 =3D7) must have told him the jig was up=
,
> > > though in mitigation the guys above him in the standings were prettty
> > > good: Lasker, Janowski, Maroczy, Pillsbury, Schlechter, Blackburne,
> > > Chigorin, Showalter and Mason. He went downhill pretty fast after
> > > that. A sad end to a difficult life full of triumphs and tragedies.- H=
ide quoted text -
>
> > A poster on my blog asked "I don=92t remember reading what happened to
> > Mrs. Steinitz and the children. In those days widows who could not
> > support their children frequently lost them to state custody."
>
> > Do you have any info on this??
>
> As far as I know, Steinitz had only one child, a daughter, Flora,
> born to him and his first wife Caroline in 1866. The daughter
> predeceased Steinitz, dying of endocarditis in 1888, which greatly
> grieved her father. Wife Caroline (n=E9e Golder) was of English birth,
> and nine years younger than Steinitz. I don't know anything else about
> her.
> I know even less about his second wife, just that she was born in
> Switzerland. Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" has a few documents
> that indicate she got some money from charitable friends of Steinitz
> to help with his hospital costs. Perhaps some of this money was still
> there when he died in August 1900.
> If anyone reading this has Landsberger's biography of Steinitz,
> perhaps he can supply more details?
You know, a lot of our champions have led really crappy lives. Poor
Steinitz....
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 13:45:38
From:
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 3:02=A0pm, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 21, 12:37=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > =A0 Yes, his minus score (+8 -12 =3D7) must have told him the jig was up=
,
> > though in mitigation the guys above him in the standings were prettty
> > good: Lasker, Janowski, Maroczy, Pillsbury, Schlechter, Blackburne,
> > Chigorin, Showalter and Mason. He went downhill pretty fast after
> > that. A sad end to a difficult life full of triumphs and tragedies.- Hid=
e quoted text -
>
> A poster on my blog asked "I don=92t remember reading what happened to
> Mrs. Steinitz and the children. In those days widows who could not
> support their children frequently lost them to state custody."
>
> Do you have any info on this??
As far as I know, Steinitz had only one child, a daughter, Flora,
born to him and his first wife Caroline in 1866. The daughter
predeceased Steinitz, dying of endocarditis in 1888, which greatly
grieved her father. Wife Caroline (n=E9e Golder) was of English birth,
and nine years younger than Steinitz. I don't know anything else about
her.
I know even less about his second wife, just that she was born in
Switzerland. Landsberger's "The Steinitz Papers" has a few documents
that indicate she got some money from charitable friends of Steinitz
to help with his hospital costs. Perhaps some of this money was still
there when he died in August 1900.
If anyone reading this has Landsberger's biography of Steinitz,
perhaps he can supply more details?
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 12:02:37
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 12:37=A0pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
> =A0 Yes, his minus score (+8 -12 =3D7) must have told him the jig was up,
> though in mitigation the guys above him in the standings were prettty
> good: Lasker, Janowski, Maroczy, Pillsbury, Schlechter, Blackburne,
> Chigorin, Showalter and Mason. He went downhill pretty fast after
> that. A sad end to a difficult life full of triumphs and tragedies.- Hide =
quoted text -
>
A poster on my blog asked "I don=92t remember reading what happened to
Mrs. Steinitz and the children. In those days widows who could not
support their children frequently lost them to state custody."
Do you have any info on this??
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 09:37:21
From:
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 11:51=A0am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Apr 21, 9:30=A0am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > "[A]fter his second meeting with Lasker, at Moscow, Russia, in 1897,
> > where he again met defeat, his decline was rapid. =A0After this second
> > defeat he almost entirely discarded all thoughts of the games and
> > devoted himself to other matters. =A0He became an enthusiastic believer
> > in the Kneipp cure."
>
> > =A0 This gives the impression that Steinitz gave up up chess after
> > losing to Lasker in January 1897. That's not at all true. He played in
> > four tournaments 1897-1899, all of them involving top-level masters,
> > and overall he did very well, failing to win a prize only in his very
> > last event, London 1899. His combined score in these four events was
> > +35 -24 =3D23.
>
> Yeah, I thought that was very odd as well. =A0I even took a quick look
> at the remainder of the obituary (Part 2 of which I will post
> tomorrow) and it even repeats that he never played competitive chess
> again after his 1897 defeat at the hands of Lasker.
If we count only the 1897-98 tournaments, Steinitz scored +28 -12
=3D16. He finished =3D1st of 3 at New York, 4th of 19 at Vienna, and 5th
of 16 at Cologne. The latter two events were particularly impressive.
At Vienna he placed behind only Pillsbury, Tarrasch and Janowski,
ahead of Schlechter, Burn, Chigorin, Lipke, Maroczy, Alapin,
Blackburne, Schiffers, Marco, Showalter, Walbrodt, Halprin, Caro,
Baird and Trenchard. At Cologne he was behind Burn, Charousek,
Chigorin and W. Cohn, but ahead of Schlechter, Showalter, Berger,
Janowski, Popiel, Schiffers, von Gottschall, Albin, Heinrichsen, Fritz
and Schallop. Not bad for an old man!
> It was always my understanding that his poor performance in the 1899
> London tournament was "the straw that broke the camel's back".
Yes, his minus score (+8 -12 =3D7) must have told him the jig was up,
though in mitigation the guys above him in the standings were prettty
good: Lasker, Janowski, Maroczy, Pillsbury, Schlechter, Blackburne,
Chigorin, Showalter and Mason. He went downhill pretty fast after
that. A sad end to a difficult life full of triumphs and tragedies.
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 08:51:04
From: RookHouse
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 9:30=A0am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> "[A]fter his second meeting with Lasker, at Moscow, Russia, in 1897,
> where he again met defeat, his decline was rapid. =A0After this second
> defeat he almost entirely discarded all thoughts of the games and
> devoted himself to other matters. =A0He became an enthusiastic believer
> in the Kneipp cure."
>
> =A0 This gives the impression that Steinitz gave up up chess after
> losing to Lasker in January 1897. That's not at all true. He played in
> four tournaments 1897-1899, all of them involving top-level masters,
> and overall he did very well, failing to win a prize only in his very
> last event, London 1899. His combined score in these four events was
> +35 -24 =3D23.
>
Yeah, I thought that was very odd as well. I even took a quick look
at the remainder of the obituary (Part 2 of which I will post
tomorrow) and it even repeats that he never played competitive chess
again after his 1897 defeat at the hands of Lasker.
It was always my understanding that his poor performance in the 1899
London tournament was "the straw that broke the camel's back".
|
| |
Date: 21 Apr 2008 06:30:31
From:
Subject: Re: Steinitz Obituary
|
On Apr 21, 5:47=A0am, RookHouse <[email protected] > wrote:
> As reported by the New York Times on August 14, 1900:http://www.rookhouse.=
com/blog/?p=3D177
Quite interesting. Thank you for posting that, Morphy.
I noticed one passage that seemed misleading. The second paragraph
of the obituary says:
"[A]fter his second meeting with Lasker, at Moscow, Russia, in 1897,
where he again met defeat, his decline was rapid. After this second
defeat he almost entirely discarded all thoughts of the games and
devoted himself to other matters. He became an enthusiastic believer
in the Kneipp cure."
This gives the impression that Steinitz gave up up chess after
losing to Lasker in January 1897. That's not at all true. He played in
four tournaments 1897-1899, all of them involving top-level masters,
and overall he did very well, failing to win a prize only in his very
last event, London 1899. His combined score in these four events was
+35 -24 =3D23.
The obit also gives the impression that Steinitz "became an
enthusiastic believer in the Kneipp cure" (a regimen of cold baths)
only after his 2nd loss to Lasker. Actually he had been a Kneipp
devotee for many years before that.
The obit mentions a fund that helped pay for Steinitz's medical care
and the support of his widow. One of the main instigators of and
contributors to that fund was Max Judd, a prominent St. Louis
businessman and chess master. Judd was serving as US Consul-General in
Vienna when Steinitz lost his rematch with Lasker. After the match,
Steinitz stayed a while with Judd, who was instrumental in getting the
old warrior back on his feet. Judd is the subject of a 3-part article
by Jeremy Spinrad at www.chesscafe.com. The second part can be read
here: http://www.chesscafe.com/spinrad/spinrad.htm.
The third part, which covers Judd's diplomatic service in Vienna and
the help he gave Steinitz there, will appear this Saturday 4/26/2008.
|
|
