Fascinating stuff. When the Expos moved in 2004, the choice of the name "Nationals" was considered merely an alternative to not using "Senators" (since the District has no senators, or voting representatives, for that matter), but it had a history of its own long before the original AL team began using it...though I don't think very many clerks in the federal government play baseball in their spare hours these days.

Cool stuff. It makes me wonder when the first box score was published. To google!

edit: according to this http://thefatherlife.com/mag/2009/08/02/the-150th-anniversary-of-the-box-score/ it was in 1859.

I'm pretty sure that the Nationals are not called the Senators because the Rangers still hold the Senators trademark.

The Civil War helped facilitate the spread of the "New York game" as soldiers idled away time in camp, prisons, and even the front lines.

True enough. However, as historians like Peter Morris (BUT DIDN'T WE HAVE FUN?) insist, the Civil War also decimated the lineups of most town ballclubs in both the North and South; by the end of the 1860s, amateur town clubs were on their way out.

The New Yorkers usually won these matches by lopsided scores such as when members of the New York 71st Regiment beat the Nationals 42 to 13 on July 12, 1861. However, the Nationals got revenge a year later, defeating the 71st 28-13 on August 7, 1862.

Yeah, the Nationals were the first to adopt the use of contrabands, and they had a competitive advantage for awhile.

What's the best book on the early history of baseball? I know this is the place to get the answer.

I'm pretty sure that the Nationals are not called the Senators because the Rangers still hold the Senators trademark.

Published reports at the time of the decision indicated that Selig pushed hard for the relocated Expos to be called the Senators, but the DC government vetoed it as unrepresentative of current Washington, DC. Since they were paying for the stadium, and there wasn't any local ownership, they got their way on that.

the District has no senators

I'm pretty sure they have Senators when Congress is in session.

And if one replies that they are not citizens of the District, well, they are still part of the scenery, like the Rays of Tampa and the Diamondbacks of Arizona. The local wildlife, as it were.

[6] What's the best book on the early history of baseball?

I recommend A Game of Inches and But Didn't We Have Fun? both by Peter Morris (as noted in 4 above). A Game of Inches is a catalog of baseball "firsts", informative and well organized.

The Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract has a good overview decade-by-decade.

[2] Cool stuff. It makes me wonder when the first box score was published. To google!

edit: according to this http://thefatherlife.com/mag/2009/08/02/the-150th-anniversary-of-the-box-score/ it was in 1859.

According to A Game of Inches and other sources, the box score dates back to 1845:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B01E7D71230F931A35757C0A9609C8B63

The New York Times
BASEBALL PREVIEW; Take Me Out to the Box Score
By ALAN SCHWARZ
Published: April 2, 2006 ...

1845

Baseball's first box score, printed by The New York Morning News on Oct. 22, 1845, demonstrated the pastime's roots in cricket, which had its own box scores, or abstracts. Because a cricket batter either does or does not score a point by reaching the opposite wicket, early baseball boxes simply listed when a batsman succeeded (by scoring a run) or failed (by making an out). The intermediate step -- getting a base hit but not scoring -- did not get recognized for years. Early box scores were only nine lines long because there were no substitutions, and certainly no relief pitchers.

See also:
http://baseballhistoryblog.com/1173/first-known-box-score/
and
http://thornpricks.blogspot.com/2008_03_01_archive.html

I'm pretty sure they have Senators when Congress is in session.

And if one replies that they are not citizens of the District, well, they are still part of the scenery, like the Rays of Tampa and the Diamondbacks of Arizona. The local wildlife, as it were.

I think you can see, though, why people to whom DC Congressional representation is a major political issue are not going to see that as a good answer. It sounds as if they feel like it's rubbing it in to have a team named "Senators" when they want real Senators and can't get any.

I thought they would go with "Grays". It's not exactly a thrilling moniker, but at least it has one hell of a history. I'm surprised they didn't choose it. "Nationals" is ultra-mega-bland. I guess it beats "Wizards" though.

6] What's the best book on the early history of baseball?

I recommend A Game of Inches and But Didn't We Have Fun? both by Peter Morris (as noted in 4 above). A Game of Inches is a catalog of baseball "firsts", informative and well organized.

I also like John Thorn's recent book Baseball in the Garden of Eden.