I must here refer to the game of “Rashes” (Addenda, ii. pp. 452, 453). I have not succeeded in obtaining a version played now, and fear it is lost altogether, which is, perhaps, not surprising, as the use of “rushes” has practically ceased; but, as recorded by Mr. Radcliffe in 1873, there is no doubt it represented the survival of the time when rushes were gathered and used with ceremony of a religious nature.
Even in the extremely simple “Ring a Ring of Roses” (ii. 108-111), now only a nursery game played by very youngchildren, there can be traced a relationship to a dance, in which the use of flowers, and all the dancers bowing or falling prostrate to the ground together, with loud exclamations of delight obtained. It may well be that sneezing, an imitation of which is an essential part of the game, was actually a necessary part of the ceremonial, and sneezing was always considered of sacred significance among primitive peoples. It is not probable that children would introduce this of their own accord in a dance and “bop down” game.
The games played in the third method of this group are also representative of custom. In “Old Roger” (vol. ii. pp. 16-24), the circle of players is stationary throughout; the circle sings the words describing the story, and the other players or actors run into the circle and act their several parts in dumb show. The story, it will be seen, is not the acting of a funeral, but the planting of a tree over the grave of a dead person by relatives and friends, and the spirit connection which this tree has with the dead. The spirit of the dead “Old Roger” enters the tree, and resents the carrying away of the fruit by the old woman by jumping up and making her drop the apples. Possession of the fruit would give her power over the spirit. That the tree is sacred is clear; and I am tempted to suggest that we may possibly have in this game a survival of the worship of the sacred tree, and its attendant priest watching until killed by his successor, as shown to us by Mr. Frazer in the story of the “Golden Bough.”
“Round and Round the Village” (ii. pp. 122-143) shows us the performance of a recurring festival very clearly in the words which accompany all versions, “As we have done before.” This conveys the idea of a special event, the event in the game marriage, and I suggest that we have here a periodical village festival, at which marriages took place. It is characteristic of this, as in “Old Roger,” that the chorus or circle stand still and sing the event, while the two characters act. This acting is the dancing round the village, going in and out the windows and houses, then choosing a lover, and “follow her to London.” It is quite possible that the perambulation of boundaries with which festive dances and courtship were often associated wouldoriginate this game. The perambulation was a recurring custom periodically performed, and on p. 142, vol. ii., I have given some instances of custom which, I think, confirm this.
In “Who goes round my Stone Wall” we find the players in circle form, standing still and representing the houses of a village (the stone wall), and also animals. The game represents the stealing of sheep, one by one, from the village, by a predatory animal or thief. In this game the circle do not sing the story. That element has disappeared; the two actors repeat a dialogue referring to the stealing of the sheep from the “wall.” This dialogue is short, and is disappearing. The game is not now understood, and consequently is dying out. “Booman,” another of the same kind, represents a funeral. The grave is dug in action, Booman is carried to his grave, the dirge is sang over him, and flowers are pretended to be strewn over.
There are other circle games, which it is not needful to examine in detail. They are fragmentary, and do not present any fresh features of interest. It is, however, important to note that a few examples have evidently been derived from love ballads, drinking songs, and toasts; some of the dance games are of this origin. This may be explained by the fact that children, knowing the general form of marriage games, would naturally dance in circle form to any ballad verses in which marriage or love and courtship occurs, and in this manner the ballad would become apparently a fresh game, though it would only be putting new words to an old formula of action.
Dr. Jacob Jacobsen, inDialect and Place Names of Shetland, tells us that all thevissiksor ballads have been forgotten since 1750, or thereby. They were sung to a dance, in which men and women joined hands and formed a ring, moving forwards, and keeping time with their hands and feet. Mr. Newell (Games, p. 78), records that “Barbara Allen” was sung and danced in New England at children’s parties at a period when dancing was forbidden to be taught in schools. “Auld Lang Syne” is a further instance.
It will easily be seen that the circle games have a distinctivecharacteristic compared with the line games. These, as I have already pointed out, are games of contest, whereas the circle games are games in which a homogeneous group of persons are performing a ceremony belonging entirely to themselves. The ceremony is of a religious character, as in “Oats and Beans and Barley,” or “Old Roger,” dedicated to a spirit intimately connected with the group who perform it, and having nothing belonging to any outside group. The position of the marriage ceremony in this group is peculiar. It has settled down from the more primitive state of things shown in the line marriage games, and has acquired a more social and domestic form. Except in the very significant water custom in “Sally Water,” which I have suggested (ii. pp. 176, 177) may take us back to perhaps the very oldest stage of culture, all the games in this group are evidently of a later formation. Let it be noted, too, that the circle has deep religious significance not entirely absent from the customs of comparatively later times, among which the singing of “Auld Lang Syne” is the most generally known.
But in speaking of matters of religious significance, it is important to bear in mind that we are not dealing with the religion of the Church. Everywhere it is most significant that marriage ceremony, sacred rite, social custom, or whatever is contained in these games, do not take us to the religion of to-day. Non-Christian rites can only be pre-Christian in origin, and these games therefore take us to pre-Christian religious or social custom, and this is sufficient to stamp them with an antiquity which alone would certify to the importance of studying this branch of folk-lore.
To take now the dialogue or individual form of game, the best example for my purpose is “Mother, Mother, the Pot boils over” (vol. i. pp. 396-401). Here the chorus has disappeared; the principal characters tell the story in dialogue, the minor characters only acting when the dialogue necessitates it, and then in dumb show. This is an interesting and important game. It is a complete drama of domestic life at a time when child-stealing and witchcraft were rife. A mother goes out to work, and returns to find one of her seven children missing. The gamedescribes the stealing of the children one by one by the witch, but the little drama tells even more than this. It probably illustrates some of the practices and customs connected with fire-worship and the worship of the hearth. There is a pot, which is a magical one, and which boils over when each one of the children is stolen and the mother’s presence is necessary. A remarkable point is that the witch asks to borrow a light from the fire. The objection to the giving of fire out of the house is a well-known and widely-diffused superstition, the possession of a brand from the house fire giving power to the possessor over the inmates. The witch in this game takes away a child when the eldest daughter consents to give her a light. The spitting on the hearth gives confirmation to the theory that the desecration of the hearth is the cause of the pot boiling over. Instances of magical pots are not rare.[20]
[20]Mr. W. F. Kirby refers me to the form of initiation into witchcraft in Saxony, where the candidate danced round a pot filled with magic herbs, singing—“I believe in this pot,And abjure God;”or else it was—“I abjure God,And believe in this pot.”
[20]Mr. W. F. Kirby refers me to the form of initiation into witchcraft in Saxony, where the candidate danced round a pot filled with magic herbs, singing—
“I believe in this pot,And abjure God;”
“I believe in this pot,And abjure God;”
or else it was—
“I abjure God,And believe in this pot.”
“I abjure God,And believe in this pot.”
After the children are stolen the mother has evidently a long and troublesome journey in search of them; obstacles are placed in her path quite in the manner of the folk-tale. Blood must not be spilled on the threshold. This game, then, which might be considered only as one of child-stealing, becomes, when examined on the theories accompanying the ancient house ritual, an extraordinary instance of the way beliefs and customs have been dramatised, and so perpetuated. Other games of a similar character to this, and perhaps derived from it, are “Witch,” “Gipsy,” “Steal the Pigs.”
Amongst other games classified as dialogue games are those in which animals take part. In some there is a contest between a beast of prey, usually a fox or wolf, and a hen and her chickens or a goose and her goslings; in others a shepherd or keeper guards sheep from a wolf, and in these animals of the chase are hunted or baited for sport. In the animal contest games, “Fox and Goose,” “Hen and Chickens,” “Gled-wylie,” “Auld Grannie,” “Old Cranny Crow,” all played in the dialogue form, the dialogue announces that the fox wants some food, and he arouses the suspicion of the goose or hen by prowling around or near her dwelling. After a parley, in which he tries to deceive the mother animal, he announces his intention of catching one of the chickens. The hen declares she will protect her brood, and a contest ensues. These games have of course arisen from the well-known predatory habits of the wolf, fox, and kite. On the other hand, the games illustrating the hunting or baiting of animals, such as “Baste the Bear,” “Fox in the Hole,” “Hare and Hounds,” are simply imitations of those sports. “Baiting the Bear,” a popular and still played game, has continued since the days of bear-baiting.
I may also mention the games dealing with ghosts. “Ghost at the Well,” “Mouse and Cobbler,” show the prevailing belief in ghosts. Playing at Ghosts has been one of the most popular of games. These two show the game in a very degenerate condition. I need not, I think, describe in detail any more of the dialogue games. There are none so good as “Mother, the Pot boils over,” but that was hardly to be expected. The customs which no doubt were originally dramatised in them all have in many cases been lost, as in the case of some versions of “Mother, the Pot boils over.”
The dialogue games appear to me to be later in form than both line and circle games. They are, in fact, developments of these earlier forms. Thus the “Fox and Goose” and “Hen and Chickens” type is played practically in line form, and belongs to the contest group, while the “Witch” type is probably representative of the circle form. But they have assumed a dramatic character of a very definite shape. This, as will be seen later on, is of considerable importance in the evidence of the ancient origin of games; but I will only point out here that this group has allowed the dramatic element to have full scope, with the result that a pure dialogue has been evolved, while custom and usage has to some extent been pushed in the background.
The next group is the arch form of game. This I divide into two kinds—those ending in circle or dance form, andthose ending with a contest between two leaders. Of this first form there are several examples. “London Bridge” (i. pp. 333-50) is possibly the most interesting. Two players form the arch, all the others follow in single file. The words of the story are sung while all the players run under or through the arch. The players are all caught in turn in the arch, and then stand aside; their part is finished. In some cases the game begins by all forming a circle, and the verses are sung while the circle dances round. The arch is then formed, and all run through it in single file, and are caught in turn by being imprisoned between the lowered arms. Also, we find the circle-dancing following the arch ceremony. In my account ofthis game(vol. i. pp. 341-50), I have drawn attention to the incident of a prisoner being taken as indicative of the widespread custom known as the foundation sacrifice, because of the suggested difficulty of getting the bridge to stand when the prisoner is taken. I have given a few instances of the custom, and the tradition that the stones of London Bridge were bespattered with the blood of little children, and that the mortar was tempered with the blood of beasts. In stories where a victim is offered as a foundation-sacrifice, the victim, often a prisoner, is sometimes forced to enter a hole or cavity left on purpose in the building, which is then walled or built up, enclosing the victim. In some, recourse to lottery is had; in others, as at Siam, mentioned by Tylor (Primitive Culture, i. 97), it was customary, when a new city gate was being erected, for a number of officers to lie in wait and seize the first four or eight persons who happened to pass by, and who were then buried alive under the gate-posts. After these customs of human sacrifice had ceased to be enforced, animals were slaughtered instead; and later still the ceremony would be performed, as a ceremony, by the incident being gone through, the person or animal seized upon being allowed to escape the extreme penalty by paying a money or other forfeit; and it may be this later stage which is represented in the game. The dancing in circle form, which belongs, I think, to the original method of play, shows us a ceremony in which people of one place are concerned, and would supersede an older lineform of game, if there were one, when the custom showed a real victim being taken from outsiders by force, who would resist the demand. The circle dance would follow as the completion of the ceremony. The “line” form would also be the first portion of the game to disappear when once its meaning was lost.
The game, “Hark! the Robbers” (i. 192-99) may be a portion of “London Bridge” made into a separate game by the part of the building being lost, or the children who play both games may have mixed up the method of playing; but as it ends in some places with a contest and in some with a dance, it is difficult to say which is right.
“Thread the Needle,” played by all players running through an arch and then dancing round, is a game well illustrated by customs obtaining on Shrove Tuesday in different parts of the country. All the children play “Thread the Needle” in the streets of Trowbridge, Bradford-on-Avon, South Petherton, Evesham, besides other places, in long lines, whooping and shouting as they run through the arches they make. After this they proceed to the churchyard, and encompassing the church by joining hands, dance all round it three times, and then return to their homes. Here is the undoubted performance of what must have been an old custom, performed at one time by all the people of the town, being continued as an amusement of children. It was played at Evesham only on Easter Monday, and in three other places only on Shrove Tuesday, and another correspondent says played only on a special day. In other places where it is played the game is not connected with a special day or season. The circle dance does not always occur, and in some cases the children merely run under each other’s clasped hands while singing the words. In the places above mentioned we see it as a game, but still connected with custom. It is a pity that the words used by the children on all these occasions should not have been recorded too. “How many Miles to Babylon” (vol. i. pp. 231-238) may with good reason be considered a game of the same kind. It represents apparently a gateway of a town, and a parley occurs between the gatekeepers and those wishing to enter or leave the town. Small gateways orentrances to fortified towns were called needle’s eyes, which were difficult to enter. But notwithstanding these apparent identifications with the conditions of a fortified town, I think the practice of going through the arch in this and in the previous game relates to the custom which prevailed at festivals held during certain seasons of the year, when people crept through holed stones or other orifices to propitiate a presiding deity, in order to obtain some particular favour. This would be done by a number of people on the same occasion, and would terminate by a dance round the church or other spot associated with sacred or religious character. “Long Duck” is another probably almost forgotten version of this game.
“Draw a Pail of Water” (vol. i. pp. 100-108), though not quite in accord with the arch form in its present state, is certainly one of the same group. This game I consider to be a descendant of the custom of “well worship.” In its present form it is generally played by children creeping under the arms of two or four others, who clasp hands and sway backwards and forwards with the other children enclosed in them. The swaying movement represents, I believe, the drawing of water from the well. The incidents of the game are:—
(1) Drawing water from a well.(2) For a devotee at a well.(3) Collecting flowers for dressing the well.(4) Making a cake for presentation.(5) Gifts to the well [a gold ring, silver pin, and probably a garter].(6) Command of silence.(7) The presence of devotee at the sacred bush.(8) The reverential attitude (indicated by the bowing and falling on the ground).
I can now add another incident, that of the devotee creeping through a sacred bush or tree (signified by the creeping under or getting enclosed within the arms of the leaders). These are all incidents of primitive well worship.
I have from many different versions pieced together the lines as they might appear inearlier versions(i. p. 107).
This restoration, though it is far from complete, shows clearly enough that the incidents belong to a ceremonial of primitive well worship. Dressing holy wells with garlands and flowers is very general; cakes were eaten at Rorrington Well, Shropshire, and offerings of pins, buttons, and portions of the dress, as well as small articles worn on the person, are very general; silence is enforced in many instances, and sacred trees and bushes are to be found at nearly all holy wells. Offerings are sometimes hung in the bushes and trees, sometimes thrown into the well. Miss Burne records inShropshire Folk-Lore(pp. 414, 433, 434) that at Rorrington Green, in the parish of Chirbury, is a holy well, at which a wake was celebrated on Ascension Day. The well was adorned with green bowers, rushes, and flowers, and a maypole was set up. The people used to walk round the hill with fife, drum, and fiddle, dancing and frolicking as they went. They threw pins into the well for good luck, and to prevent them from being bewitched, and they also drank the water. Cakes were eaten. These were round flat buns, from three to four inches across, sweetened, spiced, and marked with a cross, and were supposed to bring good luck if kept.
Instances of similar practices at holy wells could be multiplied, and they are exhaustively examined in my husband’s book onEthnology in Folk-Lore. Halliwell records in his nursery rhymes what is perhaps the oldest printed version of the rhyme. He says the children form a long string, hand in hand; one stands in front as leader, two hold up their clasped hands to form an arch, and the children pass under; the last is taken prisoner. Though this way of playing does not appear to be used now—no version, at least, has reached me—it is clear that the game might be played in this way, probably as a commencement of the ceremonial, and then the other positions might follow. Halliwell may not have recorded it minutely or have heard of it as a whole, or the version sent him may have been in degenerate form. It is, however, clear that the arch form here indicates a ceremonial, and not the taking of a prisoner.
“Oranges and Lemons” (vol. ii. pp. 25-35) is the best-knowngame of the arch form, followed by the contest or tug-of-war. In this game two players, sometimes chosen by lot, clasp hands and form an arch. They have each a name, which is secret. One is called “Orange,” the other is “Lemon.” They sing the words of the game-rhyme, and the other players run under the arch in a long line or string. At the close of the verses which ends with the line, “Here comes a chopper to chop off your head,” one of the string of players is caught and is asked which she prefers, orange or lemon. She chooses, and is told to stand behind that leader who took that name. This is repeated until all the players have been separately caught, have chosen their side, and are standing behind the respective leaders, holding on to each other by clasping each other’s waists. A line is then drawn on the ground, and both sides pull; each endeavours to drag the other over the line. The tug is generally continued until one side falls to the ground. Now this is an undoubted contest, but I do not think the contest is quite of the same kind as the line game of contest and fighting. The line form is one of invaders and invaded, and the fight is for territory. In this form it seems to me that the contest is more of a social contest, that is, between people of the same place, perhaps between parishes and wards of parishes, or burghers and apprentices (townspeople) on one side, and the followers of lords or barons (military power) on the other, or of two lords and barons. The leaders are chosen by lot. Each leader has a “cry” or “colour,” which he calls out, and the other players run and place themselves under the banner they choose.
In my account of this game I draw particular attention to the following details:—The game indicates contest and a punishment, and although the sequence is not clear, as the execution precedes the contest, that is not of particular importance in view of the power of the old baronial lords to threaten and execute those of their following who did not join their armed retainers when required. All rhymes of this game deal with saints’ names and with bell ringing. Now, the only places where it would be probable for bells to be associated with different saints’ names in one area would be the oldparish units of cities and boroughs. The bells were rung on all occasions when it was necessary to call the people together. The “alarm” bell tolling quickly filled the open spaces and market-places of the towns, and it is a well-known fact that serious contests and contest games between parishes and wards of parishes were frequent. The names “oranges” and “lemons,” given to the leaders in the game, usually considered to be the fruits of these names, are, in my opinion, the names of the “colours” of the two rival factions.
The passing under the arch in this game is not absolutely necessary in order that the players may exercise their choice of leaders, nor is the “secrecy” which is observed necessary either. Even this may have its origin in custom. It may signify the compulsory attendance of a vassal under pain of punishment to serve one side, or the taking prisoner and condemning to death for serving on the opponents’ or losing side. An idea is current that it represents cutting off the last person’s head, the last of the string or line of players, and in some places the last one in the line is always caught instead of one whom the leaders choose to enclose in their arms. Of course a “laggard” or late arrival would be liable to suspicion and punishment, and this idea may be suggested in the game; but I do not think that the game originates from the idea of catching a “last” player. The passing under the arch can also be attributed to the custom of compelling prisoners to pass under a yoke to signify servitude, and the threat of execution would follow attempt to escape or disobedience. Again, prisoners were offered life and freedom on condition of joining the army of their opponents.
The other games of this method of play, “Three Days’ Holiday,” and “Tug of War,” are the same game under other names, with only a nominy surviving, and the method of play. Several games entered under the title of “Through the Needle Eye,” are really the “arch” type with the “tug,” that is the “Oranges and Lemons” game, instead of belonging to the “Thread the Needle” or first form of arch type, as they are usually considered. The Scottish form, described by Jamieson (ii. p. 290), is an exception which should have been includedwith “Thread the Needle,” to which group it belongs. The other games, “Through the Needle Eye,” have lost a portion of their play, which probably accounts for the mixture of name with the “Thread the Needle” games, because of both containing the arch form. “Namers and Guessers,” “Fool, Fool, come to School,” “Little Dog, I call you,” practically versions of one and the same game, which I have classed in this type because of the “tug,” have an additional element of guessing in them. The leader or namer on one side and the guesser on the other take sides. All the players have names given them, and it is the first business of the guesser to guess which of the players has taken a particular name. If he guesses correctly, he takes that player on his side; if incorrectly, he stays on the namer’s side. After he has “guessed” at all the players, the “tug” follows, and the beaten side has further to run the gauntlet between two lines of the successful side. This game, having all its players chosen by guessing, by what might have been originally choosing by “lot” or by magical powers, may have an entirely different meaning, but it is clearly a contest game, although there is no indication as to the why or wherefore. The punishment of “running the gauntlet” is found in the game, which again indicates military fighting.
This group of games, though small, is perhaps one of the most indicative of early custom, for beyond the custom which is enshrined in each game—foundation sacrifice, well worship, &c.—it will be noticed there is a common custom belonging to all the games of this group; this is the procession under the arch. The fact that this common custom can also be referred to primitive usage, confirms my view that the particular customs in each game owe their origin to primitive usage. Mr. W. Crooke has very kindly supplied me with some notes on this interesting subject, and I gladly avail myself of his research:—
“In Cairo, women walk under the stone on which criminals are decapitated, in the hope of curing ophthalmia and getting children. They must go in silence, and left foot foremost.”—Lane,Modern Egyptians, i. p. 325; Hartland,Perseus, i. p. 163.“Rheumatism and lumbago cured by crawling under granitic masses in Cornwall.”—Hunt,Popular Romances, p. 177.“Passing children under bramble to cure rupture.”—Ibid., pp. 412, 415.“This cures chincough.”—Aubrey,Remains, p. 187.“In Scotland, sick children are passed through the great stones of Odin at Stennis, and through a perforated monolith at Burkham, in Yorkshire.”—Rogers,Social Life in Scotland, i. p. 13.“Barren women pass their hands through the holes of the Bore Stone at Gask in order to obtain children.”—Ibid., iii. p. 227.“Similar rites prevail in Cyprus.”—Hogarth,Devia Cypria, p. 48; Gardner,New Chapters in Greek History, p. 172.“This again gives rise to the use of the gateway through which pilgrims pass to temples. Such are the Indian Torana, in this shape, which are represented by the Torio, so common in Japan.“The Greeks had the same, which they called Dokana (δὁκανα, from δοκὁϛ, ‘a beam’). With them they represented the Dioscuri—Castor and Pollux. They are described by Plutarch.”—De Amor. Fratr., i. p. 36.“Similar arches, covered with charms, were seen at Dahomi by Burton.”—Mission to Gelele, i. pp. 218, 286.“Women in England creep under a gallows to get children.” (I have mislaid the reference.)“There are many ‘creeps’ or narrow holes in Irish dolmens certainly used by people, who had to creep in to worship the ghost or bring offerings. Captives intended to be slaughtered had to creep through such places.”—Borlase,Dolmens of Ireland, ii. p. 554.“Barren women pass their hands through such holes.”—Ibid., ii. p. 650.“A good picture of such a stone from France.”—Ibid., ii. pp. 626, 700, 702, 707.
“In Cairo, women walk under the stone on which criminals are decapitated, in the hope of curing ophthalmia and getting children. They must go in silence, and left foot foremost.”—Lane,Modern Egyptians, i. p. 325; Hartland,Perseus, i. p. 163.
“Rheumatism and lumbago cured by crawling under granitic masses in Cornwall.”—Hunt,Popular Romances, p. 177.
“Passing children under bramble to cure rupture.”—Ibid., pp. 412, 415.
“This cures chincough.”—Aubrey,Remains, p. 187.
“In Scotland, sick children are passed through the great stones of Odin at Stennis, and through a perforated monolith at Burkham, in Yorkshire.”—Rogers,Social Life in Scotland, i. p. 13.
“Barren women pass their hands through the holes of the Bore Stone at Gask in order to obtain children.”—Ibid., iii. p. 227.
“Similar rites prevail in Cyprus.”—Hogarth,Devia Cypria, p. 48; Gardner,New Chapters in Greek History, p. 172.
“This again gives rise to the use of the gateway through which pilgrims pass to temples. Such are the Indian Torana, in this shape, which are represented by the Torio, so common in Japan.
“The Greeks had the same, which they called Dokana (δὁκανα, from δοκὁϛ, ‘a beam’). With them they represented the Dioscuri—Castor and Pollux. They are described by Plutarch.”—De Amor. Fratr., i. p. 36.
“Similar arches, covered with charms, were seen at Dahomi by Burton.”—Mission to Gelele, i. pp. 218, 286.
“Women in England creep under a gallows to get children.” (I have mislaid the reference.)
“There are many ‘creeps’ or narrow holes in Irish dolmens certainly used by people, who had to creep in to worship the ghost or bring offerings. Captives intended to be slaughtered had to creep through such places.”—Borlase,Dolmens of Ireland, ii. p. 554.
“Barren women pass their hands through such holes.”—Ibid., ii. p. 650.
“A good picture of such a stone from France.”—Ibid., ii. pp. 626, 700, 702, 707.
Mr. Albany F. Major has also kindly drawn my attention to the following interesting passages from the sagas, which Dr. Jon Stefansson has kindly translated as follows:—
“In old times this had been the custom of brave men, who made an agreement (pact) that the one who lived the longest should revenge the other’s death. They were to go under three earth-sods, and that was their oath (eiðr). This ceremony (leikr) of theirs was in this wise, that three long earth-sods (turfs) should be cut loose. All the ends were to be fast in the ground (adhere to it), but the coils (bends) were to be pulled upward, so that a man might gounder them. This play Thorgeir and Thormod went through.”—Fóstbrædra Saga, ed. 1822, ch. i. p. 7.“Now is spread about this report of Thorkell and his men, but Gudmund had before told [the story] somewhat otherwise. Now that tale seemed to those kinsmen of Thorarins somewhat doubtful, and they said they would not put trust in it without proof, and they claimed for themselves [to share] half the property with Thorkell, but Thorkell thought to own it himself alone, and bade go to ordeal after their custom. This was then the [form of] ordeal at that time, that they should go under an earth-belt, that is, a sod [which] was ripped up from the field. The ends of the sod must be fast in the field, but the man who was to perform the ordeal must go thereunder. Thorkell of the Scarf somewhat suspects whether the death of those men can have happened in the way that Gudmund and his men had said the latter time. Now, heathen men thought that they had no less at stake, when they had to play such a part, than Christian men think nowadays when ordeals are held. Then the man who went under the earth-belt was clear if the sod fell not on him. Thorkell took counsel with two men that they should let themselves fall out about something or other, and be there standing near at hand when the ordeal was being performed, and should touch the sod so hard that all might see that they brought it down. After this the man who was to perform the ordeal starts, and as soon as he was come under the earth-belt those men who were set to do it sprang to meet each other under arms, and they encounter near the bend of the sod and lie fallen there, and the earth-belt fell down, as was to be expected. At once men spring between them and separate them; that was easy, because they were fighting with no risk to life. Thorkell of the Scarf asked what people thought of the ordeal; now all his men say that it would have done well if no one had spoilt it. Then Thorkell took all the loose property, but the land is joined on to Hrappstead.”—Laxdæla Saga, ch. xviii.“Berg gave notice of the blow for the Hunawaterthing and began the lawsuit there. As soon as men came to the thing they tried to arrange a settlement. Berg said that he would not take payment in atonement, and would only be reconciled under these terms, that Jokull should go under three earth-belts, as was then the custom after great transgressions, ‘and thus show humility towards me.’ Jokull said the trolls should take him before he thus bowed himself. Thorstein said it was a matter for consideration, ‘and I will go under the earth-belts.’ Berg said then would the matter be paid for. The first earth-belt reached to the shoulder, the next to thewaist-belt, the third to mid-thigh. Then Thorstein went under the first. Then said Berg: ‘Now I make thee stoop like a swine, who wast the loftiest of the Vatnsdale men.’ Thorstein answers, ‘That hadst thou no need to say, but this will be the first return for those words, that I will not go under any more.’ Finnbogi said, ‘That is clearly not well said, but then not much comes in repayment for Berg’s wrong, that he gat from Jokull, if the matter shall here come to a standstill, and everything seems to you lowly by the side of you Vatnsdale men, and I will challenge thee, Thorstein, to holm-gang a week hence by the stackyard which stands on the island down before my farm at Borg.’”—Vatnsdæla Saga, ch. xxxiii.
“In old times this had been the custom of brave men, who made an agreement (pact) that the one who lived the longest should revenge the other’s death. They were to go under three earth-sods, and that was their oath (eiðr). This ceremony (leikr) of theirs was in this wise, that three long earth-sods (turfs) should be cut loose. All the ends were to be fast in the ground (adhere to it), but the coils (bends) were to be pulled upward, so that a man might gounder them. This play Thorgeir and Thormod went through.”—Fóstbrædra Saga, ed. 1822, ch. i. p. 7.
“Now is spread about this report of Thorkell and his men, but Gudmund had before told [the story] somewhat otherwise. Now that tale seemed to those kinsmen of Thorarins somewhat doubtful, and they said they would not put trust in it without proof, and they claimed for themselves [to share] half the property with Thorkell, but Thorkell thought to own it himself alone, and bade go to ordeal after their custom. This was then the [form of] ordeal at that time, that they should go under an earth-belt, that is, a sod [which] was ripped up from the field. The ends of the sod must be fast in the field, but the man who was to perform the ordeal must go thereunder. Thorkell of the Scarf somewhat suspects whether the death of those men can have happened in the way that Gudmund and his men had said the latter time. Now, heathen men thought that they had no less at stake, when they had to play such a part, than Christian men think nowadays when ordeals are held. Then the man who went under the earth-belt was clear if the sod fell not on him. Thorkell took counsel with two men that they should let themselves fall out about something or other, and be there standing near at hand when the ordeal was being performed, and should touch the sod so hard that all might see that they brought it down. After this the man who was to perform the ordeal starts, and as soon as he was come under the earth-belt those men who were set to do it sprang to meet each other under arms, and they encounter near the bend of the sod and lie fallen there, and the earth-belt fell down, as was to be expected. At once men spring between them and separate them; that was easy, because they were fighting with no risk to life. Thorkell of the Scarf asked what people thought of the ordeal; now all his men say that it would have done well if no one had spoilt it. Then Thorkell took all the loose property, but the land is joined on to Hrappstead.”—Laxdæla Saga, ch. xviii.
“Berg gave notice of the blow for the Hunawaterthing and began the lawsuit there. As soon as men came to the thing they tried to arrange a settlement. Berg said that he would not take payment in atonement, and would only be reconciled under these terms, that Jokull should go under three earth-belts, as was then the custom after great transgressions, ‘and thus show humility towards me.’ Jokull said the trolls should take him before he thus bowed himself. Thorstein said it was a matter for consideration, ‘and I will go under the earth-belts.’ Berg said then would the matter be paid for. The first earth-belt reached to the shoulder, the next to thewaist-belt, the third to mid-thigh. Then Thorstein went under the first. Then said Berg: ‘Now I make thee stoop like a swine, who wast the loftiest of the Vatnsdale men.’ Thorstein answers, ‘That hadst thou no need to say, but this will be the first return for those words, that I will not go under any more.’ Finnbogi said, ‘That is clearly not well said, but then not much comes in repayment for Berg’s wrong, that he gat from Jokull, if the matter shall here come to a standstill, and everything seems to you lowly by the side of you Vatnsdale men, and I will challenge thee, Thorstein, to holm-gang a week hence by the stackyard which stands on the island down before my farm at Borg.’”—Vatnsdæla Saga, ch. xxxiii.
These significant customs, I think, bear out my theory as to the origin of the games played in the two methods of the arch form.
Lastly, I come to the “winding up” games. “Eller Tree” (i. p. 119) and “Wind up the Bush Faggot” (ii. pp. 384-387), show a game in which a tree or bush is represented, and is probably indicative of tree worship. The tallest player represents the tree, and all the other players walk round and round in line form, getting closer and closer each time, until all are wound round the centre player. They call out when winding round “The old tree gets thicker and thicker,” and then jump all together, calling out “A bunch of rags,” and try and tread on each other’s toes. This last action is evidently performed from not understanding the action of stamping, which is, without doubt, the object of the players. It is probable that this game descends from the custom of encircling the tree (Mr. Addy suggests the alder-tree) as an act of worship, and the allusion to the “rags” bears at least a curious relationship to hanging rags on sacred trees. A ceremonial of this kind would probably take place each spring, and the stamping on the ground would be, as in “Oats and Beans and Barley,” a part of the ceremony to awake and arouse the earth spirit to the necessity of his care for the trees under his charge. The connection of all the players, by means of the clasped hands, with the central figure or tree, may also be considered a means of communicating life and action to it; the tree requiring contact with living and moving creatures to enable it to put forthits leaves. In a version of this game from Lincoln, called the “Old Oak Tree” (ii. p. 386), we find practically the same words and same actions, the dancing round and jumping up and down are constant features of this game. It remains in some degenerate versions from Scotland (ibid.), where the game has assumed the modern name of “Rolling Tobacco.” In “Wind up the Bush Faggot” we have again the tree or bush suggested, and the dancing and jumping, or stamping up and down. In Shropshire it is the closing game of any playtime, and was played before “breaking-up” at a boys’ school in Shrewsbury in 1850-1856. This tends to show that the game had originally been played at a special time or season.
For an example of this custom I may repeat (fromii. p. 386) that in mid-Cornwall, in the second week in June, at St. Roche and one or two adjacent parishes, a curious dance, like a serpent’s coil, is performed at the annual “feasts.” The young people are assembled in a meadow, and the band plays a lively tune. The band leads, and all the people follow hand in hand. The band or head keeps marching in an ever-narrowing circle, while its train of dancing followers becomes coiled round it in circle after circle. Then the band, taking a sharp turn about, begins to retrace the circle, still followed as before, and a number of young men, with long leafy branches in their hands as standards, direct this counter-movement. Although there is no mention of a tree in the account round which this ceremony is performed, the custom is so striking as to leave very little doubt of their connection. Lady Wilde (Ancient Cures, Charms, and Usages of Ireland, p. 106) says, “On May-Day in Ireland all the young men and maidens hold hands, and dance in a circle round a tree hung with ribbons or garlands, or round a bonfire, moving in curves from left to right, as if imitating the windings of a serpent.” This is a closer parallel to the game still, and leaves no doubt as to its connection with custom. There may be, too, some connection between these winding-up or serpentine dances and the Maypole dances on May-Day in England.
The detail into which I have gone in the case of these games makes it, I think, unnecessary that I should enter into equaldetail in other customs mentioned in the classification. Thus, with regard to the funeral customs indicated in “Jenny Jones,” we have not only a ceremony of burial, but the courting of a maiden or maidens by a band of suitors, the opposition of the mother or guardians to their suit, the putting forward of domestic occupations as pretexts for refusal; there is also the illness, dying and death of the maiden, the manner of her funeral indicated by the colour selected for her burial, followed by the burial itself, the singing of the lament or funeral dirge, and, in some versions, the rising of the ghost or spirit of the departed. This game in its best versions is played in line form. But in those versions where two children only play the parts of “mother” and “Jenny Jones,” there is also evidence of the tendency of the game to develop into the individual form.
Again, those games in which “guessing” occurs remind us of the important part that guessing or chance plays in the beliefs of the savage and uncivilised. A person who, by a guess, discovers a special person out of a number, or the exact number of articles concealed in a hand or under a foot, has something of the supernatural or witch-element about him. This is largely the foundation of the belief in witchcraft and the sorcerer. It is not surprising to find, therefore, the guessing-element largely extant in the dramatic game. The “guesser” is usually chosen by lot by means of the counting-out rhyme; the leader then proceeds to confuse the guesser’s or witch’s mind by re-naming secretly the rest of the players. He calls the “guesser,” and in a doggerel rhyme (the remains or imitation probably of an incantation), tells him to pick out or name a certain person or thing. If the guess is correct, the “guesser” takes that person to his side, indicating power over that individual or thing. If the “guesser” is unsuccessful, he is scouted, mocked, and ill-used.
I now proceed with the second classification referred to onp. 461. Of the games classified onpp. 461-470,ante, it will be found on examination that nearly all of them are dramatic in form. This leads me at once to suggest that so importanta phase of their character needs separate investigation, and this I proceed to do.
In the first place, it will be found that certain of the games are wholly dramatic whatever may be the customs or rites they imitate. These games are of two classes—first, where dramatic action is complete throughout the whole game, that is where singing, action, and words are represented; secondly, where singing has dropped out, action and words only remaining.
These two classes are as follows:—
Nearly all the remaining dramatic games form a third class, namely, those where action remains, and where both words and singing are either non-existent or have been reduced to the merest fragments.
In order to complete the investigation from the point we have now reached, it is necessary to inquire what is the controlling force which has preserved ancient custom in the form of children’s games. The mere telling of a game or tale from a parent to a child, or from one child to another, is not alone sufficient. There must be some strong force inherent in these games that has allowed them to be continued from generation to generation, a force potent enough to almost compel their continuance and to prevent their decay. This force must have been as strong or stronger than the customs which first brought the games into existence, and I identify it as the dramatic faculty inherent in mankind.
A necessary part of this proposition is, that the element ofthe dramatic in children’s games is more ancient than, or at all events as ancient as, the customs enshrined in the games themselves, and I will first of all see if this is so.
With the child the capacity to express itself in words is small and limited. The child does not apparently pay as much attention to the language of those adults by whom he is surrounded as he does to their actions, and the more limited his vocabulary, the greater are his attempts at expressing his thoughts by action. Language to him means so little unless accompanied by action. It is too cold for a child. Every one acquainted with children will be aware of their dramatic way of describing to their mother or nurse the way in which they have received a hurt through falling down the stairs or out of doors, or from knocking their heads against articles of furniture. A child even, whose command of language is fairly good, will usually not be content to say, “Oh, mother, I fell down and knocked my head against the table,” but will say, “Oh, I fell down like this” (suiting the action to the word by throwing himself down); “I knocked my head like this” (again suiting the action to the word by knocking the head against the table), and does not understand that you can comprehend how he got hurt by merely saying so. He feels it necessary to show you. Elders must respond in action as well as in words to be understood by children. If “you kiss the place to make it well,” and if you bind up a cut or sore, something has been done that can be seen and felt, and this the child believes in as a means of healing. A child understands you are sorry he has been hurt, much more readily than if you say or repeat that you are sorry; the words pass almost unheeded, the action is remembered.
Every one, too, must have noticed the observation of detail a child will show in personifying a particular person. When a little child wishes to personate his father, for instance, he will seat himself in the father’s chair, cross his legs, pick up a piece of paper and pretend to read, or stroke an imaginary beard or moustache, put on glasses, frown, or give a little cough, and say, “Now I’m father,” if the father is in the habit of indulging in either of the above habits, and it will be found that sittingin the chair (if a special chair is used by the father to sit in when at home) is the foundation and most important part of the imitation. Other men of the child’s acquaintance read papers, smoke, wear glasses, &c., but father sits in that chair; therefore to be father, sitting in the chair is absolutely necessary, and is sufficient of itself to indicate to others that “father” is being personified, and not another person. To be “mother” a child will pretend to pour out tea, or sew, or do some act of household work, the doing of which is associated with “mother,” while a lady visitor or a relative would be indicated by wearing hat or bonnet or silk dress, carrying a parasol, saying, “How do you do?” and carrying on conversation. Again, too, it is noticeable how a child realises a hurt if blood and swelling ensues after a knock. This is something that can be seen and shown.
When wishing to be an animal, a child fixes at once on some characteristic of that animal which is special to it, and separates it from other animals similar in other ways. Children never personate horses and cows, for instance, in the same manner. Horses toss their heads, shake their manes, paw the ground, prance, and are restless when standing still, gallop and trot, wear harness, and their drivers have reins and a whip. When a child is a cow he does none of these things; he walks in a slower, heavier way, lowers the head, and stares about as he moves his head from side to side, lies down on the ground and munches; he has horns, and rubs these against a tree or a fence.
A child of mine, when told that he must not run in the gutter when out of doors, because that was not the place for little boys, replied, “I am not a little boy now, I am a dog, so I may run in the gutter.” When he came into the path again he became a boy.
Again the same child, when called by his name and told to come out from under a table, a round one, under which he was lying rubbing his head against the pedestal centre, because under the table was not the place for little boys, said, “But I’m not [ ], I’m a cow, and it’s not a table, it’s a tree, and I’m rubbing my horns.”
Again, when personating a train, the actions used are completely different from those used when personating an animal. The child moves at a steady rate, the feet progressing without raising the legs more than necessary, because engines only have wheels, which keep close to the ground; they don’t jump up like feet do, the arms are used as the propeller, and the puffing and screeching, letting off steam, taking in water, are imitated in sound to perfection. This is entirely on the child’s own initiative. When children play in groups the same things occur. Instances could be givenad nauseam. It cannot, therefore, surprise us that in these games children should be found to use actions which indicate to them certain persons or things, although the words they use may render action unnecessary, as action is to them most important. Children, when acting these games or dramas, appear not to need the element of dress or of particular garments to indicate their adoption of certain characters or characteristics. To display your heels and look down at them while doing so signifies a man who wears spurs, a knight; to prance along as if a horse, shows a man on horseback, a duke a-riding. A child lies or stoops down and shuts her eyes, she is dead; if she is passively carried by two others a little distance, she is going to be buried. The child, by standing still, becomes a tree, a house, or a stone wall. If an animal is required to be shown, down goes the child on hands and knees, bends her head down, and the animal is there. If a gate, fortress, or castle is wanted, two children join hands, and their arms are raised or lowered when required for opening the gate, &c. If one child is to personate a “mother,” one or two or more smaller children are placed behind or beside her as her children, because “mothers have children,” and so on. Many other examples could be given from these games of the same kind of thing. There is, then, no difficulty as to the reason why children should have continued playing at these games when once they had seen their elders play them or similar performances, nor why children should not have embodied in a game or play some of the manners and customs which were constantly going on around them in olden times as they do now, imitating the habits and customs ofthe men and women and animals by whom they were surrounded.
We know from the evidence of those who have collected the games that many were played as amusements by young men and women up to a few years ago. Some are still so played, and some years further back it was a general practice for men and women in country districts to play these or similar games at fairs and festivals; it is unlikely that adults would play seriously at children’s games, but children having seen their elders playing at these amusements would adopt them and use them in their turn, until these amusements become in turn too frivolous and childish for them. It is not so very many years since that the then educated or cultured classes amused themselves by occupations now deemed silly and unfit even for children of the uneducated class—witness practical joking, cock-fighting, &c.
The natural instinct to dramatic action in children is paralleled by the same instinct in grown-up people when in a state of culture where they are chiefly dependent upon their natural capacities for existence. Thus evidence of the natural dramatic power in savages and in semi-civilised races is abundant. The dances of savages are strongly dramatic. They advance in lines dancing, gesticulating, and singing, while others sit and look on; they dance in circles joining hands, they go down on all fours imitating animal postures and noises, they wear masks, special dresses and ornaments, and these have significance for their audience. Some of these dances are peculiar to and only witnessed by men, others performed by men are witnessed by both sexes. These ceremonial dances are performed principally at the celebration of the initiative rites, but some also represent other customs periodically performed.
Catlin’s (North American Indians) description of the Buffalo dance among the Mandan Indians shows the dancers wearing masks made of a buffalo’s head and horns, and a tail hanging down behind. The dancers went through the actions of hunting, being shot with bow and arrow, skinned and cut up, accompanied by singing and yelling. This dance was performed as a ceremony when food was required and the hunters wereat a loss, and would continue until a herd of buffalos came in sight on the prairie.
Mr. W. E. Roth gives dances accompanied by songs and pantomimic action and games practised by the N.W. Central Australian aborigines.[21]