Hi, Steve-- thanks!

I know about Villiers, but I'm wondering what makes these particular references (in 1949, following the myth-making period and rather late to be memories of eye-witness stuff) distinguishable from other data. For example: Does Villiers provide good assurance that they are first-hand observations? Are they music or verbal texts that appear to be unique? Is Villiers making a commentary that provides quality evidence of the history/genre itself, or does it tell us more about Villiers and his time?