How reliable is Folk History ?

Subject: RE: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 27 May 18 - 03:32 AM

No, I am not discounting oral history, I am saying that historians have to assess this evidence and its reliability alongside other records. It certainly helps to establish the provenance if the evidence was written down at the time (e.g. Parish records).

Your earlier arguments were with Keith, who most certainly has an agenda, but Keith is an amateur, every bit a folk historian. And Keith in that argument was trying to say that all historians agreed on stuff which in the journal articles would be subject of debate. Consider what the historians say, not what Keith says they say.

But I think you are confusing history, which is the record of what actually happened, with political philosophy. People who write historical books tend to mix these, if not confuse them. They are not so mixed in journal articles, even by the same people.

So WWI was "a battle between empires" - quite evidently true. "To divide the world", there we diverge from historical fact and touch on questions of motivation, which are much harder to be definite about. And motivations for different individuals would have been different.

Subject: RE: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 27 May 18 - 03:20 AM

It seems to me that anybody that anybody who takes an aactive part in any discipline, history, music... whatever, does so because the subject interests them personally, which implies that they bring to their subjects pre-formed opinions and pre-gained knowledge
Some time ago I became involved in some heave arguments about World War One - it became as grueling as a bad day in the trnches
I came to the subject as a left-leaning humanist who ha done a great deal of serious political reading on early twentieth century political history - I believed, and still do, that the war was a battle between Empires to divide up the world.
I began to dip into serious historical works to check on some of the facts being thrown about and I found that the historians I was reading were approaching the subject in the same way - they brought to the subject their own personal philosophies, the result being that they produced unique works based on an analysis of the events filtered through their own personal biases - different conclusions - some for the war, but just as many against.
In the end, you need to examine the information to hand and make up your own mind
On this particular occasion I had the advantage of being able to throw in a half-donen tapes worth of interview we recorded from a veteran who has lied about his age and enlisted to fight in the tranches - an added batch of information that none of the historians appeared to have had access to.
Is my opinion any less valid than any of those I had read?
This argument started about the behaviour of an English Landlord who was was widely notorious for his ruthless treatment of his tenants and who was operating in a situation where he not only held the power of life and death over those under him, but also, because of his position, he was answerable to no-one
In this situation, local information, in the form of songs, local stories, family information, parish records... are virtually all we have to go on.
The two historians that have been mentioned are sharply divided; one appears to believe that here is a sound foundation for his appalling reputation, the other believes the sun shone out of his backside
So much for your unassailable historical view.
I really can't see the problem here - if you are discounting oral history as "biased", you are ignoring important evidence.
For me, that is what folk history is - evidence
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 27 May 18 - 03:05 AM

Well rich-joy, indeed lots has been written up. In the UK for instance in the copious documentation on the submissions and outcomes of the Research Excellence Framework. Sure, not everyone in any given profession is trustworthy, but the vast majority are. Your argument is depressingly similar to those used by creationists and climate change deniers.

Please re-read your post, and particularly the quote from Jim. The first word is "All". Do you still agree with Jim's quote?

Subject: RE: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: DMcG
Date: 27 May 18 - 03:05 AM


Sorry DtG, yes it is mostly what you said, but I did feel that when you wrote "dry tome in a mainstream bookshop", you were intending that phrase to be a bit pejorative. Those "dry tomes" are fundamental studies of events. and it is what happened that I want to know, not what people felt about it.

I am very late to this discussion, and I would not contradict what was said there, but it is important to remember the authors of the 'dry tome' are themselves in a specific time and place and subject to often unrecognised attitudes that influence the research.

Which is why you can take almost any historical subject - let's say the English Civil War as an example - and find that new aspects of it can be found every few years even at this distance in time. The same source documents are used, but their relative importance and interpretation changes. So while these academic treatises do give an account of events, it can never be 'the' account.


Long may it remain so!

As to folk songs in particular, I think most posters have it right, they are a view onto how some people understood events. Contemporary accounts definitely, but later songs also: a 1950's song about a 1888 event tells us how some people in the 1950's thought, but little about 1888.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,paperback
Date: 27 May 18 - 12:58 AM

All past documentation of history...

If you don't want to end up like Snowden, Richard Thieme suggests: "the only way to tell the truth is in fiction".

This may not only be true now but in the past also, (though Richard appears to be 'on' something).

Yet, the telling of the everyday life of just regular folk you really don't need to lie, just exaggerate.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: rich-joy
Date: 26 May 18 - 09:13 PM

Yes, yes, and even "by those more learned than I"!! :))
R-J

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: rich-joy
Date: 26 May 18 - 08:54 PM

Re DC at 4.31am :
"All past documentation of history came with an agenda and quite often the writing of history eually comes with their own agendas" :

"This is the kind of statement Jim which loses you support and sympathy. History isn't my subject ...... "

Sorry, but No, it isn't. I for one, agree with that statement from Jim.

Would that ALL academics, scientists, public servants et al, were worthy of the trust and respect in which you appear to hold them, David.
Sadly, events on Planet Earth in recent years, thanks to the courage of whistle-blowers and other forms of exposé etc, have often shown otherwise.....

Just MHO of course.
R-J

.... and please don't bother now asking me to supply evidence to all that. It's all out there; it's all been written up before, by those more learned than me.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 26 May 18 - 02:15 PM

David,
My 'subject' is folksong and its history, that is folksong as set out by the '54' descriptors, not the wider sense mostly used here, but obviously also includes all of the genres that overlap.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 May 18 - 05:37 AM

"I rest my case m'lud"
What case - have you actually said anything of the subject
I've said all I intend to on the elitist approach to history -
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,Some bloke
Date: 26 May 18 - 05:20 AM

I rest my case m'lud

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 26 May 18 - 04:31 AM

"All past documentation of history came with an agenda and quite often the writing of history eually comes with their own agendas"

This is the kind of statement Jim which loses you support and sympathy. History isn't my subject, Astrophysics is, and it really annoys me when ignorant people (such as creationists) accuse all astrophysicists of having an agenda. But this is what you are doing to academics in history, some of whom I know and respect.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 May 18 - 04:15 AM

Sorry
That last was addressed to our man in the shadows "some Bloke"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 May 18 - 04:12 AM

"Now I just wonder where they got that linkage from?"
And I wonder where you got yours from - it sounds like a political establishment issued document to me, and given the history under discussion, that would be heavily influenced be Senator Joe McCarthy who decided what information was or was not permissible every bit as his counterpart in th USSR
I grew up with an interest in History; my family background and my love of song took me to Ireland where I found the two went hand in hand
Ireland's history is recorded in songs made by the people who also made their history and played an active part in changing its course
Ireland's written history is full of deliberate gaps and still locked up archive, as is the case with every former subject nation
I mentioned the Easter Week Executions earlier - Britain has a 'Thirty Year Rule' on disclosure of historical information, yet a century later there is no access to the proceedings that led to those executions.
I also mentioned The Belgian Congo and the destruction of all documentation following the collapse of Emperor Leopold's Lethal Enterprises
All past documentation of history came with an agenda and quite often the writing of history eually comes with their own agendas
For instance, we have numerous contradictory histories of The Miner's Strike
To understand that historical event you have to pick your way through them all and make up your own mind - if you have a shred of fairness in you, you go and ask the miners as well.
That goes for every aspect of oral culture I have ever been involved in - I have not gone with my own agenda and imposed it on what we collected, but have attempted to record the opinions of those who were generous enough to give us their time and information, and everything they had to say is documented and on record (and freely available, where possible - difficult in Britain, where what 'ordinary people' have to say is of no great interest to our 'betters' or by our trained experts.
People like Charles Parker, Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger blasted the media wide open with eight hour-long radio programmes based on the people's voices - after the eighth, the BBC got cold feet and silenced those voices
For me - it is what they had to ay that is the essence of our history - not the often heavily agenda driven professional writings of trained historins
"Our history's got a hole in it", as the song should have said
"Now I just wonder where they got that linkage from?"
As usiual, you reduce these discussions to ill-manned and somewhat cowardly slanging
I don't know who you are, you choose to write from the safety of anonymity
Anybody interested enough can go listen to our work - it's pretty well archived and available
I don't know everything - I don't know very much; but I have spent a lot of time asking people who know far more than I do and trying to pass on what they have to say
Please stop behaving like a schoolyard bully - it really doesn't impress and it certainly doesn't help with the sharing of ideas
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 26 May 18 - 03:54 AM

What do you mean by your subject Steve? Genuine question, do you consider your subject to be music or folklore?

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch
Date: 25 May 18 - 08:51 PM

Me: Having your "roots in fact" is not the same as reliable or accurate fact
JC: Nobody has suggested it is...

Au contrair. This thread is doing it in both type I&II fashion:

Joe incorrectly accepts fiction (Steinbeck) as nonfiction.

Sandman incorrectly rejects fiction (Shakespeare) as nonfiction.

Fiction can't be accepted or rejected to the standard of nonfiction. Wrong metrics.

Fwiw: When I got paid to write it was technical - food, drug, and nuclear grade nonfiction. Manufacturer's instruction manuals at the bottom and the Code of Federal Regs. at the top of a pyramid of knowledge and every stone audited to a schedule. Continuous improvement was the norm. “Creosote dumps” harumpf -

“The phrase (grapes of wrath) also appears at the end of chapter 25 in Steinbeck's book, which describes the purposeful destruction of food to keep the price high:

    [A]nd in the eyes of the hungry there is a growing wrath. In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.” ['Grapes' wiki]

Now I just wonder where they got that linkage from?

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 25 May 18 - 04:19 PM

I frequently co-operate and discourse with academics, and indeed supply some of them with specialist information, having spent a long time studying the minutiae of the subject. There are several points that might be relevant here. Just as there are relatively isolated scholars beavering away for decades, who occasionally get things wrong, there are academics in quite high places who do so as well.


We also need to take into account that our subject is very understudied and undervalued for various reasons, and academics and scholars in the subject are indeed few and far between, particularly in the UK. In fact I would go as far as to say the UK is arguably the poorest represented country in the First World in our subject.


Peer review is indeed very valuable, when it works, particularly in subjects that are heavily studied. However internal politics in our institutions often come into play, for instance, where a leading professor presents the fruits of some theorising, and lesser mortals have to be careful what they criticise.


I don't wish to name any names, but several years ago a professor wrote a book on our subject that contained some ground-breaking assertions. At first the book received rave reviews, mainly because he was highly respected in his own faculty and in the genre in general. It was a few years later that other academics began to pull his theses to pieces and showed how inaccurate they were.


Independent scholars have their own agendas (Bert Lloyd?), but so do academics.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 25 May 18 - 03:16 PM

I would not comment on making field recordings or dismiss those who made these recordings as operating with an agenda. So Jim, I suggest you do not do the same to academics.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,Some bloke
Date: 25 May 18 - 02:59 PM

As ever, an interesting topic but because Jim thinks nobody knows as much as he does, every view other than his is ridiculed.

Some excellent contributions on this thread. Just try to ignore the silly irrelevant waffle from Prof Carroll trying to put you down.

A pity because his knowledge is fairly good, just his lack of appreciation for the knowledge of others that's off-putting

Sigh

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 May 18 - 02:42 PM

"If not I suggest that you are in no position to comment on peer review."
How bleedin' elitist is that!!!
Go and find one of your desk-jockeys who has spent thirty to forty years in the field interviewing the people who lived in the areas where these events took place and who absorbed the stories from their forebears
A large number of these recordings are now part of the British Library Collection and in the next few months will be housed at Limerick University for future generations to be 'misinformed'
Academic snobbery really does get up my nose
I've spent best part of a lifetime pursuing this information because I enjoy doing so - not because somebody pays me to do it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 25 May 18 - 02:02 PM

Have you ever held an academic position Jim? If not I suggest that you are in no position to comment on peer review.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 May 18 - 04:44 AM

"Having your "roots in fact" is not the same as reliable or accurate fact"
Nobody has suggested it is - as I said, itdepends on the research put into the subject
Attempting to separate the two is insane
David "peers" are as likely to have their own agendas when judging the works of others as are those who made songs
I take it that we're finished with the nonsense of made matches being "uncorroborated"
All this is exr=temely unhelpful and unproductive
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch
Date: 25 May 18 - 04:37 AM

Me: Fiction is, by choice and by design, the opposite of fact.

Jim Carrol: Utter nonsense. The best of fiction has its roots in fact.


Fiction is the antonym of fact in every standard reference I own. You?

Having your "roots in fact" is not the same as reliable or accurate fact. It just means the parts not rooted in fact are fiction and until somebody sorts fact from fiction the whole of it is adulterated. It's an unknown. Maybe it is, maybe it ain't.

The fiction process does not produce nonfiction and it is the process that makes the product reliable. The fiction author has few obligations. The fiction process does not require reliability or accuracy. It's optional, sentence by sentence.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 25 May 18 - 03:55 AM

And example of where historians do disagree because of the varied reliability of the contemporary sources is the Battle of Brunanburh. There is general agreement on who the protagonists were, and that there was great slaughter, and that in some sense Aethelstan "won". But what there is no agreement on is the site of the battle, and this is because the main documentary source, the Anglo-Saxon chronicle, is silent on the issue. Now there will be articles in scholarly journals from historians proposing, providing evidence for and against, various sites. And that evidence will be weighed up, but none of those historians will say that they have the definite answer. This is scholarly debate, not disagreement, it is part of the process by which facts are established, and in this case the prime fact has not yet been established.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 25 May 18 - 03:46 AM

"Neither can many historians"

I think that depends upon where they are writing, and who for. If they are writing a scholarly article in a peer reviewed journal, they will stick to verifiable facts, here there is less disagreement, although possibly still some as there will be differences as they will afford different weight to different sources. If they are writing a book they they are not subject to such rigorous peer review, and they will overlay the facts with their interpretation, which may have some bias. This is where you get the statement that historians disagree with issues such as who won a particular war, or caused it, which is a meaningless proposition anyway. The facts are that the war happened and that certain numbers of people were killed and that territory was gained or lost. If they are writing in a newspaper, and historians do do this although most articles on history in newspapers are written by journalists, then the bias they overlay may be slanted towards the editorial stance of the particular newspaper.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 May 18 - 03:44 AM

"None of this is corroborated, and the first sentence can't be. "
Of course it is corroborated
Arranged marriages for financial convenience were a fact of life in rural Ireland were common occurrences up to comparatively recently - we have met a number of people who were one half of "made matches"
The practice generated generations of 'matchmakers' who were recognised as craftsmen in bringing couples together - the now 160 year old Lisdoonvarna matchmaking festival commemorates a fair held annually where local farmers would come in annually to look for a wife
The Travelling Community carried on the practice of matchmaking at least up tho the sixties, when they moved wholesale into urban areas - and even beyond that
Sorry - I didn't realise I was dealing with such a greenhorn in Irish affairs - will try to bear it in mind
The practice of trading off eligible daughters in order to expand your land holdings has been a part of the oral tradition at least as far back as 'Tiftie's Annie'
As far as the factual history of the practice - we have our own dear Royal family as a shining example of marriage for empowerment
Shakespeare is probably the worst example here - he never attempted to depict history as it was, but used it as a backdrop to examine the human condition - brilliantly - his historical accuracy is as naff as it comes
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 25 May 18 - 02:55 AM

Shakespeare is in fact a very good example, he was a playwright, not a historian of any kind. But he did draw on the work of historians including Raphael Hollinshead. Hollinshead's work in some places offended the Privy Council who removed some places, but Hollinshead's work still exists in its entirety. Shakespeare did exactly what the songwriters did, which is to take history, embelish it, and superimpose a bias which is either theirs or the bias of those who pay them. Shakespeare's history is folk history.

Modern historians would not dream of taking Shakespeare into account without understanding this, and looking for corroboration of anything they might find. So it is with folk songs.

Jim says of a song he posted:

"This song quite possibly depicts an actual happening; if it does, the characters are unknown.
What it does do is describe a common occurrence in Irish rural life - and far beyond"

None of this is corroborated, and the first sentence can't be. The second might be, but I am not aware of documentary sources which would provide such corroboration.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 May 18 - 02:45 AM

"No. Fact and fiction have opposite meanings."
No - they can be inter-related
Where do we go from here ?
"After all, tomorrow’s newspapers can’t agree what happened today."
Neither can many historians - go read up WW1, or more recently, The Vietnam War as an example
Or try to get some of our historians to agree on the behaviour of some of our past Royals - I'll go get the bucket, sponge and towel
History is as much prone to personal viewpoint as is oral literature
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,Some bloke
Date: 25 May 18 - 02:20 AM

No. Fact and fiction have opposite meanings. Basing your fiction on facts is however commonplace, most political propaganda for instance. Slip in a few facts and distort them gives credibility to lies.

Songs, whether portrayed as written or after a couple of centuries of edit, mishearing and adapting will of course be a combination of fact and fiction. Historians may try to separate the two out. Whether that adds or subtracts from the song is a moot point.

After all, tomorrow’s newspapers can’t agree what happened today.

Subject: Lyr Add: THAT COLD MAN BY NIGHT (Martin Long)
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 25 May 18 - 02:11 AM

"Fiction is, by choice and by design, the opposite of fact. "
Utter nonsense
The best of fiction has its roots in fact - Steinbeck, Dickens, Mrs Gaskell, Wilkie Collins, Sebastian Faulks, Upton Sinclair, Tolstoy, Jaroslav Hasek..... many, many more... used fictional characters to depict real fife situations.
How well or accurately they did it depended on how much background research went into their work
Sinclair's 'The Jungle' was so accurate in its description of the Chicago meat-packing trade that it led to a total reform of the industry.

This song quite possibly depicts an actual happening; if it does, the characters are unknown
What it does do is describe a common occurrence in Irish rural life - and far beyond
Scotland has many similar songs
Jim Carroll

THAT COLD MAN BY NIGHT.   Martin Long, Tooreen, Inagh, Recorded July 1975 at Willie Clancy Summer School
The practice of young women being pressurised or even forced into arranged marriages of convenience to older men has inspired many songs throughout these islands; sometimes depicting the tragedy or resigned bitterness of the situation the woman finds herself in, but occasionally, as with this one, open defiance, with a touch of humour.
This appears to be a locally-made song; we have been unable to find another example of it outside Clare.
Particularly interesting is the description of the visit to the matchmaker (the “learned man”) and the celebratory ceremony to seal the ‘made match’.

I am a handsome comely maid; my age is scarce eighteen,
I am the only daughter of a farmer near Crusheen,
‘Tis married I intend to be before its winning daylight,
Oh, my father wants me to get wed to a cold man by night.

This man being old, as I am told, his years are sixty-four,
I really mean to slight him, for he being wed before,
His common shoes are always loose, and his clothes don’t fit him right,
Oh I don’t intend the wife to be of that cold man by night.

The very next day without delay they all rode into town,
To a learned man they quickly ran the contract to pin down;
Into an inn they did call in to whet their whistles nigh,
In hope that I would live and die with that cold man by night.

My father came, I did him blame and thus to him did say,
“Oh father dear, you acted queer in what you done today,
In the Shannon deep I’ll go and sleep, before the mornings light,
Before I’ll agree the wife to be of that cold man by night”.

“Oh daughter dear, don’t say no more, or be a foolish lass,
For he has a house and four good cows, and a sporting fine black ass,
He has a handsome feather bed where ye may rest by night,
So change your life and be the wife of that cold man by night”.

“Oh father dear, don’t say no more, for I’ll tell you the reason why,
Before I’ll agree the wife to be, I’d first lay down and die,
In the Shannon deep I’ll go and sleep before the mornings light,
Before I’ll consent to be content with that cold man by night.

My match is broke, without a joke, I’ll marry if I can,
Before Sherofe* is over I’ll have a nice young man,
That will take me in his arms in a cold and frosty night,
And some other dame might do the same with that cold man by night.

*Sherofe Period between winter and the time when the work on the farm begins in earnest - It was reckoned that if a man hadn’t found a wife by the end of that time he would not do so for the rest of the year.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,Phil d'Conch
Date: 25 May 18 - 12:39 AM

Most of what I'm reading confuses reliability with accuracy. They're not the same things.

Fiction is, by choice and by design, the opposite of fact. Steinbeck, Shakespeare et al are works of fiction. If there is a history, it's adulterated.

It's not reliable until the accurate bits are distilled & validated to a degree of certainty.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,paperback
Date: 24 May 18 - 10:04 PM

sandman, didn't you read the disclaimer at the end of the movie? Based on a true story

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: The Sandman
Date: 24 May 18 - 04:56 PM

me being silly, hilarious. history is bunk both the official and folk history , however of the two i would give more crednce to folk history rather than the official history ,which is written by the lackeys of the establishment, a prime example is shakespreares version of richard the third, complete cow towing to the tudor dynasty, henry 7[who defeated richard,and his descendants henry 8,elizabeth 1, which defeated richard the third, extremely unreliable history, absolute unreliable bunk

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 May 18 - 03:21 PM

"Courts define murder, not me or you. "
Not in the case of national liberation wars when the courts are appointed by the people you are fighting they don't
Ireland as a colony was in dispute with the British empire constantly - in the particular period we are speaking about land was the issue - this eventually developed into a war of independence
Every nation has the right to oppose those who acts unjustly
Nobody refers to The Isreali, or Indian, or Afican fights for national Liberation as "murders"
Britain was regarded as an oppressor, Leitrim represented that oppression perfectly and needed to be opposed
What do you suggest - take him to court.
"If that point of view is tainted by partiality, that evidence is likewise tainted."
You would rather take the "untainted" evidence of who exactly?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 24 May 18 - 02:48 PM

Courts define murder, not me or you.

"The point about song and lore is that it provides information on the subject from a point of view not usually taken into consideration, and in doing so, it becomes evidence"

If that point of view is tainted by partiality, that evidence is likewise tainted.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 May 18 - 12:45 PM

"but they do not provide justification (for instance of murder)."
I think this hits the nub of the whole argument
How do you define "murder" - national liberation struggle, a fight against injustice and oppression - war maybe
Does the taking of life have to be blessed by some higher authority before is ceases to be murder and becomes acceptable - when does a murderer become a national hero or a fighter for justice?
As far as the accuracy of the songs, John is quite right (as he usually is), as was Bert all those years ago
The point about song and lore is that it provides information on the subject from a point of view not usually taken into consideration, and in doing so, it becomes evidence
In the absence of other evidence, once it is examined for flaws, it becomes a feasible account of an event or situation, particularly when it was made contemporary to events described.
Jim Caarroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 24 May 18 - 12:25 PM

John Moulden:

"The point I would make, as my last word, was provided by Bert Lloyd, of flawed and immortal memory: 'Folk songs do not tell us what happened; they tell what people believed happened' - however, Bert did not say as I think obvious: It is what people believe that tempers their actions. As such Folk History is intensely important in establishing some elements of 'Why?' events unfolded, as distinct from 'What' 'actually' happened."

Well what actually happened is absolutely crucial. Folk songs may provide evidence of motivation, but they do not provide justification (for instance of murder).

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 24 May 18 - 12:23 PM

""he was preoccupied with “social life, travel and the opposite sex”"


Doesn't exactly mark him out amongst young men of any social class.

"and left a trail of lovers and mistresses across the continent"

Which marks him out as someone with the resources to do so across the continent rather than closer to home.

And he bequeathed his women servants £20. Seems more likely to be out of respect rather than penance.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: John Moulden
Date: 24 May 18 - 11:35 AM

Folk History is the same as any other history: subject to the deficiencies and prejudice of the sources and to the deficiencies and prejudices of the inquirer.

I pointed above towards elements of my thesis (which can be freely downloaded) and found almost all of what I said was ignored. However, the intention was to indicate a range of inquiries I, and others, had conducted into the 'relative truth' of a number, or range of songs about verifiable events. In doing so I suggested a series of methods whereby a degree of reliability could be established. These might have helped avoid some of the more bitter exchanges herein: - which in any case serve no purpose beyond the tempering of opinion.

The point I would make, as my last word, was provided by Bert Lloyd, of flawed and immortal memory: 'Folk songs do not tell us what happened; they tell what people believed happened' - however, Bert did not say as I think obvious: It is what people believe that tempers their actions. As such Folk History is intensely important in establishing some elements of 'Why?' events unfolded, as distinct from 'What' 'actually' happened.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 May 18 - 09:03 AM

If you quote further you will ffind that he also comments on the fact that all the women servants of the household received financial gifts on his death whereas none of the men did, implying that there might be substance to the rumours
Bit selective!!
It has already been made clear that there is no solid evidence so harping on it is meaningless
The fact that the writers included him on an article regarding the sexual conduct of the landed gentry in Ireland implicates him with the rest of them - if the writers believed he was innocent they would have said so.
It is highly likely that, given his established sexual record , that he "he was preoccupied with “social life, travel and the opposite sex” and left a trail of lovers and mistresses across the continent", makes the accusations even more likely.
He was a man who liked sex, who had an invalid wife, was hated by his neighbors and fellow landlords and spent long periods living in isolated rural areas
He was brutal to his servants (some of them actually colluded in his murder by re-setting the house clocks).
Why is is so difficult to beliebe this upper-class thug didn't help himself to the daughterrrs of his tenants, using eviction as a bargaining chip ?
This fits in perfectly with the story of the girl who drowned herself rather than run the risk of becoming his servant
If you read up on the behavior of any of the landlords in this period, there is very little actual evidence of how any of them behaved
Around here, with the locals place lendlords in two categories - good one and bad ones - and anybody you ask will tell you excatly why they are remembered as they are
Jim Caarroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 24 May 18 - 08:42 AM

Ok, Jim, its there on page 15, I had not read this far as up to then it was all irrelevant. It says, as you have quoted already:

"Leitrim’s batchelorhood undoubtedly lent itself to imputation of lasciviousness
on his part. Otherwise it appears that there was nothing in particular in his diaries to suggest this, nor indeed is he accused of it in the reports of police and of poor law inspectors who accuse him of a host of other malpractices. It may be that the imputation of lasciviousness to him is primarily a way of denigrating him, of underlining and illustrating his oppressive character in the minds of many and of lending some justification for his assassination .... "

So this source, along with all other historical sources, finds no evidence for the accusation which you levelled against Lord Leitrim in another thread and all those posts ago.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 24 May 18 - 06:18 AM

You have just been given a statement about Leitrim from a document I posted which you dismissed as only dealing with events up to the 18840s
"Because that refers to behaviours in the 1840s, Leitrim's murder was in 1878.""
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 24 May 18 - 03:16 AM

No idea what you are talking about now, Jim. I have read everything you have posted. I have followed your links at least far enough to ascertain whether they are relevant or not.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,Greg F.
Date: 23 May 18 - 09:16 PM

to quote Henry Ford history is bunk

As if he was even remotely qualified -with an eighth grade education-to make such a statement.

He sounds kinda like Trump, no?

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 May 18 - 07:09 PM

Because that refers to behaviours in the 1840s, Leitrim's murder was in 1878."
"Leitrim’s batchelorhood undoubtedly lent itself to imputation of lasciviousness on his part. Otherwise it appears that there was nothing in particular in his diaries to suggest this, nor indeed is he accused of it in the reports of police and of poor law inspectors who accuse him of a host of other malpractices. It may be that the imputation of Because that refers to behaviours in the 1840s, Leitrim's murder was in 1878.asciviousness to him is primarily a way of denigrating him, of underlining and illustrating his oppressive character in the minds of many and of lending some justification for his assassination .... There may be some significance in the fact that in his will Leitrim bequeathed £20 to
each of his female se rvants but made no similar bequest to his male servants"

Whoops, I wonder how that got there - that is a direct quote regarding the character of Lord Leitrim from the document - please have the decency to read what I put up.
It wouldn't matter anyway
The description of predatory immorality by the rich and powerful didn't stop suddenly - as I pointed out, it continues to the present day..... Weinstock, Savile, et al
You really should have quit when you wereonly as far back as you were a few postings ago
Jim Caaarroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: GUEST,paperback
Date: 23 May 18 - 04:45 PM

"Henry Ford history is bunk, Ford was talking about offical history written by [Jewish] academics."

I may be assuming the worst, as people do, but maybe not.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 23 May 18 - 04:42 PM

Dick you are being silly now. Academic historians use all available sources, place the highest emphasis on material which is corroborated by several sources. I have no idea what you mean by "official history", but academics in any subject do not bow to pressure from anyone to publish conclusions which are contrary to the evidence from their sources, whatever those sources are.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: The Sandman
Date: 23 May 18 - 04:26 PM

"Whether it can be relied upon as a description of that event is very doubtful, and can probably only be known if the details can be confirmed from other sources." so official history written by academic historians is no more reliable than folk history, to quote Henry Ford history is bunk, Ford was tal;king about offical history written by academics.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 23 May 18 - 03:44 PM

"You have yet to comment on the document you were linked to which outlined the sexual behavior of our betters at the height of their powers"

Because that refers to behaviours in the 1840s, Leitrim's murder was in 1878.

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 23 May 18 - 03:18 PM

"However, the specific accusation of droit de seigneur, none of the three historians seem to support"
Slevin actually says that there is no evidence to support it as does Liam Nolan - both thought it credible enough to include in their histories without dismissing it out of hand
Nolan makes the poin that there was a large body of information to hand that he did not use due to his being unable to confirm it
Malclolmson dismisses all criticism of Leitim out of hand
As for your novelist, she deals only with the murders - can't find a comment from her one way or the other
Several things about this; the victims would hardly go about shouting what had happened to them at a time when rape victims wre considered as guilty as their rapists, if not moreso
One victim was said to hev drowned herself to avoid the shame
The families would not make too much of a fuss for fear of eviction
The auhorities would have bent over backwards to cover such events up to save embarrasing his ludship - Irland was a powder keg of revolt and land wars without adding something like this to the already toxic atmosphere.
Despite all this, a century and a half later these accusations have remained as fresh as they were on the day they were made
You have yet to comment on the document you were linked to which outlined the sexual behavior of our betters at the height of their powers
I would say I wonder why but I wouldn't be telling the truth
"Haven't you been paying attention Jim?"
I sure have - as old as I am my sense of smell is as good as it ever was Teribus
Your style of evasion and your cap-doffing sycophancy would have giben you away across the length of a football field
You've just given yourself away by identifying yourself with something Baccy wrote anyway
None so dim.... as they should have said
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Lyr Add: How reliable is Folk History ?
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 23 May 18 - 02:19 PM

"Leitrim was generally hated - by his tenants, by his fellow landlords and his fellow peers"

Yes, Slevin says that and all of the historians seem to agree on that. However, the specific accusation of droit de seigneur, none of the three historians seem to support. And that is the accusation that you claimed that a song provided support for.

Pursuing someone to bankruptcy might also provide a reason for someone to hate him.