whoa, sorry I am coming so late to this thread...as someone who has performed in no fewer than four pagan bands, and who does a lot of wrting on pagan topics, I might have something valuable to offer (than again maybe not!!!)...
first off, MudPuppy, a book you should locate is "Earth Air Fire Water" by two authors named Skelton and Blackwood; their book is purely about your very topic: pagan imagery and origins of a great many traditional songs and poems, mostly divided into categories of subject matter (magic, nature worship, sexuality, etc.) It may be out of print, in which case I might be persuaded to make photocopies from my copy for you...
As usual these pagan threads have been very interesting...and as usual Okie/T in Oklahoma has been trying desperately to provide us with all the answers. Please, no offense intended, but lighten up a bit! You are obviously well-read on the subject but so are many of us and, while some of us admit there are many differing views and approaches to these topics, you appear to be the only one saying "DON'T read this or that book" or "THIS is the WAY IT IS, no other interpretation possible." This is simply not the way to go about addressing these topics when so much of what we "know" is mere conjecture and poetic product anyway!!!
You say Gardner's books should be avoided, then a few posts later you say Wicca may be a good resource for Helen's research...huh???
Since Helen's research interests lie squarely in the realm of folklore and interpretation of that folklore and how folk magic ways are related to modern pagan practice (and they ARE related, even though, as you correctly point out, Wicca was invented piecemeal by Gardner in the 40s; but he cobbled it together from lots of stuff that had been around for along time and Hutton has demonstrated quite clearly the link between agrarian rituals and beliefes and modern pagan practices), then why on earth should she be told to avoid the work of Graves, Frazer, Campbell, Murray and other authors whose specialty is examining folklore??? I think dismissing these authors and their books, who have been part of the "canon" on these subjects for so very long, is pure folly. At the very least we must acknowledge their influence, even if some of their theories or analyses have been discredited or attacked by those who came later.
I guess I am of the school of thought that thinks no source by any serious scholar (of folklore, history, archeology or magic) should be discounted without having read it first...I mean, Hutton's peers in academia think he is a bit of a nutter for being a practicing pagan, do they not??? And that naturally colors their reception of his work which most of us would agree is of very high quality.
sorry if this post sounds too righteous but there is way too much "I know something you don't know" in the pagan think tanks these days and, since we all start from a place of not knowing anything, we must not forget that each day brings new opportunities to learn...
blessings at Beltaine,
Peg/Albion