Greg: You may be right, but I can't really tell what it is you are saying. I think the objection to the "plague" theory is not that it is new, but that there is no evidence to support it. No one has yet pointed to such evidence. It sure does sound like an urban legend. That is, it seems to tell one more about the people who propound it than about the subjet nursery rhyme. Like Malcom, I see no particular advantage in preserving urban legends.

1. Do I misunderstand you? Are you saying the "plague" theory is "intriguing"? If so, why?
2. Am I wrong?
3. If the answer to (2) is other than unconditional negagive, why?