Folklore as an Historical Science | Page 5

and the action which
do not apparently affect the movements of civilisation, but which make
up the personal, religious and political life of the people. It is always
well to bear in mind that the historical records preserved from the past
must necessarily be incomplete. An accident preserves one, and an
accident destroys another. An incident strikes one historian, and is of
no interest to another. And it may well be that the lost document, the
unrecorded incident, is of far more value to later ages than what has
been preserved. This condition of historical research is always present
to the scientific student, though it is not always brought to bear upon
the results of historical scholarship.[1] But the scope of the historian is
gradually but surely widening. It is no longer possible to shut the door
to geography, ethnography, economics, sociology, archæology, and the
attendant studies if the historian desires to work his subject out to the
full.[2] It is even getting to be admitted that an appeal must be made to
folklore, though the extent and the method are not understood. After all
that can be obtained from other realms of knowledge, it is seen that
there is a large gap left still--a gap in the heart of things, a gap waiting
to be filled by all that can be learned about the thought, ideas, beliefs,
conceptions, and aspirations of the people which have been translated
for them, but not by them, in the laws, institutions, and religion which
find their way so easily into history.
The necessities of folklore are far greater than and of a different kind
from those of history. Edmund Spenser wrote three centuries ago "by
these old customs the descent of nations can only be proved where
other monuments of writings are not remayning,"[3] and yet the
descent of nations is still being proved without the aid of folklore. It is

certain that the appeal will not be made to its fullest extent unless the
folklorist makes it clear that it will be answered in a fashion which
commands attention. It appears to me that the preliminary conditions
for such an appeal must be ascertained from the folklore side. History
has not only justified its existence, but during the long period of years
during which it has been a specific branch of learning it has shown its
capacity for proceeding on strictly scientific and ever-widening lines.
Folklore has neither had a long period for its study nor a completely
satisfactory record of scientific work. It is, therefore, essential that
folklore should establish its right to a place among the historical
sciences. At present that right is not admitted. It is objected to by
scholars who will not admit that history can proceed from anything but
a dated and certified document, and by a few who do not admit that
history has anything to do with affairs that do not emanate from the
prominent political or military personages of each period. It is silently,
if not contemptuously ignored by almost every historical inquirer
whose attention has not been specially directed to the evidence
contained in traditional material. Thus between the difficulties arising
from the interpretation of texts which, originating in oral tradition, have
by reason of their early record become literature, and the difficulties
arising from the objections of historians to accept any evidence that is
not strictly historical in the form they assume to be historical,
traditional material has not been extensively used as history. It has also
been wrongly defined by historians. Thus, to give a pertinent example,
so good a scholar as Mr. W. H. Stevenson, in his admirable edition of
Asser's Life of King Alfred, lays to the crimes of tradition an error
which is due to other causes. Indeed, he states the cause of the error
correctly, but does not see that he is contradicting himself in so doing.
It is worth quoting this case. It has to do with the identification of
"Cynuit," a place where the Danes obtained a victory over the English
forces, and Kenwith Castle in Devonshire has been claimed as the site
of the struggle and "a place known as Bloody Corner in Northam is
traditionally regarded as the scene of a duel between two of the
chieftains in 877, and a monument recording the battle has been
erected."[4] Mr. Stevenson's comment upon this is: "We have in this an
instructive example of the worthlessness of 'tradition' which is here, as
so frequently happens elsewhere, the outcome of the dreams of local

antiquaries, whose identifications become gradually impressed upon
the memory of the inhabitants;" and he then proceeds to show that this
particular tradition was produced by the suggestion of Mr. R. S. Vidal
in 1804. Of course, the answer of the folklorist to this charge