From Protoball
Jump to: navigation, search

This is a property of type Text.

Pages using the property "Query"

Showing 25 pages using this property.

(previous 25) (next 25)


-2500.2 +<p>Have other scholars commented on Mr. George's ballplaying interpretation of the Gilgamesh epic? </p>


1086.1 +<p> </p> <p><strong>Note:</strong> We need to confirm whether the Domesday Book actually uses the term "bittle-battle," "stool ball," or what. We also should try to ascertain views of professional scholars on the interpretations of the Book. Martin Hoerchner advises that the British Public Records Office may, at some point, make parts of the Domesday Book available online.</p>
1393.1 +<p>Is "stumpball" actually a known game?  Have we done adequate searches for this name?</p>
1400c.1 +<p>What, if anything, have scholars said about the nature of the game that Jesus played?  A baserunning and/or batting game?  More like soccer or field hockey?  Other?</p>
1450.2 +<p><strong>Note:</strong> we need a fuller citation and the key text. Is it possible that this entry confuses D'Urfey's 1694 play about Don Quixote [see Entry #1694.1, below] with the Cervantes masterpiece?</p>
1500s.2 +<p><strong>Note:</strong> Is it possible to determine the approximate date of this event?</p>
1538.1 +<p>Can the actual text be retrieved?</p>
1540c.2 +<p>Have scholars indicated the likely nature of "palm play?"  Could it have involved the batting of a ball with the palm?</p>
1555c.1 +<p>Any idea what "rene base" might have meant in those days?  Could it refer to a much older form of the team-tag game later known as prisoner's base? </p>
1586c.1 +<p>Further interpretations are welcome as to Sydney's meaning.</p>
1598.4 +<p>Note: do later writers agree that this was mere coincidence?</p>
1600c.1 +<p>What is the basis of the Andrei/Zolnay report of a circuit of bases in the Czech game?</p> <p>Does Mehl's discussion of the Czech game add anything?</p> <p>Can we verify the Gyula Hajdu source? Is it <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Magyar Nepraiz V. Folklor?</span>  Does Hungarian rounders Belong in this entry?  If not, how do we date it?</p>
1630.4 +<p>Is the Wiltshire County website's URL available? Is it still operative?</p> <p>Is the original source of the data given?</p>
1630c.3 +<p>Can we find and inspect the 1935 Boas edition of the diary?</p>
1656.1 +<p><strong>Note:</strong> It would be useful to ascertain what Dutch phrase was translated as "playing ball," and whether the phrase denotes a certain type of game. The population of Manhattan at this time was about 800 [were there enough resident Englishmen to sustain cricket?], and the area was largely a fur trading post. Is it possible that the burghers imported this text from the Dutch homeland?</p> <p>Can anyone out there google in Dutch?</p>
1660c.3 +<p>Can we determine whether 17th-century balslaen was a batting/baserunning game, or was it in the field-hockey, or handball, or golf, families of games?</p> <p>Was "New Netherland" confined to the Manhattan area or did it extend northward into the Hudson River valley?</p> <p>Is "circa 1660" a defensible approximation for this find?</p> <p>Was balslaen played in Holland?  Could it have influenced English ballplaying, including cricket and English base ball??</p> <p> </p>
1661.1 +<p>Can we really assume that Galileo was familiar with 1600s stoolball and tennis?  Is it possible that this excerpt reflects commentary by Salusbury, rather that strict translation from the Italian source?</p>
1666.1 +<p>Bunyan was born in 1628.  Are we sure that this event can be dated 1666, when he was nearly forty years old?</p>
1680.3 +<p>So . . . the quote was, perhaps, from a 1680 lecture by John Bunyan himslef?</p>
1700.1 +<p>Can we confirm this citation, and that it refers to cricket? Do we know of any earlier public announcements of safe-haven games?</p>
1725c.1 +<p>Further comment on this entry is welcome, especially from wicket devotees; after all, this may be the initial U.S. wicket citation in existence (assuming that #[[1700c.2]]  cannot be documented, and that #[[1704.1]] above is not ever confirmed as wicket).</p>
1732.1 +<p>Is it fair to assume that the gentleman used a bat to propel the ball? </p> <p>Are such feats known in England?</p> <p>Is a 160-foot weather-vane plausible?  That's well over 10 stories, no?</p> <p> </p>
1733.1 +<p>Some actual text should be added here, if it can be captured.</p>
1749.2 +<p>Only two players were named for this account.  Was that because the Prince and Lord Middlesex both led clubs not worthy of mentioning, or was there a two-player version of the game then (in the 1800s competitive games of cricket were similarly reported with only two named players)?</p>
1750s.3 +<p>Can we interpret the baserunning rule allowing "a pace or jump to the base [the runner] was striving to reach?"  Plugging didn't count if the runner was close to the next base," perhaps?</p>
(previous 25) (next 25)
Personal tools