Page:Folklore1919.djvu/26

14 Mr. J. Jacobs advocated two methods for the study of folk-tales, the one was to analyse it into its elements, which are the incidents of history—a practice which has been largely followed since then. The other was the mapping of folk-tales, which, so far as I am aware, has very rarely been done, although in other branches of ethnology the method of putting data on maps has yielded very valuable results, Mr. Jacobs asks what are we to study in a folk-tale? and replies, “In the first place, the folk-tale itself and for itself.”

Mr. J. S. Stuart-Glennie also laid emphasis on maps of distribution of all branches of ethnology, and went on to say, “First, then, grant Differences of Races, Migrations of Races, and the Origin of Civilisation in the Conflict of Races, must we not exceedingly question current theories of Primitive Man, and of his being even approximately represented by contemporary Savages? What Savage Race can we point to which, considering the facts I have indicated of Migrations, etc., may not possibly, and even probably have, in some indirect or distorted way, derived its Mythology from the great centres of Civilisation?

“If all the Civilisations of which we have any knowledge originated in the very complex conditions of a Conflict of Higher and Lower Races, then we must, I think, very seriously question the current assumption that different peoples necessarily pass through similar ‘stages.’. . . We have no proof whatever that any Savage People has passed independently into new ‘stages,’ and developed its Mythology in accordance therewith.” Unfortunately these views of Mr. Stuart-Glennie’s, like others he advocated, appear to have been very largely overlooked. There is no need to indicate reasons for the general neglect of Mr. Stuart-Glennie’s adumbrations, but I do wish to draw