Page:The Folk-Lore Journal Volume 3 1885.djvu/13

Rh In the Folk-Lore Journal (vol. ii. p. 312) Mr. Nutt has given a very good summary of the subjects included under the general term folk-lore, but, in classifying these subjects, he does not utilise the terms usually recognised and adopted, and his classification does not by itself indicate the methods of studying folk-lore. Mr. Hartland's classification (ii. 343) is, I venture to think, the better. But still I do not think we should go beyond the radical groups into which the subjects included in folk-lore naturally divide themselves. Simplicity is much needed. Folk-practice and folk-wont are, after all, arbitrary divisions, and few students will, I think, limit their studies by this classification. Many, however, do, and will limit their studies to the natural grouping of the subjects, and I can see no reason why they should not as long as they recognise these parts as belonging to a larger whole. I would therefore venture to suggest the following division into four radical groups, each of which is subdivided into minor groups, as in the accompanying table:—

1. Traditional Narratives:
 * (a) Folk Tales;
 * (b) Hero Tales;
 * (c) Ballads and Songs;
 * (d) Place Legends.

2. Traditional Customs:
 * (a) Local Customs;
 * {b) Festival Customs;
 * (c) Ceremonial Customs;
 * (d) Games.

3. Superstitions and Beliefs:
 * (a) Witchcraft;
 * (b) Astrology;
 * (c) Superstitious Practices and Fancies.

4. Folk-Speech:
 * (a) Popular Sayings;
 * (b) Popular Nomenclature;
 * (c) Proverbs;
 * (d) Jingle Rhymes, Riddles, &c.