|
17 Aug 05 - 01:13 PM (#1544088) Subject: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Maryrrf I've looked over previous threads on "Mattie Groves" and haven't found the answer, nor have searches on the net yielded it. The "first known date" for the appearance of the song is 1611, I think. However there is a line in the song that says "Lord Arlen's gone to consecrate King Henry at Whitehall" which made me think it must have occurred during the reign of Henry VIII, around 70 years previous to that. I've been checking through some history books trying to figure out if Henry VIII was ever "concecrated" at Whitehall, or it might be this consecration ritual was a yearly event of some kind? I'd always thought the meeting between Mattie Groves and Lord Arlen's wife took place on New Year's Day because in some versions it says "the first day of the year". Then again, sometimes it's "best day of the year". Well, does anybody want to venture a guess as to what might be the exact year, if we could deduce such a thing? |
|
17 Aug 05 - 01:33 PM (#1544111) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: McGrath of Harlow "First day of the year" needn't be assumed to mean January 1st. Up until 1752 in England the year was seen as beginning on March 25th, the feast day of the Annunciation, nine months before Christmas Day. |
|
17 Aug 05 - 01:35 PM (#1544117) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Maryrrf Oh I didn't know that! I'm so glad I posted this question - it sheds new light on the subject. Thank you! |
|
17 Aug 05 - 02:25 PM (#1544196) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Bunnahabhain Also, why assume Henry VIII? Henry I reigned in the 12th C, whitehall has been a centre of goverment since about then. There is no record of a Lord (or earl etc) Arlen in Burkes Peerage, and the 1901 UK cencus has no Arlens at all. The name, has therefore suffered from the folk process. Going to obvious mishearings does not help, as there are too many options. The nearest is probably the earls of Arden, who have held titles from Saxon times. Not a lot of good.... So neither the King nor the Lord can pin it down. We tried to pin the place down a while back, and that didn't get to a proper answer either. Can't find that thread now. How ironic... |
|
17 Aug 05 - 03:02 PM (#1544230) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Maryrrf Oh I know we can't ever be completely sure, but it's fun to try. What about this hypotheses - (as you know, Mattie Groves is also referred to as Little Musgrave)- that it took place in Cumbria? Check out the link http://musgravemanor.homestead.com/Cumbria.html |
|
17 Aug 05 - 03:31 PM (#1544252) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Le Scaramouche Musgraves are an old Cumbrian family and isn't the lord in the original song lord Barnard? Don't think we need go back as far as Henry I, the ballad is certainly not that old. |
|
17 Aug 05 - 05:14 PM (#1544305) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Maryrrf Yes, I usually sing the "Mattie Groves/Lord Arlen" version but the Little Musgrave and Lady Barnard version may be even more prevalent. |
|
17 Aug 05 - 05:57 PM (#1544331) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Bunnahabhain I know it's not that old, but I was making the point it King Henry doesn't help much on it's own. Could well be Henry VII. I've not heard the King Henry verse, and it's not in the DT. How's it go? |
|
17 Aug 05 - 08:17 PM (#1544443) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: McGrath of Harlow The episode referred to might be a lot older than the ballad we've got. Or, another way of putting it, the story could be a lot older than any historical characters it may have got itself attached to. The original Lord Arlen would have been some Alpha Male Homo Erectus... |
|
17 Aug 05 - 10:16 PM (#1544478) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Malcolm Douglas The earliest reference is c.1611 (Beaumont and Fletcher, Knight of the Burning Pestle, one verse quoted). The ballad was probably quite new at that time. Barnet or Barnard to begin with; the "Arlen" form is much later. So far as I recall, King Henry doesn't appear in the song until early 20th century sets found in America. Not something to be used in any attempt at dating it wihout a lot more detail. What was your source for that line? |
|
18 Aug 05 - 12:13 AM (#1544538) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Q (Frank Staplin) The version found in Canada, "Lord Banner" ("and young Magrue from Scotland too") is more interesting. In that song, Lord Banner has gone to fair England "to take King Henry's throne. Now an attempt to take the throne was certainly newsworthy, and would be meat for Wackipedia. A version collected by Sharp (Lady Banner and little MacGroves involved here) has Lord Banner "Redemption gone, he's on Queen Anne's throne." That shifts the date a bit. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 12:15 AM (#1544539) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Q (Frank Staplin) Those two are in Bronson's "Singing Tradition." |
|
18 Aug 05 - 04:05 AM (#1544605) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Paul Burke Do I detect a little naievity here? Most of the 'big ballads' are timeless STORIES. Even if there was an incident that inspired a particular reworking of the theme, it's almost always heavily vested in a mythological coating. Just as an instance: since Lord Whatever killed both Matty/ Musgrave and the lady, who recorded the conversation between them about hearing the horn of Mattygrave's pal: "away, Musgrave, away"? It's a timeless tragedy, a work of art, not a historical record. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 07:50 AM (#1544707) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Santa There's always some spoilsport out to ruin the fun! Yes, of course it is a work of art etc. That doesn't mean that it was a total invention. The song may have had some historic grounding, and some people find it interesting to try to tease out any such factual basis from thin textual references and any other research. Whether it did or it didn't, often we can learn something from the gleanings they find or the path they take. (Or even, it must be admitted, sometimes gain a mild amusement from errors.) Good for the diggers. Full speed ahead and damn the philistines. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 08:07 AM (#1544720) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Maryrrf Well I got the line about "King Henry at Whitehall" from the singing of Joan Baez, which I'm pretty sure was taken from an Appalachian version. (Some of the Appalachian variants have Lord Donald/Arnold/Arlen/ or whatever blasting Mattie Groves with a shotgun, so I know they can't be regarded as reliable sources). Oh I'm sure it's a story that's been repeated many, many times (husband walks in on unfaithful wife and her boyfriend and kills both of them - nothing new!) but in the back of my mind I think the song might be based on an incident that really happened and probably at some time during the reign of Henry VIII. I think it was one of those scandals like Joey Buttafuoco and Amy Fisher that would have caught people's imagination enough for them to still be singing it in 1611. I really enjoy the song - always have and while I'm singing it or listening to it I picture the characters and the scene in my mind. I just wanted to "glean" (as Santa so aptly put it) other peoples opinions to see if there was the faintest chance that the actual incident may have been recorded or pinpointed. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 08:15 AM (#1544724) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Steve Parkes Sarah Gray's version has the usual swordfight, but Lord Darnall shoots Lady Darnell with his "special" (surely not a gentleman's weapon)?! Andthe name of the page is Robert Ford! Steve |
|
18 Aug 05 - 09:15 AM (#1544784) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,DB Child no. 81 is 'Little Musgrave and Lady Barnard' and Child gives the earliest written citation as 1611 - as given above. It's not unreasonable to suppose that if the ballad is based on historical events then those events could have taken place a century or more earlier - or not, as the case may be. Interestingly, some versions of Child no. 83, 'Child Maurice' ('Gil Morice', 'Bob Norice', etc., etc.) also feature a homicidal 'Lord Barnard'who, this time, mistakes Lady B's illegitimate son (Child M.) for her lover and chops his head off. This seems to be a much later ballad (printed versions from mid-18th century)but perhaps at some time in the 15th/16th centuries there was a Lord Barnard, in the North of England, who was known to fly off the handle when he thought that his missus was 'playing away' and his savagery stuck in the folk memory and generated (at least) two ballads. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 10:13 AM (#1544836) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Les from Hull The first Lord Barnard (Sir Christopher Vane) was created in 1698. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 11:36 AM (#1544913) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,DB Thanks Les from Hull. Hmm, that does rather blow my theories out of the window, doesn't it? Nevertheless, if Lord B. wasn't 'created' until 1698 how did he get into a ballad cited in 1611 and probably created even earlier? I suppose the moral is never enquire too deeply into the historical backgrounds of ballads - it can drive you crazy - gibber, gibber, drool, drool!! |
|
18 Aug 05 - 11:37 AM (#1544914) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Dave the Gnome 1927 - A bloke in the pub told me. :D |
|
18 Aug 05 - 11:47 AM (#1544926) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Le Scaramouche I think Barnard Castle in Teesdale might be a candidate. Varnet was created Earl Barnard because his family took the place. A quick google should give you the family details. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 11:53 AM (#1544931) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Paul Burke Barnard could have been his first name: "The ballade of ane right noble victorius [and] myghty lord Barnard Stewart lord of Aubigny erle of Beaumont Roger and bonaffre consaloure and cham[ber]lane ordinare to the maist hee maist excelle[n]t [and] maist crystyn prince Loys king of France knyght of his ordoure capitane of the kepyng of his body co[n]queror of Naplis and vmquhile co[n]stable general of the same." - by William Dunbar, Walter Chepman and Androw Myllar, 1508. Which would be a disaster for dating the song, as you'd have to look up everyone called Barnard, Bernard, Bernhardt etc. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 12:10 PM (#1544950) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Le Scaramouche How true. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 12:19 PM (#1544958) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Maryrrf Oh well it's fun to speculate, isn't it! |
|
18 Aug 05 - 12:25 PM (#1544966) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Les from Hull Actually the current Lord Barnard lives in Raby Castle. Anybody fancy popping over and asking him? |
|
18 Aug 05 - 01:20 PM (#1545008) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: DannyC I fall with Mr. Burke here. When the lady "cast her eye on the little Musgrave as bright as the summer sun" I caught a divine glimmer from a nearby tangled hedge. A Graves he said - a Graves he said to place these lovers in. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 04:15 PM (#1545106) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: McGrath of Harlow The thing is there's nothing particularly unusual about the story as such. Stuff like this happens pretty regularly in real life. (For example see this rather horrible storythat I came across today when looking for soemthing quite different, about a man who went out and killed his former lover and her family; he also beat a dog to death with a shovel. Typical ballad material, except he wasn't a lord. Unlike the equally unsavoury Lord Lucan, who could also have well featured in a ballad.) I'd have thiught it pretty likely that the text we have does in fact relate to some actual episode, though it'd likely enough have incorporated stuff from some pre-existing account of the same kind of thing. |
|
18 Aug 05 - 04:21 PM (#1545112) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Le Scaramouche Wouldn't have surpised your average Englishman much 400 years ago. |
|
19 Aug 05 - 09:02 AM (#1545588) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Snuffy Speaking of real life throwing up modern instances like the stories of old songs, this one put me in mind of Polly Vaughan/Molly Ban, etc |
|
19 Aug 05 - 07:26 PM (#1546068) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,maryrrf Some interesting speculation - I tend to agree that the incident must have happened but then was elaborated on and confused with other incidents...people have always been fascinated with scandal, haven't they - and "Mattie Groves" has it all - sex, violence, involvement of rich prominent citizens, must have been quite a sensation in the surrounding area when it happened! |
|
19 Aug 05 - 10:16 PM (#1546167) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Q (Frank Staplin) As posted by Pavanne in another thread, in the 17th c. versions of Child 81, and the one in Pepys Ballads I, the characters are Little Mousgrave (Musgrave, Musgrove) and Lady Barnet. The lord was feasting with friends; no kings, queens or Whitehall are mentioned. Child, the English and Scottish Popular ballads, quotes Percy: "This ballad is ancient, and has been popular; we find it quoted in many old plays." He mentioned one of about 1611. It is likely that the song originated in the theatre; the characters entirely fictional. |
|
19 Aug 05 - 10:59 PM (#1546187) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,wife of punkfolkrocker Mattie Groves.. folk rock at its best !!! a really good song to drink and dance to.. so does anyone actually ever bother listening to the lyrics..!!???? |
|
20 Aug 05 - 10:03 AM (#1546271) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Le Scaramouche The lyrics are the whole point. Who says the incident had to happen? |
|
20 Aug 05 - 03:08 PM (#1546364) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,DB So, 'Wife of punkfolkrocker' "a really good song to drink and dance to.. so does anyone actually ever bother listening to the lyrics..!!????" Words failed me for a moment - and I managed to bite back some rude ones! Thing is, some authorities believe that ballads were originally danced to - but I think that at the stage of ballad evolution reached by the 'Little Musgrave and Lady Barnard' / 'Matty Groves' ballad, the words are important - at least they're important to me! I wonder, have you ever tried listening to this ballad without a heavy rock accompaniment? Try, for example, Jimmy Hutchinson's rendition on his CD 'Corachree'- Living Tradition 'Tradition Bearers Series' LTCD 1002, 2000. Mr Hutchinson's version is, of course, based on Jeannie Robertson's - I'm sure I've got a reference for that, somewhere, but can't find it at the moment. |
|
08 Apr 08 - 12:33 PM (#2310186) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Big Vern The first (1658) version mentions 'our lady's (i.e. Virgin Mary) grace' in the opening preaching scene. Late 16th and 17th century England and Scotland being Calvinist countries did not do sermons on the Virgin Mary's grace. This rather suggest a pre- or early reformation origin (i.e 1550s or before). |
|
08 Apr 08 - 12:43 PM (#2310195) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST, Sminky The following quote is from Fletcher's play 'Knight of the Burning Pestle' (first performed 1607, published 1613): "OLD MERRYTHOUGHT (sings) And some they whistled, and some they sung, Hey, down, down! And some did loudly say, Ever as the Lord Barnet's horn blew, Away, Musgrave, away!" |
|
08 Apr 08 - 08:16 PM (#2310686) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Steve Gardham The names Musgrave and Barnard and their derivatives occur in place names all over northern England and southern Scotland which isn't surprising as through intermarriage the nobility acquired castles, towns etc all over the place. The Percys of Northumberland for instance had all sorts of land in various parts of England and probably Scotland too after the Union. Ballads of this sort had their heyday in the 16th century but as has been stated the stories they tell could date back to much earlier times. As for conjecturing dates of origin from internal evidence, yes this is great fun, and marvellous if you can turn up something new and concrete. Try working on 'The Cruel Mother' and 'John of Hazelgreen' Cheers, SteveG |
|
08 Apr 08 - 08:19 PM (#2310689) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Steve Gardham I should add, even if you get a definite fix on a surname and a Christian name, try ploughing through the online family trees of the nobility, bred like rabbits they did!! |
|
08 Apr 08 - 08:43 PM (#2310711) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST Bunnahabhain-- No one answered your question in as many words, so: The lead-in is when Groves & Lady Whosis first meet in the church and she invites him home. He: "I cannot go, I dare not go; I fear 'twould cost my life, For I see by the little ring you wear, you are Lord Arlen's [?] wife; You're the great Lord Arlen's wife." She: "This may be false, this may be true; I can't deny it all, But Arlen's gone to consecrate ... King Henry at Whitehall, King Henry at Whitehall." FWIW, at the U. of Oregon c.1968 I went to a session in the Anthro Dept., I think, with a folklorist named Barry Tolkein. He insisted that Baez had pirated a bunch of ballad lyrics from him, I think including this one. Which is neither here nor there and doesn't help pin down the song. My guess would be that if a real event were meant, it would refer to the coronation of either Henry VII in 1485 or Henry VIII in 1509. I have no idea if either event took place at Whitehall. Chicken Charlie |
|
08 Apr 08 - 10:19 PM (#2310760) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: dulcimerjohn most significant version..1969..'liege and lief' classic fairport lineup. |
|
08 Apr 08 - 11:12 PM (#2310779) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Malcolm Douglas Certainly very influential on the modern revival, but 'most significant'? Over a span of nearly 400 years, I very much doubt it. It's largely irrelevant to this particular discussion in any case; as a modern collation it can tell us nothing about the history of the song. To answer a few points made a little earlier in this recently revived thread: Charlie: Let's give that folklorist his proper name: Barre Toelken. It's a matter of record that Baez was, shall we say, rather less than frank about where she got some of her early material. Anything of hers should only be considered authentic, and useful for the purposes of discussion, if it can be traced to a traditional source. That particular text isn't in Bronson, but plenty of oral examples have turned up since than. It would be interesting to know more about the provenance of this one. It wouldn't be at all surprising to find that she got it from Toelken and 'forgot' (see Sandy Paton's comments in earlier discussions here on songs that she learned from him and later pretended to have had from 'little old men in Ireland' or some such). 'Big Vern': England has never been a 'Calvinist' country. The 1658 printing (Child 81A) has: Little Musgrave came to the church-dore The preist was at private masse But he had more minde of the faire women Then he had of our lady['s] grace. 1658 was the year Cromwell died. Although Catholicism was widely frowned upon (in much the same way that Communism, for example, has been in America in more recent times) a reference to 'our lady' clearly was not considered odd or inappropriate at that time. In fact, the ballad sheet issued by Henry Gosson (Child 81C) was around 20 years earlier, perhaps more, and makes no reference to 'our lady' at all. There is probably no future in trying to guess the age of the song by that means. Similarly, King Henry appears only in late (collected in the 20th century) American versions; so there is no help to be had there, as was pointed out when this discussion was originally started in 2005. We can say only that the song was known around 1611; as I said a few years back in this very thread, it was probably quite new at that time. |
|
09 Apr 08 - 01:07 AM (#2310829) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Chicken Charlie Malcolm-- Thanks for clarification. My only excuse is I never saw the name in print, just heard it, and that forty years back. Good to have it right. CC |
|
09 Apr 08 - 01:22 AM (#2310833) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Nerd Just to amplify on the observations above by Steve Parkes, Sara Grey's version of this ballad, with the "special" (pistol), and "little Robert Ford" as the footpage places it as likely a Madison County, North Carolina version. Cas Wallin sang it that way, as did his relative Dillard Chandler. Both have versions available on CDs, Cas's on one of Mike Yates's releases though Musical Traditions, and Chandler's on the Folkways album "Old Love Songs and Ballads," recently reissued as "Dark Holler: Old Love Songs and Ballads." The joke, of course, is that "Little Robert Ford" is also the betrayer of Jesse James. When Wallin sang the song, he paused after the verse mentioning Ford, chuckled, and said, "he busied hisself, didn't he?" This showed, I think, that he was in on the joke! In general, it's well and good to speculate, but unless an earlier version turns up in some manuscript (which does sometimes happen), it isn't likely that any version will push the date back to before 1611. It's always more likely that the details which pin it to an earlier date were added in modern times than that they survived in oral tradition undetected until today. |
|
09 Apr 08 - 03:26 AM (#2310863) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Neovo The version of Mattie Groves I sing has Lord Donald as the cuckolded husband. Maybe mis-remembered but would that make any historical sense? |
|
09 Apr 08 - 05:35 AM (#2310913) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane Just a note: If you go to Google Books, and search on Musgrave and Barnard, you can view a lot of books containing different versions, including a full view of Percy's Reliques, and partial views of Child and other well known collections. Nothing in the way of new information found there yet, though, buit I was surprised to find one interpretation that the man who blew the horn was in fact a rival of Musgrave, who fancied his OWN chances with the Lady Barnard, and therefore didn't want her killed. I also found that killing BOTH lovers was apparently the necessary way of doing it to make it legal, and in such a place and manner that their guilt was clear. Then you were off the hook, it was a crime of passion. No good waiting until later, because you had then no evidence of their adultery. |
|
09 Apr 08 - 10:05 AM (#2311065) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Maryrrf Well I'm glad this thread was revived. I don't suppose we'll ever know the true "origins" of the ballad - i.e. when, and if, it really happened, and who the unfortunate lovers were. Interesting to speculate though! |
|
10 Apr 08 - 09:42 AM (#2312014) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Margaret It probably isn't helpful, but in the headnotes Bronson says there is a Scottish version older than any of the published ones. I've never seen anything else about this so it may be a mistake. |
|
10 Apr 08 - 01:16 PM (#2312174) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Steve Gardham Some of these old boadside ballads are simply moral warnings to the well-to-do to persuade them to stick to the straight and narrow. In this case a simple message of avoiding adultery (or getting caught!) The Cruel Mother is simply a warning to young girls from noble backgrounds to avoid liaisons with servants. SteveG |
|
10 Apr 08 - 08:51 PM (#2312567) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Malcolm Douglas Bronson wrote: 'There has also survived a Scottish text, earlier than any of these [ie earlier than any of the Child texts] in the Panmure MS, as yet unprinted.' That was in 1962. The MS commonplace-book compiled by Robert Edward is, I think, now considered to date from the 1630s at the earliest; so it is likely pre-dated by the Gosson broadside and certainly by the Beaumont and Fletcher verse. It appears that the text, 'Litel Musgray', was printed in Marion Stewart and Helena Mennie Shires, King Orphius; Sir Colling; The brother's lament; Litel Musgray: Poems from Scottish Manuscripts of c.1586 and c.1630 lately discovered (Cambridge: Ninth of May, 1973). I should have a copy of this fairly soon, and will report back on anything material it may contain. In another discussion here on this song, I listed all (or nearly all) of the many names given the cuckolded aristocrat in traditional versions of the ballad. If 'Neovo' has a look at that, he or she will see why 'the version [he or she] sing[s]' (unless learned directly from a 400-year-old source) is unlikely to tell us anything helpful. Best to treat the song as fiction, as Steve suggests. Some of the old ballads have roots in real (and sometimes even identifiable) events; the majority don't. |
|
11 Apr 08 - 05:18 AM (#2312745) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane A search of Google Books on Litel Musgray turns up the following references, in case it helps. But nothing relevant can be viewed online: Aberdeen University Review - Page 290 by University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen University Alumnus Association - World War, 1914-1918 - 1974 Litel Musgray in its new version has the wonderful simplicity of the best ballad art : as the horn-blast is distantly heard announcing the ... Women Medievalists And The Academy - Page 744 by Jane Chance - Biography & Autobiography - 2005 - 1073 pages ... "Sir Colling, " "The Brothers Lament, " "Litel Musgray": Poems from Scottish Manuscripts of c. 1586 and c. 1630. Cambridge: The Ninth of May, 1963. ... Annual Bibliography of Scottish Literature by Library Association Scottish Group - Dialect literature, Scottish - 1969 Page 53 ... and Litel Musgray : poems from Scottish manuscripts of C.1586 and c.1630 lately discovered, transcribed and edited by M. Stewart and HM Shire. ... Annual Report of the Council Under Statute D, III, 10 on the General and ...by King's College (University of Cambridge) - Universities and colleges Page 8 Litel Musgray.' (Editor with Marian Stewart.) 'Information for Collective Action. A Microanalytic View of Plural Decision-Making.' 'Eastern Monarchs. ... Medieval Studies for J.A.W. Bennett: Aetatis Suae LXX by Jack Arthur Walter Bennett, P. L. Heyworth - Drama - 1981 - 438 pages [ Sorry, this page's content is restricted ] |
|
11 Apr 08 - 05:29 AM (#2312750) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane Other forms of the name which occur are: (Maestries) Musgraeffe, said to have been Sir John Musgrave's wife, c1502, and Agnes Musgraif, c1511 See "The Poems of William Dunbar" Thomas Musgray or Musgra was an Englishman "captane of Beruik (Berwick)" who came with a "greit armye" (The Buik of the Croniclis of Scotland) There are many other similar references in the 1500's |
|
11 Apr 08 - 10:57 PM (#2313440) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Uncle_DaveO Warning: Thread drift! Back in '05, Maryrrf commented that I really enjoy the song - always have and while I'm singing it or listening to it I picture the characters and the scene in my mind. This reminds me of a comment I once heard Peggy Seeger say, when someone asked her if--and why--she often sang ballads with her eyes closed. "Because I want to watch the movie!" Dave Oesterreich |
|
12 Apr 08 - 11:32 AM (#2313697) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Big Vern Malcolm - I note what you say about the Gosson text - but as to early modern England not being a Calvinist country - i'm afraid that almost all historians of the early modern period would disagree with you (eg Collinson, Lake, Tyacke, Morrill, etc). The Elizabethan and Jacobean Church of England was solidly Calvinist in its doctrine and it was not until Charles I' support for William Laud that anti Calvinist elements began to dominate the Church of England. Laud paid the ultimate price for that in 1645. Further, the 'official' Cromwellian church was a blend of Presbyterian, particular baptist and congregationalist elements - all of whom Calvinists. Catholics were not just frowned upon - despite making up 2-3% of the population of England, they were actively oppressed, their estates seized and they were forced to worship underground. To talk openly of Catholic doctrine would inspire arrest and probably a riot and a pogrom. Most people had not ever met a Catholic but deeply feared fear them. As to saying that references to 'our lady' 'clearly was not considered odd or inappropriate at that time' - do you have evidence?, I am a historian of the era and on my reading of this period it very much was inappropriate and odd to mention 'our Lady' - the Civil War was fought in part over the fear of popery, a fear dragged up by Charles I recruiting Irish soldiers into his Army. The Solemn League and Covenant of 1643 had declared that all who took it would 'endeavour the extirpation of Popery' from England, Scotland and Ireland - and this had been done, as all know, with much military vigour. I have read hundreds of tracts and manuscripts from this period and references to 'Our Lady' are very rare. So therefore, the references to the 'preist was at private masse' in a public context indicates we are dealing with either pre-reformation England or Ireland, not England or Scotland from the 1560s onwards and certainly not England in the first half of the seventeenth century. In 1658 Mass had not been said in England or Scotland (except behind closed doors and with defiant trepidation) for just under 100 years. I have had a look at the 1658 source text. The text is a book called Wit Restored (Wing Reference M1719) - the text is not an innocent broadside (if such a thing exists) but a Royalist wit book compiled by Sir John Mennes (1599-1671) a royalist vice admiral during the Civil War and and James Smith (1605-1667) a clergyman who whilst conforming to the church system of the Parliamentarian period, spent most of his time drinking in taverns, writing smutty poems and was imprisoned for debt. Wit Restored is a compilation of anti-Parliamentarian verse alongside smutty burlesque songs composed by Mennes and Smith, as well as numerous ballads. Little Musgrave (starts p.174) is called 'the old ballad of little Musgrave'. I would venture that it was a song Smith or Mennish had picked up from taverns on their travels and included it in their book because it was a scandalous. |
|
12 Apr 08 - 09:25 PM (#2314008) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Margaret Malcolm - thanks for checking my reference from Bronson. It has stuck in my mind since I read it. Big Vern and others - the Catholic references could be an attempt to make the ballad sound old. If I wrote a ballad about a bank robbery and had the robbers ride off on horses I would at least be implying that the events of my ballad had happened over a century ago, if at all. Someone making a ballad around 1600 might do the same, especially if they WERE telling an old story, or if they wanted to make it sound like they were not talking about contemporary events. |
|
13 Apr 08 - 06:32 AM (#2314134) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST Margaret - I agree. Although it settles the argument against my original assertion, having looked at the book Wit Restored in its entirety I think that is exactly what Mennish and Smith are trying to do. There's numerous 'merry England' ballads in the book referred to as the 'old ballad of. . .' There is some recent work on how Royalists tried to re-create a vision of 'Olde Merrie England' as part of the propaganda effort against the Republican and Protectorate regimes (in 1658 very few in Charles II's close circle believed that he would be restored only 2 years later) - and Wit and Drollery books (which were publicly burned by the authorities who knew they were anything other than innocent books of ballads) were part of this effort. It would be interesting to go through them all because lots of folk material survives because of them. |
|
13 Apr 08 - 06:56 AM (#2314143) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Big Vern My apologies - I forgot to sign in above. Although the point still stands, that a reader in 17th Century England or Scotland would think the ballad set in the Catholic past or in present day Ireland. As to dating a ballad there are of course two issues - dating it from the point of view of the historian/folklorist - i.e. when it was actually first written and literary dating (or whatever the terminology is) - i.e. dating it on internal evidence when it was supposed to take place. |
|
13 Apr 08 - 09:29 AM (#2314203) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane Thread creep again I would just like to note that my ancestor was directly involved in the festivities of the Restoration in May 1660, including attending a banquet on board the 'Royal Charles' off Holland, addressed an ode to the new King, and included a description of the event in one of his books. |
|
13 Apr 08 - 09:38 AM (#2314206) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Rusty Dobro I sense this version may not be quite the original: A holiday, a holiday, so the rain was falling hard, Lord Arlen's wife went into the town with her husband's credit card And when the shopping it was done, she went back to where her car was parked. And there she saw little Matty Groves, nicking sat-navs in the dark. Come home with me, little Matty Groves, come home with me today, And I will do such things to you as will take your breath away. I can't come home, I won't come home, I can't come home for my life, For I see by your personal number plate you are Lord Arlen's wife. What if I am Lord Arlen's wife, Lord Arlen he has gone, Down to the pub at Eastbridge, to play his melodeon. I can't come home, I won't come home, I can't come home, I fear, For I'm due in court in half an hour for nicking a Cavalier. You can come home, little Matty Groves, you can come home today, For I'm the very close friend of a magistrate, he'll see that you're OK. I can't come home 'cos if I did I'd be no use to you, I've had a quart of Bacardi Breezer and six tins of Special Brew. You must come home, little Matty Groves, I know we'll be all right, For I can start without you, and you can take all night. At this a servant standing by began to grow quite vexed, He swore Lord Arlen he would know, so he sent him off a text. And when Lord Arlen read the news, he began to swear and cuss, He chucked his melodeon back in its box and jumped on the very next bus. When he got back to his own bedroom, he peered around the door, His lady fair and Matty Groves still at it on the floor. Then Lord Arlen turned around and hurried from the room, He came back with his camcorder, with its twenty times optical zoom. And when the filming it was done, it was sold to Channel 4, The three of them got stinking rich, so they made a dozen more. |
|
13 Apr 08 - 11:38 AM (#2314265) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Big Vern Pavane - that is interesting. The Royal Charles of course was originally the Naseby, the flag ship of the Protectorate's Navy: by all accounts it was a massive ship. Charles II was utterly humiliated when it was captured by the Dutch in the Medway in 1667. I wonder if an ballads were written about it? |
|
13 Apr 08 - 11:44 AM (#2314270) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Big Vern Indeed there is, although its pre-capture - in 1666 a broadside came out called Holland Turn to Tinder to the tune of Packington's Pound (Wing reference H2445A) |
|
14 Apr 08 - 03:29 AM (#2314887) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,PMB Bit of a quibble Vern- I'm not so sure that the Elizabethan church was quite so Calvinist- what about Marprelate? But I quite agree about the role of the imagined past in the runup to the Civil War- on BOTH sides (Merry England v Norman yoke). |
|
14 Apr 08 - 05:59 AM (#2314954) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane I don't know about ballads, but I could lay my hands on the ode (written in French by Samuel Chappuzeau, a Calvinist as it happens, and tutor at the time to Prince William of Orange, Charles's nephew) |
|
14 Apr 08 - 12:01 PM (#2315187) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane Vern, Even worse, the Dutch didn't have a use for it in their shallow waters, and soon sent it for scrap. |
|
14 Apr 08 - 05:30 PM (#2315577) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Uncle_DaveO Rusty Dobro, is that your own writing? It's spectacular! Dave Oesterreich |
|
15 Apr 08 - 04:02 AM (#2315917) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Rusty Dobro 'Fraid so, Dave! Lacking the voice and ability to do justice to 'proper' folk, I churn out this nonsense to appeal to the most coarse , brutish and undiscerning of pub audiences. They are rarely disappointed in me, nor I in them. |
|
15 Apr 08 - 05:44 PM (#2316680) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,Big Vern PMB - As historians such as Collinson and Lake show - Marprelate was anti Episcopalian and pro-presbyterian but, issues of church government aside, he was within a Calvinist doctrinal consensus. A seventeenth century Calvinist is not by definition a presbyterian or indeed a puritan. |
|
16 Apr 08 - 04:10 AM (#2317022) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,PMB Yes, Vern, that's what I was saying- the Calvinists were the opposition within the church, which was NOT Calvinist. They executed Penry because they thought he was the writer. If Whitgift had any Calvinistic tendency, it was in organisation only |
|
17 Apr 08 - 04:46 AM (#2318039) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST I know that this is not really the place for a historical debate but you confuse what I said above. The Calvinists were NOT oppositional in the pre Laudian CofE and doctrinally the Church WAS Calvinist. The view that Calvinists were an oppositional movement against the Church of England is untenable since historians such as Tyacke's, Collinson's and Lake's extensive research over the past 50 years. As every history undergrad since about 1980 knows, Whitgift's Lambeth Articles of 1598 are unequivocally Calvinist on the doctrine of grace and salvation as are the pre revision 39 Articles. The English Bishops at the Synod of Dort held Calvinist positions and the famous TULIP five points of Calvinism were largely the work of the English bishops. A study of even obscure Elizabethan and Jacobean printed sermons bears out that the Calvinist doctrine on grace and redemption was the centre of orthodoxy. There were of course disagreements as to vestments and the government structure of the church - but, with the exception of a minority of separatists, this was a debate that took place within the doctrinal Calvinist consensus of the Church of England. See the Peter Lake's numerous studies on this. Even in Europe, Calvinists were uncomfortable lifting the government structure of the Church to being a mark of the true Church. Calvin himself did not do this (although he favoured Presbyterianism), rather it was largely Calvin's successor Beza in the 1580s. As I said above the Marprelate controversy was not about Calvinism but about the government of the church and an attack on what Martin believed was the stalling of the reformation by wordly bishops. Yes Penry was executed, but not because he was Calvinist - Penry was not a member of the Church of England - he was a separatist and thus was something of an extremist. To call a separatist like Penry a 'Calvinist' and Whitgift not is is to equate the doctrine of ecclesiology as the sole mark of Calvinsim. This is plainly wrong: the TULIP formula agreed at Dort says nothing about the government of the Church. This is not 'Anglican' (which in the sense of ceremonial but protestant is an word only used by writers from the mid 18th century onwards - see OED) v Calvinist but Calvinists debating with themselves on the nature of a Reformed church. I think that's enough from me on this topic, so i'll leave you to reply but I think we should eventually get back to Matty Groves :) |
|
18 Apr 08 - 08:14 AM (#2319174) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,HughM Some time ago one of my friends was involved in a function at Rydal Hall in Cumbria (the north-west corner of England). He was shown an ornate wooden chest given to the Barnard family in the 16th century by the Musgraves on the occasion of a wedding in the Barnard family, in an attempt to end the long-running feud between them, said to have started in the 12th century. This prompted him to sing the song. Having started, it occurred to him that there were several clergymen and numerous children listening, and perhaps it was not the most appropriate song for the audience. However, having started, he felt compelled to finish it, afer which there was a deathly silence until a small girl remarked "so it was quite like East Enders really, wasn't it"? (East Enders is a soap opera on British TV.) |
|
18 Apr 08 - 08:16 AM (#2319178) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,HughM |
|
18 Apr 08 - 08:26 AM (#2319184) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,HughM Third time lucky I hope! This time I'll try not to hit the tab key before checking my spelling! My friend also said that the Musgraves arrived in England with William the conqueror and adopted the name somewhat later. They were sent north to discourage Scots raiders and later took over Featherstone Castle, which is still habitable, a few miles south of Haltwhistle. He said Musgrave means "valley of rats", so I suppose an alternative description would be "ratty grove". |
|
18 Sep 08 - 10:43 AM (#2444024) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane Just found a reference to a Musgrove in a different song. Johnny Armstrongs last goodnight Printed around 1711, supposedly about events of 1528. Towards the end, the page Musgrove is the last survivor of the fight, and takes the news to Armstrong's wife. Probably nothing to do with the other song - but you never know. |
|
20 Nov 08 - 09:51 PM (#2499012) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST Well though I haven't read everything on this page, all the history and stuff, I know this ballad but in a very different way. My family has carried this ballad on for as long as anyone can remember, along with alot of other ballads like Barbra Allen and Lady Margret, at least that's what we call them. As far as we knew they were as true as could be to the original versions since my family came from the Appalachian mountains where people carried these ballads to. I'm really amazed at how different the versions are-so perhaps my version and the version from the mountains has been very diluted-though these mountains are very secluded and I know for a fact my family didn't leave until the late 70's. Just thought I'd add my opinion. And my family, who still lives up there, sings it the exact same as always. I've never heard any variations, though of course I have never looked for them. ps-we always sang it as "Lord Darnell" |
|
21 Nov 08 - 02:37 AM (#2499108) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: pavane Could you post the words to your version? Would be an interesting comparison. Lord Donald, Barnard, Barnett, Arlen and many other Lords are known! |
|
21 Nov 08 - 04:50 PM (#2499601) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST If you've ever saw the movie songcatcher it's exactly the same, basically because they went up there and collected old ballads. But in case you haven't here are the words. This is all sung with a higher pitch tone at the end, kind of a trademark for old appalachian ballads. Oh Holy Day oh Holy day the first one of the year Little Mattie Groves to church he goes some holy words to hear, hear, some holy words to hear He spied some women dressed in black as they came into view Lord Darnell's wife was gaily plad the flower of the few few, the flower of the few She stepped right up to little mattie groves her eyes cast on the ground "oh please oh please come with me sir as you pass threw this town, town, as you pass threw this town." But what is said by little mattie groves as he sat up in bed "I fear it is your husbands mad and I will soon be dead dead, i will soon be dead." but little mattie groves he laid back down and soon fell off to sleep when he awoke lord darnell was standing at his bed feet, feet, standing at his bed feet Saying,"how do you like my snow white dove," said,"how do you like my sheets, and how do you like my pretty little woman that's a laying in your arms asleep, sleep, laying in your arms asleep." Well the first swing that little mattie made it hurt lord darnell's sore the next swing that lord darnell made little mattie hit the floor, floor, little mattie hit the floor As you can tell, pretty different lol. I did some research and I've come to figure out that alot of those old english ballds that were carried over were "mountanized" and changed to fit the vocabulary and tune of the mountain people, who of course even today are still secluded. It's really interesting to actually research this stuff now, I just saw the movie songcatcher and it got me really interested, since these are my family's old songs and I was amazed to here this version of it on the movie. definatly go check the movie out. |
|
21 Nov 08 - 05:05 PM (#2499608) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: Goose Gander Hello Guest - Can we convince you to take a 'name' and join Mudcat? I'm sure there are many folks here who would be interested in your family's songs and your insights and observations about this music. |
|
21 Nov 08 - 05:41 PM (#2499632) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST well i could im sure but i have no musical background other than these songs lol. my brother plays every instrument known to man but i have no idea about the tunes and pitches, i just know the words and how to sing the songs lol. im not sure i could be of any real help |
|
21 Nov 08 - 05:45 PM (#2499635) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRgH_0zxqQE no idea if this will help but i found this on youtube. it's from the movie songcatcher which has alot of the songs I grew up with. my grandparents sing these songs exactly like this. im sure most of ya'll know about this or have seen it but just in case..this is pretty much that "high pitch" at the end (i guess thats what you call it) lol
Thanks. -Joe Offer- |
|
21 Feb 15 - 05:57 PM (#3688692) Subject: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Joe Offer Another cached thread. The big ones are too cumbersome to transfer by way of individual messages. -Joe- Subject: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Richie Date: 11 Feb 15 - 12:21 AM Hi, I've begun looking at Child 81 in some detail and find that's I'm not understanding a few things. 1) Who is Matty Groves? He is named Little Musgrave by Child A but also litil musgray, Little Matha Grove, Little Mossy Groves, Little Mathew Grew, young Magrove, little MacGroves, Little Ned Groves, Little Maddy Gross, Little Mushiegrove, Young Marshal Grones, Young McGrover, Young LaGrove, or one of the many other related names. Barry reports in BBM, 1929: There is not space for the proof here, but the editors feel that in their detailed study of "Musgrave" they have proved that all Child's English texts, A, B, C, are mere personal lampoons, of the reign of James I, directed against a prominent personage. Who is this prominent personage? 2) One of the main openings found in Child D, E, H, K, L, and O begins with the ballad commonplace: There were four and twenty ladies/gentlemen; A- playin' at the ba'. The "playing at the ball" has morphed into (version O) : Assembled at a ball. It also is similarly implied in North American versions that "ball" is a dance or gala. I thought this was a term used circa 1800-- so what is this (A- playin' at the ba') referring to? 3) Are there two basic North American types and how are they defined? These are a couple questions I have. Any help is appreciated, Richie Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Richie Date: 11 Feb 15 - 09:32 AM Hi, Question 1 may be extended to Lord Barnard and his wife. Lord Barnard is also Lord Daniel, Lord Arnold, Lord Orland, Lord Aulan, Lord Vanner, Lord Banner, Lord Thomas, Lord Donald, Lord Valley, Lord Bander, LordB arnett, Lord Barnaby, lord birnibie, Lord Vanover, Lord Diner, Lord Allen, Lord Barnswell, Lord Barlibas, Lord Bengwill, or "Lord Someone." Who is the Lord Barry refers to in my last post. About Child C we have this: The British broadside ballad, The Lamentable Ditty Of The Little Mousgrove And The Lady Barnet, published by F. Coles (London); T. Vere (London); and W. Gilbertson (London) sometime between 1658 and 1664, and archived at the Bodleian Library Broadside Ballads, shelfmark: Wood 401(91) with a note on the reverse by Wood stating that the protagonists were alive in 1543 [ref. Peacock, NL]. So Wood (or someone) writes that "the protagonists were alive in 1543." Who were the protagonists? Richie Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: GUEST,Allan Conn Date: 11 Feb 15 - 11:13 AM Playing at the ba' will refer to playing ball. The precursor to modern football and rugby. Ball games were played throughout Britain and some of the older games still exist from Orkney down to Derbyshire. There a several games still in existence here in the Scottish Borders and here is a wee clip from the Jedburgh game called Jethart Hand Ba'. Basically played through the town with two side called The Uppies and The Dounies. Generally a play starts off as a big scrum until someone breaks free with the ball as they do about a minute into this clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSXMCk-HRqc Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Richie Date: 11 Feb 15 - 04:47 PM Thanks Allan, I think the earliest use of "ball" as a dance would be circa 1791. Anyone has info on that? This is one of the main openings. It's found in Child D, E, H, K, L, and O begins with the ballad commonplace: There were four and twenty ladies/gentlemen; A- playin' at the ba'. Here are some of the examples: Child D (Kinloch): 1 There were four and twenty gentlemen A playing at the ba, Child K (Robertson): 1 It's four and twenty bonny boys Were playin at the ba, Child L (Buchan): 1 Four and twenty handsome youths Were a' playing at the ba, Child E (Campbell) and Child H (Motherwell): 1 Four and twenty gay ladies Were playing at the ba, Child O (Sampson- from gypsy) dating to the early 1800s; 1 There was four-and-twenty ladies Assembled at a ball, Notice that in Child O "playing at the ball" has changed to "assembled at a ball." This change is found frequently in versions from North America that use this opening. It certainly makes more sense. Since the stanza following it is about who comes in (usually to church) "arrayed in white" etc. Richie Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: GUEST Date: 11 Feb 15 - 05:01 PM The bit about the football is interesting. Concentrate on Musgrove, which seems to be the root of all the other textual deviations. Musgrove is one of the English border Names from the east of Cumberland, often captains of Bewcastle. Similarly Barnard would be a root from which the others would deviate, but less likely any other way. The only locaql connection that I know is Barnard Castle in Durham, but that is rather a long way off. Bringing the yearlings home, from the American texts seems an odd pasttime, unless it is an allusion to reiving. And the first holiday of the year would before 1750 in England be March 25th, Lady Day, which was old new year's day (hence in a roundabout way the beginning of our tax year!) On the other hand, a pure flight of fancy, one of the variants not cited above is Lord Darnel ~ could that be Darnley? I doubt it, though his wife had a reputation, and Bothwell was known to like border football. I'm letting my imagination run riot here! Everything after the tax year bit is pure moonshine. It's just a rattling good yarn, whoever the protagonists are. Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: GUEST,Dave Date: 11 Feb 15 - 05:11 PM Given Richie's dates, surely another candidate must be James Hamilton, 2nd Earl of Arran, regent for Mary Queen of Scots following the death of James V in 1542, and his wife Lady Margaret. Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Steve Gardham Date: 11 Feb 15 - 05:39 PM Barnard/Barnet and Musgrove were names very common all over the north of England and Scotland in Medieval times. Wood may well have been right but with such common names we are clutching at straws. People far better placed to make this a real event than anyone living today have tried and failed to give a definite identification to these characters. Speculation is fun but without strong evidence you're pissing in the wind. Richie, I'm sorry but I find some of your lines of questioning intriguing. Why are you so preoccupied with more recent corruptions when the earliest versions state clearly what is going on? Playing at the ball very likely simply means they were tossing a ball around, not necessarily playing some specific game. In this case numbers seem to be very specific and a search of ball games played in the early modern period shouldn't be too difficult to find. Having said that I also find Barry's claim interesting, but my natural scepticism is also suspicious. Why mention this earth-shattering snippet and then leave no evidence of where to find the details? Just about every printer in the 17thc printed the ballad. The earliest ref I have is 1630. It's just possible if it were a real event that took place in 1543 there were still people around who could remember it. Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: breezy Date: 11 Feb 15 - 06:00 PM who WAS , not who IS, cos by my reckoning thems all dead long ago. so, who was Matty Groves ? Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Richie Date: 12 Feb 15 - 12:00 AM Hi, TY for your replies. Barry devoted 44 pages to Little Musgrave in BBM, and if Musgrave lived and was in fact a real person, he is dead now- TY. The Reign of James I, first Stuart King, was from 1603 to 1625, he ruled as King of Scotland (as James VI) from 1567 to 1625. Barry published two additional versions in BFSSNEin he early 1930s. He had no additional comment of his earlier assertion. In BBM, 1929 Barry says, "Nothing is clearer than that there were two very early forms of this ballad, one containing King Henry, the other "Away Musgrave." The former appears in America where it has been purely traditional until within a very few years; the latter was the original of the English and Scottish copies." Three years later in BFSSNE after printing Wells' version from Kentucky, Barry again assert the two types of ballad theory but explains it differently: There are two forms of "Little Musgrave and Lady Barnard" in American tradition, distinguished as the Banner type and the Arnold type (Barry, Eckstorm and Smyth, British Ballads from Maine, pp. 181, ff.) Miss Wells's version is of the Arnold type and clearly very old; its nearest textual relatives are Maine E, F, and Belden A (ibid., pp. 169-70, 172-80), particularly the last, with which it agrees in the interpretation of the alarm-call on the bugle. The melody is an excellent set of what was certainly the original air to the ballad. In stanza 8, formed of the second couplets of two stanzas, with the refrain of each, only the second part of the melody is used, repeated to fit each half-stanza. A version of the Banner type is in Bulletin, FSSNE., 8, pp. 6-8. Flanders headnotes (written by Coffin) in her books Ancient Ballads (1961) explain it this way: Barry feels there-was a pre-American split in the tradition of the ballad, one form featuring the "away, Musgrave, away" lines and the "bugle-blowing" scene, the other retaining mention of King Henry. The Henry type he believes to date back to the time of Henry VIII and to be the progenitor of almost all the American texts. The "away, Musgrave" type, he feels, gave birth to the Anglo-Scottish texts and a few late American arrivals. Barry printed the "Lord Banner type" which was taken from Orlon Merrill in New Hampshire in BFSSNE 1931. These are the two types I was talking about in my first post. Richie Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Big Al Whittle Date: 12 Feb 15 - 03:49 AM I used to love The Groves Family. Lenny was my favourite. Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Steve Gardham Date: 12 Feb 15 - 07:56 AM Richie, I haven't time to look into this at the moment, but to be honest you are probably the best placed person yourself to look at all of the American versions and come to some sort of conclusion. If you subscribed to the Ballad-list you would get very knowledgeable help from the likes of Bob Waltz who revels in this sort of analysis. I'm just about to start some dating for Steve R and then I'll have a look at it. I have the Flanders set but don't have many copies of Bulletin or Barry's BBM. Whilst there are excellent examples of ballads being preserved in an older form in the States (Bramble Briar) I'm rather sceptical of anything earlier than 1700. Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Richie Date: 18 Feb 15 - 12:01 PM Hi, My computer went out. I've compiled the versions from the West Indies. Little Musgrove- Forbes (JM) pre1924 Beckwith A, B Little Musgrove- Maroons (JM) pre1924 Beckwith C Lord Barnet- female singer (JM) 1957 Leach Miss Notty- Jobe (St. Vincent) 1966 Abrahams A Matty Glow- Antoine (St Vincent) 1966 Abrahams B Garoleen- Joseph (St Vincent) 1966 Abrahams C Matty Gru- McIntosh (St. Croix) 1989 REC Any other versions? Anyone have the text to Matty Gru or known when it was first recorded? All the versions are somewhat corrupt- the names are all different "Matty Glow" is Lady Barnard in one. This is a complicated ballad as far as categorizing it. There are different openings and different types based in part on Barry's conclusions. However there doesn't seem to be any definitive "real people" that the ballad is based on - and no one has answered the comments by Barry or Wood (broadside) - even Barry did not comment further which means to me that he could not come up with verifiable names. Richie Subject: RE: Origins: Who is Matty Groves? From: Steve Gardham Date: 18 Feb 15 - 05:34 PM Henry VIII? Pooh! Why not Henry I? You are probably better placed to make your own judgments on these versions as you probably have access to more variants than Barry had. Even where we have a pretty good idea who the original characters were in a ballad, many of the ballads were based on hearsay, legends and local folklore, and though they tell a sort of truth that people wanted to believe in they seldom contain many of the real facts. Many of the Scottish ballads were for instance based on one side of the story, mostly well distorted in that side's favour. Others were written to please the rich patrons whose forebears featured in them. This was going on even as late as Scott's time. |
|
01 Sep 15 - 05:19 AM (#3734583) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: GUEST,mpainter The year can be put to 1535 through the one version collected near Asheville, NC. The reference " gone to consecrate King Henry at Whitehall" can be documented as a historical event. |
|
01 Sep 15 - 07:52 AM (#3734606) Subject: RE: Mattie Groves - What year? From: MGM·Lion Don't know if this has been mentioned before on any other thread; but talking of the young man's name {Mattie Groves, Musgrave, Musgray &c}, Paul Carter used in the 1950s to sing what he said was a Canadian version where the young man is called The Young Leboux, which doesn't appear to be even a variant of the usual name[s]. Anyone come across that nomenclature? I forget what the lord & lady were called, but I think it was something akin to Barnard. ≈M≈ |
&id=15215.gif&seq=1&size=0){kind=link}