Part 38

Blow-point. Bob Cherry. Bummers. Chinny-mumps. Cuddy among the Powks. Dish-a-loof. Dust Point. Handy Dandy. Level Coil. Lug and a Bite. Lugs. Magician. Malaga Raisins. Musical Chairs. Neighbour, I torment thee. Obadiah. Penny Hop. Pigeon Walk. Pinny Show. Pins. Pirly Peaseweep. Pon Cake. Poor and Rich. Prick at the Loop. Robbing the Parson's Hen Roost. Scat. She Said, and She Said. Stagging. Sticky-stack. Stroke Bias. Sweer Tree. Thing Done. Troco. Troule-in-Madame. Truncher. Turn Spit Jack. Wiggle Waggle. Wild Boar.

In order to show the importance of this classification, let me first refer to the games of skill. These are (1) where one individual plays with some articles belonging to himself against several other players who play with corresponding articles belonging to them; (2) where one player attempts to gain articles deposited beforehand by all the players as stakes or objects to be played for. These games are played with buttons, marbles, cherry-stones, nuts, pins, and pence. In the second group, each player stakes one or more of these articles before beginning play, which stakes become the property of the winner of the game. The object of some of the games in the first group is the destruction of the article with which the opponent plays. This is the case with the games of "conkers" played with nuts on a string, and peg-top; the nuts and top are broken, if possible, by the players, to prevent their being used again, the peg of the top being retained by the winner as a trophy. The successful nut or top has the merit and glory of having destroyed previously successful nuts or tops. The victories of the one destroyed are tacked on and appropriated by each victor in succession. So we see a nut or a top which has destroyed another having a record of, say, twenty-five victories, taking these twenty-five victories of its opponent and adding them to its own score. In like manner the pegs of the tops slain in peg-top are preserved and shown as trophies. That the destruction of the implements of the game, although not adding to the immediate wealth of the winner, does materially increase his importance, is manifest, especially in the days when these articles were comparatively much more expensive than now, or when it meant, as at one time it must have done, the making of another implement.

These games are of interest to the folk-lorist, as showing connection with early custom. We know that playing at games for stakes involving life or death to the winner, or the possession of the loser's magical or valuable property or knowledge, is not only found in another branch of folk-lore, namely, folk-tales, but there is plenty of evidence of the early belief that the possession of a weapon which had, in the hands of a skilful chief, done great execution, would give additional skill and power to the person who succeeded in obtaining it. When I hear of a successful "conker" or top being preserved and handed down from father to son,[19] and exhibited with tales of its former victories, I believe we have survivals of the form of transmission of virtues from one person to another through the means of an acquired object. I do not think that the cumulative reckoning and its accompanying ideas would occur to modern boys, unless they had inherited the conception of the virtue of a conquered enemy's weapon being transferred to the conqueror's.

[19] I know of one nut which was preserved and shown to admiring boys as a conqueror of 1000.

Other games of skill are those played by two or more players on diagrams or plans. Many of these diagrams and plans are found scratched or carved on the stone flooring or walls of old churches, cathedrals, and monastic buildings, showing that the boys and men of the Middle Ages played them as a regular amusement--probably monks were not averse to this kind of diversion in the intervals of religious exercise; plans were also made on the ground, and the games played regularly by shepherds and other people of outdoor occupation. We know this was so with the well-known "Nine Men's Morris" in Shakespeare's time, and there is no reason why this should not be the case with others, although "Nine Men's Morris" appears to have been the favourite. These diagram games are primitive in idea, and simple in form. They consist primarily of two players trying to form a row of three stones in three consecutive places on the plan; the one who first accomplishes this, wins. This is the case with "Kit-Cat-Cannio" (better known as "Noughts and Crosses") "Corsicrown" and "Nine Men's Morris."

Now, in "Noughts and Crosses" the simplest form of making a "row of three," where only two players play, and in another diagram game called "Tit-Tat-Toe," it is possible for neither player to win, and in this case the result is marked or scored to an unknown or invisible third player, who is called "Old Nick," "Old Tom," or "Old Harry." In some versions this third player is allowed to keep all the marks he registers, and to win the game if possible; in others, the next successful player takes "Old Nick's" score and adds it to his own. Here we have an element which needs explanation, and it is interesting to remind oneself of the primitive custom of assigning a certain proportion of the crops or pieces of land to the devil, or other earth spirit, which assignment was made by lot. It seems to me that a game in which an invisible player takes part must come from an era in which unknown spirits were believed to take part in people's lives, the interpretation of such part being obtained by means of divination.

Again, in the games played with ball (hand) are remains of divination, and the ball games played by two opposite parties with bats and sticks, the origin of our modern cricket and football, have been developed from those early contests which have played such an important part in parish and town politics. Even in the simple game of "Touch" or "Tig" a primitive element can be found. In this game, as in many others, it is one of the fundamental rules, now unfortunately being disregarded, that the player who is "he" or "it" must be chosen by lot; one of the "counting out" rhymes is said until all the players but one are counted out--this one is then "he." This "he" is apparently a "tabooed" person; he remains "he" until he succeeds in touching another, who becomes "tabooed" in turn, and the first is then restored to his own personality. There would be no necessity for this deciding by lot unless something of an ignominious or "evil" character had been originally associated with the "unnamed" or "tabooed" player. In some games the player who is counted out is the victim of the rough play or punishment, which is the motive of the game. It is possible that the game of "Touch" has developed from the practice of choosing a victim by lot, or from tabooing people suffering from certain diseases or subjected to some special punishment.

The "counting out" rhymes of children are in themselves an interesting and curious study. They contain the remains in distorted form of some of the early numerals. The fact of a counting-out rhyme being used in the games is of itself evidence of antiquity and old usage. For those interested in this branch of study I can refer to the valuable book on this subject by Mr. H. Carrington Bolton, which contains hundreds of these rhymes collected from various sources.

I mention these instances of possible connection between the games of skill and ancient belief and custom, to show that the anthropological significance of traditional games is not absent from what might perhaps be considered quite modern games. This is important to my argument, because when I turn to the dramatic section of children's games there is so much evidence of the survival of ancient custom and belief, that I am supported in the arguments which I shall advance by the fact that the whole province of children's play, and not particular departments, contribute to this evidence. It will be seen from the classification that many customs are dramatised or represented in a more or less imperfect form in a large number of games, and that these customs have been those which obtained a firm hold on the people, and formed an integral part of their daily life. Courtship, love, and marriage form the largest number; then the contest games for the taking of prisoners and of territory are the next in point of numbers. Funerals appear as the next most widely spread, then harvest customs, while the practice of divination, the belief in ghosts and charms, well-worship, tree-worship, and rush-bearing, witches, and child-stealing, are fully represented. Next come imitations of sports (animal), and contest games between animals, and then a number of games in which "guessing" is a principal feature, and a large number dealing with penalties or punishments inflicted for breach of rules.

A survey of the classification scheme of traditional games introduces the important fact that games contain customs; in other words, that games of skill and chance have come down from a time when practices were in vogue which had nothing originally to do with games, and that dramatic games have come down from times when the action they dramatise was the contemporary action of the people. It becomes important, therefore, to work more closely into the details of these games, to ascertain if we can what customs are preserved, to what people or period of culture they might have belonged. In many instances enough is said under each game to show the significance of the conclusions, but when brought together and compared one with another these conclusions become more significant. The fact that marriage custom is preserved in a given form becomes of immense value when it is found to have been preserved in many games. I shall not go further into the games of skill and chance, but confine myself to the important class of dramatic games.

By the dramatic game I mean a play or amusement which consists of words sung or said by the players, accompanied by certain pantomimic actions which accord with the words used, or, as I prefer to put it, of certain definite and settled actions performed by the players to indicate certain meanings, of which the words are only a further illustration.

To take the method of play first, I have found five distinct and different methods:--

(1) The line form of game, played by the children being divided into two sides of about an equal number on each side, with a space of ground of about eight or ten feet between the two lines. Each line joins hands, and advances and retires in turn while singing or saying their parts.

(2) The circle form, played by the children joining hands and forming a circle, and all walking or dancing round together when singing the words.

(3) The individual form, where the children take separate characters and act a little play.

(4) The arch form, in which two children clasp each other's hands, hold their arms high, and so form a kind of arch, beneath which all the other players run in single file.

(5) Winding-up form, in which the players, clasping hands, wind round another player until all are wedged closely together, and then unwind again, generally assuming a serpentine form in so doing.

It will be well, in the first place, to arrange the games played under each of these methods:--

GAMES PLAYED IN LINE FORM (_with singing and action_).

Babbity Bowster. Green Grass. Hark the Robbers (_one form_). Here comes a Lusty Wooer. Here comes one Virgin on her Knee. Jenny Jones (_one form_). Jolly Hooper (_only one line advance_). Lady of the Land. London Bridge (_one form_). Mary Brown (_one form_). Milking Pails. Nuts in May. Pray, pretty Miss (_one form_). Queen Anne. Three Dukes. Three Knights. Three Sailors. We are the Rovers.

CIRCLE FORM (_singing and action subdivided into three methods_).

(1) Green Gravel. Jolly Miller. London Bridge (_some versions_). Lubin. Mulberry Bush. Nettles. Oats and Beans and Barley. Ring a Ring o' Roses. Rushes. Wallflowers. When I was a Young Girl. Would You know how doth the Peasant?

(2) All the boys. Down in the Valley. Glasgow Ships. Here stands a Young Man. Isabella. Jolly Fisherman. Jolly Sailors. King William. Kiss in the Ring. Knocked at the Rapper. Lady on the Mountain. Mary Brown. Mary mixed a Pudding. Merry-ma-tanza. Needle Cases. Old Widow. Oliver, Oliver, follow the King. Poor Mary sits a-weeping. Poor Widow. Pretty little Girl of Mine. Punch Bowl. Queen Mary. Rosy Apple, Lemon, and Pear. Round and Round the Gallant Ship. Sally Water. Silly Old Man. Uncle John. Wind.

(3) Booman. Old Roger. Round and Round the Village. Who goes round my Stone Wall?

INDIVIDUAL FORM (_dialogue game_).

Auld Grannie. Baste the Bear. Fox and Goose. Ghost at the Well. Gipsey. Gled-wylie. Hen and Chickens. Honey Pots. Jack, Jack, the Bread's a-burnin'. Keeling the Pot. King of the Barbarie. Lady on yonder Hill. Lend Me your Key. Mother, may I go out? Mother Mop. Mother, Mother, the Pot boils over. Mouse and Cobbler. Old Granny Crow. Old Woman. Shepherds and Sheep. Steal the Pigs. Three Jolly Welshmen. Witch.

The arch form of game, or tug-of-war as it is usually called, subdivide into two methods:--

ARCH FORM.

(1) Draw a Pail of Water. Hark the Robbers (_some versions_). How many Miles to Babylon. London Bridge. Long Duck. Thread the Needle. Through the Needle Eye.

(2) Fool, Fool, come to School. Hark the Robbers (_some versions_). Little Dog, I call you. Namers and Guessers. Oranges and Lemons. Three Days' Holidays. Tug of War.

WINDING UP, OR SERPENT'S COIL FORM.

Bulliheisle. Eller Tree. Port the Helm. Snail Creep. Tuilzie Wap. Winding up the Bush Faggot.

The first or line form of games is characterised by no one player being distinguished above his fellows; there are no distinct or separate characters to be played. All the players on one line say the same words and perform the same actions; all advance together and retire together. Each line stands still while the other line advances, retires, and has its "say." In this way questions are asked and answers are given. Questions and answers form an essential part of the line form of game. The one line of players imply action of a party composed of several persons who are of the same opinion, and the line on the opposite side is a party who hold different opinions, and express these in words and by actions; so that in no game played in line form do we get unanimous action of all the players, but half and half.

These line games represent in the main a contest, and there are contests of different kinds; that is, war between the people of two different locations, between parishes or border countries of different nationalities, and contests for wives, of a more or less friendly nature. That the lines or sides indicate people who come from one country or district to another country or district is shown, I think, by the fact that a line is drawn in the middle of the ground, which line separates the territory of the two sides. Players can go as far as the line on their own side, but one step over lands them in the enemy's territory. In a marriage game of the line form, the girl when unwilling is pulled across the line, and when willing she walks across to the opposite side. It is also clear that in the marriage games the party on one side represents young men, and on the other side young women.

In the second group, the circle form, all the players join hands to form a circle. They all perform the same actions and say the same words. This circle form is used in three ways.

In the first or simplest class all the players perform the same actions, sing the same words all together. There is no division into parties, and no individual action or predominance. This method is adopted when a certain recurring custom is celebrated or a special event is commemorated. The event is described in pantomimic action, and accompanied with dance and song.

In the second class the circle is formed, the players all clasp hands, dance round together, and sing the same words; but the action is confined to first one and then two players, who are taken by "choice" from those forming the circle. This class principally consists of courtship, love-making, and marriage games. The two principal parties concerned usually have no words to say, though in some "love" games the centre player does express his or her own feelings in verse. The fact that this form is used for love and marriage games accounts for the much larger number of games in this class and their greater variety.

In the third class of the circle game the players form the circle to act the part of "chorus" to the story. There are also two, three, or four players, as required, who act parts in dumb show suitable to the character personified. In this class the circle personate both animate and inanimate objects. The circle is stationary--at least the players forming it do not dance or walk round. They sometimes represent houses; a village, and animals are usually represented rather than people.

The circle games I consider to be survivals of dramatic representations of customs performed by people of one village or of one town or tribe--representations of social customs of one place or people, as distinct from the "line" form of games, which represent a custom obtaining between two rival villages or tribes. Thus I am inclined to consider the joining of hands in a circle as a sign of amity, alliance, and kinship. In the case of the line games hands are clasped by all players on each side, who are thus in alliance against those on the opposite side. When hands are joined all round so that a circle is formed, all are concerned in the performance of the same ceremony. There is no division into parties, neither is difference of opinion shown either by action or words in circle games.

In the third class of game there are several distinct characters, and the game partakes more of the nature of what we should call a play proper, and may be considered an outcome of the circle play. There are several characters, usually a mother, a witch or old woman, an elder daughter and several younger children, a ghost, and sometimes animals, such as sheep, wolves, fox, hen, and chickens. The principal characters (not more than two or three) are played by different children, and these having each a part allotted to them, have also a certain amount of dialogue to say, and corresponding actions to perform. The remaining characters, whether children or animals, merely act their part when action is required, all doing the same thing, and have no words to say. The dialogue in these games is short and to the point. It has not been learnt from written sources, but orally, and as long as the main idea and principal incidents are not departed from, the players may, according to their capacity, add to or shorten the dialogue to heighten the situation. There is no singing in these games, though there is what perhaps might be called the remains of rhyme in the dialogue.

The fourth form, that of the arch, is played in two ways. In the first, two children clasp their hands and hold them up to form an arch. Under this all the other players run as if going through an arch or gateway, and the players are generally stopped by the two who form the arch. Then a circle is formed, and all the players join hands and dance round together. In the second way, the arch is formed as above, and all the players run under. These players are then caught one by one within the arch, and have to choose one of the two leaders, behind whom they stand. A tug-of-war then ensues between the two leaders and their followers.

The first of these, that ending with the circle or dancing, indicates the celebration of an event in which all the people join, and all are of one way of thinking--differing from this group of customs celebrated by the simple circle game by each person in turn performing a ceremony, signified in games by the action of going under or through an arch.

The second way, when the "tug" follows, represents a contest, but I do not think the contest is of the same kind as that of the line form. This rather represents the leaders of two parties who are antagonistic, who call, in the words of the rhymes, upon the people of a town, or faction, to join one of the two sides. The fact that each player in the line or string is caught by the leaders, and has to choose which of them he will fight under, together with the tug or pulling of one side over a marked line, by the other side, indicates a difference in the kind of warfare from the line contests, where territory is clearly the cause of the struggle and fight. The line contest shows a fight between people of different lands; and the arch contest, a method of choosing leaders by people living in one land or town.

In the fifth form, "winding up games," the players join hands in a long line, and wind round and round one player at the end of the line, usually the tallest, who stands still until all are formed in a number of circles, something like a watch spring. They then unwind, sometimes running or dancing, in a serpentine fashion until all are again in straight line. These games probably refer to the custom of encircling trees, as an act of worship. They differ from the circle game in this way: The players in a circle game surround something or some one. In the "winding up" game they not only surround, but attachment or "hold" to the thing surrounded has to be kept.

The fact that these games lend themselves to such treatment, and the fact that I am obliged to use the terms, district, tribe, localities, obliged to speak of a state of contest between groups, of the sacred encircling of a tree, and of other significant usages, go far to suggest that these games must contain some element which belongs to the essential part of their form, and my next quest is for this element. I shall take each class of game, and endeavour to ascertain what element is present which does not necessarily belong to games, or which belongs to other and more important branches of human action; and it will depend on what this element is as to what can ultimately be said of the origin of the games.

Of the games played in "line" form, "We are the Rovers" is the best representative of pure contest between two opposing parties. If reference is made to the game (vol. ii. pp. 343-356), the words will be found to be very significant. In my account of the game (pp. 356-60), I suggest that it owes its origin to the Border warfare which existed on the Marches between England and Scotland and England and Wales, and I give my reasons, from analysing the game, why I consider it represents this particular form of contest rather than that of a fight between two independent countries. Both sides advancing and retiring in turn, while shouting their mutual defiance, and the final fight, which continues until all of one side are knocked down or captured, show that a deliberate fight was intended to be shown. I draw attention, too, to the war-cry used by each side, which is also significant of one of the old methods of rallying the men to the side of their leader--an especially necessary thing in undisciplined warfare. This game, then, contains relics of ancient social conditions. That such a contest game as this is represented by the line form combining words, singing, and action, is, I submit, good evidence of my contention that the line form of game denotes contest. This game, then, I consider a traditional type of contest game.