THE SCIENCE OF FOLK-LORE.
SHOULD like to make some remarks on the classification and nomenclature of folk-lore from the practical collector's point of view.
If I were asked the question, "Which of the proposed schemes would prove the most useful in practice?" I should answer without hesitation, Mr. Gomme's. I read his paper on "The Science of Folk-Lore" in the last number of the Journal with feelings something like those of a student who, after painfully striving to master some difficult language with the aid of a dictionary alone, suddenly finds a grammar put into his hands. Mr. Nutt's and Mr. Hartland's vast "Redistribution Bills," on the other hand, I am sorry to say, roused a feeling of bewilderment. They are no doubt admirable from a scientific point of view, but too elaborate for the weaker brethren, or at all events for the sisters, who certainly have a fair share of the work of collecting. One would be continually wondering, "What should go where?" i.e. under what head any particular item should be placed. It is not always easy to sort one's scraps, and to decide to what "genus" each "species" belongs. For instance: a certain man at Whixall in Shropshire said in 1883 that when St. Peter had the toothache. Our Lord desired him to cut his nails on a Friday, and he would be cured; hence any person who is careful always to cut his nails on a Friday only, will never be troubled with toothache. Now, which is the leading feature in this "scrap"? St. Peter, the toothache, Friday, or cutting nails? Ought it to be placed under Legends of the Saints, Folk-Medicine, Days and Seasons, or Superstitions connected with the Human Body? (I am giving possible sub-divisions, not writing under the idea that these
