further variants can be found. Finally, a few remarks are sometimes added where the tales seem to need it. In two cases (Nos. xvi. and xxi.) I have been more full.
I. TOM TIT TOT
Source.—Contributed by Mrs. Walter-Thomas (née Fison) to the “Suffolk Notes and Queries” of the Ipswich Journal, 1877, and reprinted by Mr. E. Clodd in a paper on “The Philosophy of Rumpelstiltskin” in Folk-Lore Journal, vii., 138–43. I have reduced the Suffolk dialect.
Parallels.—In Yorkshire this occurs as “Habetrot and Scantlie Mab,” in Henderson’s Folk-Lore of Northern Counties, 221-6; in Devonshire as “Duffy and the Devil,” in Hunt’s Romances and Drolls of the West of England, 239-47; in Scotland two variants are given by Chambers, Popular Rhymes of Scotland, under the title “Whuppity Stourie.” The “nameguessing wager” is also found in “Peerifool,” printed by Mr. Andrew Lang in Longman’s Magazine, July, 1889, also Folk-Lore, September, 1890. It is clearly the same as Grimm’s Rumpelstiltschen (No. 14); for other Continental parallels see Mr. Clodd’s article, and Cosquin, Contes pop. de Lorraine, i., 269, seq
Remarks.—One of the best folk-tales that have ever been collected, far superior to any of the Continental variants of this tale with which I am acquainted. Mr. Clodd sees in the class of name-guessing stories a “survival” of the superstition that to know a man’s name gives you power over him, for which reason savages object to tell their names. It may be necessary, I find, to explain to the little ones that Tom Tit can only be referred to as “that,” because his name is not known till the end.
Source.—From Folk-Lore Journal, ii., 40-3, to which it was communicated by Miss C. Burne.
Parallels.—Prof. Stephens gave a variant from his own
