Greg

Whilst I agree with you that Malcolm does tend towards the "if it's not recorded, it doesn't exist" school of thought which I have argued against previously (a good example I have given previously is in the early interpretation of the Early English poem "The Dream of The Rood"), in this case quite careful research has been done, and this article by Pete Millington, which Malcolm quoted, is quite informative. I have known Pete since the '70s and he knows a lot about mummers' plays.

There is one important area where the hypothesis could be attacked ... this is early references to "mummers" etc. from Bede (circa 730) onwards. Modern researchers like Pete explain these by saying that "mummers" and "guisers" can mean many different things and need not mean people performing the plays. So well and good, but they can't demonstrate that they don't ... and a single unequivocal instance, either of a play or reference to one, would throw the whole "recent hypothesis" out of the window. As such, it's a good hypothesis because it can be tested.

As regards the "St George" aspect of the play, it is - of course - unlikely to be before the 17th Century because it appears to have come from Richard Johnson's "History of the Seven Champions", first published in 1596-7. However, The "Legenda Aurea" (Golden Legend) here contains some of the material and was first compiled by Jacobus de Voragine in 1275 (printed in English by Caxton in 1483), so ...

The "related activities" argument has been used much too loosely in the past and so is currently out of fashion, having been "discredited". There are, however, aspects of it which can be helpful and it will become useful again once people feel able to trust it. Meanwhile, there's always the psychological analysis (see my post above) and a nice example of this is the Jungian analysis here which contains a lot more of value than at first appears.

Some of the contributions above show a non-understanding of traditional practices based simply on the fact that the people contributing are not taking part in them. This can easily be forgiven! I think you have a very useful point whan you state that things don't just spring up from nowhere, though.

Another question I'd like to be asked more often is why so many people continue to keep on doing these things. It would, I think, lead to a much firmer understanding of why traditional practices survive so tenaciously (and why they're in essence much older than some people are willing to give credence to). How many people ever ask other than mechanical questions of the people performing these plays?

:-)
Ian