Do you not see those two statements as contrary, Jack?

Er - no - not really.

One is my own statement with respect of the limits of folklore to account for the origins / meaning of anything without resorting the spurious. The other is an almost-quote (as I say I can't remember who said it, nor their exact words) pointing out that the traditional provenance of any custom is only as old as the last time it was performed. In the absence of any firm historical evidence then it will always be a matter of speculation.

In any case the origin of a custom is of less importance than its performance in the here and now. On That performance alone it will be judged to be a Living Tradition, or at least a revival of one, which most of these things are anyway.

Bit like Dr Who really - you had the Real Traditional Old Dr Who, which died the death (in more ways than one), then The Revival Dr Who that reinvented it with scant respect for what went before but still lays claim to the years of the original in order to bolster its significance.