culture area in which it is found, but it is also necessary to ascertain its scientific relationship to other items found in the same area; and I have protested against the too easy attempt to proceed upon the comparative method. Before we can compare we must be certain that we are comparing like quantities.”[1]
The memorable Second International Folk-Lore Congress, which was held in London in 1891, afforded a great opportunity for discussion.
In his address as chairman of the Folk-tale Section, Dr. Hartland said,[2] “Literary men have contended that the true origin of folk-tales was to be found in India, that they were Buddhist parables, and that the Buddhist propaganda sowed them broadcast. This, at least as I understand it, is the old orthodox opinion of scholars who dispute the anthropological hypothesis. . . . As the area of research widens, we doubt more and more that folk-tales found in the remotest corners of the earth have all sprung from one centre within a measurable historical period. It has, therefore, been practically abandoned by most of its defenders in this country. But the anthropological hypothesis is not left in possession of the field. That hypothesis attributes the origin of folk-tales, as of every other species of tradition, to the constitution of the human mind. A similar environment acting upon the mind will everywhere produce similar results. The birthplace of any story is, therefore, impossible to determine; for no story has any one birthplace.” Dr. Hartland then stated a counter-theory, which “accepts the results of the controversies over the theories of the Aryan philologists and the Buddhist scholars. It admits that the foundation of the absurd and impossible tales current all round the globe must be sought in the beliefs of savage tribes . . . but it denies that the mere fact that a given story is found
- ↑ Folk-Lore as an Historical Science, London, 1908, p. xiii.
- ↑ The International Folk-Lore Congress, 1891 (1892), p. 16 ff.
