Jack, I am unsure why you jump to such conclusions over a typo or oversight.

Not only have I seen Cecil Sharp's work, I own both Sharp's and Bronson's work (and the Bronson book cost me dearly) and have analyzed mmuch (not all) of both Bronson's and Sharp's work. It seems you may have fallen into the trap of "variants" when a closer look will reveal very little that has changed in terms of the DNA of these tunes. Of course there are variants, but they mean almost nothing. Anymore than changing clothes can actually change the person. Added approach notes, ornamentations, even redirections do not hide the raw structure of a tune. Simple target note analysis will show that. In fact, often the additions or alterations themselves can lead one to identify the folk culture or "folk" that influenced the variant.

One need only make a cursory analysis of the arrangements of Marjory Kennedy Fraser of songs from the Hebrides to see (hear) how songs originally in Gaelic have been cleaned up and straightened out, and yet one can still find the earlier tunes through both melodic analysis and the comparisons to earlier transcriptions of singers from those islands.

Bronson's work was very good, Sharp's made conclusions based on language, and music analysis, it appears to me, took a back seat. It appears he had little understanding of the Gaelic language that may have affected or been the basis for some of the tunes. Read the work and you tell me on what musical basis he makes claims that certain songs are from England, not Scotland, or Ireland, or France, for that matter.

I would like to learn from you what leads you to believe that Cecil Sharp was an expert analyst. I appreciate his collections and what he did for preserving the music. I simply disagree with his conclusions as to what is English and what is Scottish. I am unsure, myself, but certain "genes" are more common to the music of one geogrphical area than another. In the end, I have read no one who knows where anything originated, but when you isolate a specific time period with a small window of time, one can identify those unique elements that make something Highland and something else Hungarian. With a bit more focus, the same can be done with Highland versus "English."

It's fine that you disagree with me, I am sure many do. But your response offers no factual analysis, falls into old traps, and only takes jabs at me based on the faulty analysis of others.

Odd, but does make interesting reading.

[I apologize for any typos or any other weird moments where I may have simply spaced out. I just don't have time to go back and proof this.]