Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 10, 1899.djvu/377

 Reviews. 337

some ceremony of crowning, or spitting over the head, but it was dying out ; and as we played the game the pursuer touched his man three times, with the words, " One, two, three, the man for me." Another game described here under the names of "Hunt the Staigie," " Chickidy Hand," " Stag," and " Whiddy," of which "Johnny Rover" seems a variant," was well known in Bristol. We called it " Cock Warning ; " and the formula uttered by the " Cock " was " Cock warning once. Cock warning twice. Cock warning three times over." Before saying this he had to clasp his hands, and he had to effect his first capture with his hands clasped. Touching was enough for a capture. The boy caught joined hands with him, as described by Mrs. Gomme in " Lamp- loo," to catch the others, first repeating the warning. There was a goal or post from whence the capturing party always started. If they loosened their hands, any of the others could ride them pick-a-back to the post, and they had to begin again with the warning. In all these games it was the rule that when three had been caught, the first "Cock" or "King" (but only the first) was entitled to leave the capturing party, and join the other.

The differences in these three games, as known in my boyhood at Bristol and as described by Mrs. Gomme, are perhaps trivial. But trivial differences are sometimes of importance in reasoning back to origins ; and these, I think, tend to the conclusion that all three games are developed from a common original, to which " Lamploo," as described by Mrs. Gomme from the Somerset and Dorset Notes aftd Queries, is probably the nearest approximation. If so, Jamieson's guess at the derivation of the game of King of Cantland cannot be correct, though the common original may have been, and probably was, a mimicry of tribal or inter-communal raids. Numerous as have been Mrs. Gomme's contributors, and many as are the variants of many of the games, the book might easily have been increased in size by the addition of other variant details. In a collection of traditions, of whatever kind, there is always the difficulty of knowing where to stop. For scientific purposes it is of course better to err on the inclusive side ; but scientific purposes are not the only considerations in the publica- tion of a book. We have every reason to be grateful to Mrs. Gomme for the information she has got together and the form in which she has presented it. If it be not all we could wish for as anthropological students, it is much more than we could ever

VOL. X. z