As reported by the New York Times on August 14, 1900:
http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=177

On Apr 21, 5:47*am, RookHouse wrote:
As reported by the New York Times on August 14, 1900:http://www.rookhouse.com/blog/?p=177

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 =23.
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
he 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.

On Apr 21, 9:30*am, wrote:

"[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 =23.

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".

On Apr 21, 11:51*am, RookHouse wrote:
On Apr 21, 9:30*am, wrote:

"[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 =23.

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.

If we count only the 1897-98 tournaments, Steinitz scored +28 -12
=16. He finished =1st 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 =7) 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.

On Apr 21, 12:37*pm, wrote:

* Yes, his minus score (+8 -12 =7) 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’t 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??

On Apr 21, 3:02*pm, RookHouse wrote:
On Apr 21, 12:37*pm, wrote:

* Yes, his minus score (+8 -12 =7) 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’t 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 (née 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?

On Apr 21, 3:45 pm, wrote:
On Apr 21, 3:02 pm, RookHouse wrote:

On Apr 21, 12:37 pm, wrote:

Yes, his minus score (+8 -12 =7) 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’t 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 (née 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....

On Apr 21, 4:45*pm, wrote:

* 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 (née 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.

Flora is indeed mentioned in the obituary, but so are his two children
with his second wife:

“About 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.”

“Prior 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.”

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.

On Apr 21, 5:08*pm, SBD 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.

On Apr 21, 5:12*pm, RookHouse wrote:
On Apr 21, 4:45*pm, wrote:

* 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 (née 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.

Flora is indeed mentioned in the obituary, but so are his two children
with his second wife:

“About 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.”

“Prior 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.”

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.