Not 'spouting' [I suspect you mean], Mike. Merely draw attention to one speculation. Still find it an interesting postulation; tho one to be taken, as all such potential Pseuds Corner candidates if not careful, with a good grain of salt.   Bob a fine scholar of facts and influences to be sure; but not too sure of him as anthropological theorist. The fact that a narrative has a demonstrable surface interpretation with a long derivative pedigree does not preclude underlying symbolisms and superstitous 'survivals'-- within which there may be room for more than one 'bugaboo'; and more than one interpretation. I must say that, if any nonsense is being spouted, the assertion that, because Bob Thomson demonstrated a certain line of narrative development, any other factors attributed to the legend must be ipso facto precluded and dismissed as self-evident rubbish would perhaps rank pretty high?

Best as ever

~Michael~