Page:Transactions of the Second International Folk-Congress.djvu/114

This page has been validated.
78
Folk-tale Section.

that the tale may have been imported into Ireland, and cannot be used to prove the existence of junior-right there,[1] there is the obvious fact that such evidence is only confirmatory at least. We do not learn about the existence of junior-right from Cinderella, or of the couvade from Aucassin et Nicolete; we have other and better evidence for the existence of these customs. No anthropologist worth his salt would accept as evidence of a custom its existence in a folk-tale unless confirmed by archæological research in other directions. So that if we study the folktales for these survivals, we only arrive at second-hand material of precarious value.

What then are we to study in a folk-tale? Well, in the first place the folk-tale itself and for itself. The essential character of folk-tales is best described by the Italian name for them, novelline popolari: they are little novels for children, as the others are for children of a larger growth. And in novels the essential thing is plot, which has been well described as pattern in human action. We must be able to draw out this plot, or pattern, in the folk-tale, and for this purpose analyse it into its elements, which are the incidents of the story. There are many incidents common to several stories; you will all probably understand what I mean by the youngest best incident, the substituted bride incident, the talking-bird incident, the envious stepmother incident. The first step is to draw up a list of these incidents, and especially of those that are common to several stories. I have found this so necessary in my own studies on the folk-tale, that I have drawn out a preliminary list of these common incidents running to about 700 in number. I have given them names, added bibliographical references by which their occurrence may be ascertained, and will print this tentative list and nomenclature and bibliography of folk-tale incidents in the Transactions of the Congress.[2]

Having got our list and nomenclature of incidents we shall then be able to describe and analyse a folk-tale without having to

  1. I drew attention to this difficulty in my review of Mr. Hartland’s Science of Fairy Tales, Folk-Lore, ii, 125. I still remain unconvinced by his answer in that part of his Chairman’s Address which deals with my “counter-theory” without referring to my name. I feel bound to mention this, since Mr. Hartland has not done so, as otherwise in championing the said counter-theory I might be thought to be plagiarising—from myself.
  2. See Appendix to present paper, pp. 87-98.