, 1889-04-04
DECAY OF TRADITION.
The Invention OF Writing Seems to Fave
Put An End to Folk LORI.

The Invention OF Writing Seems to Fave
Put An End to Folk Lore.
II is said that the invention of writ,
ing injured the power of memory, and
years ago, before the schoolmaster
WINS abroad as he is nowadays, it was
possible TO meet with many instances
of strong memorizing capacity among
persons who could neither read nor
write. Complicated accounts could
be kept by the aid of a tally" only,
and the memory of many n small far
mer or petty rural shop keeper was his
only ledger and order book. It's GER
tain that since the art of writing has
become an almost universal accom-
plishment the faculty of memory,
being less needed. is less cultivated.
Long after the invention of letters our
forefathers rested much upon oral ira
dition. Antiquarians assert that one
OF the ancient races of Italy possessed
nc written language, and even where
written characters were in use oral
tradition formed an important supple
men to them. Folk lore tales and
ballads have been handed down from
lip to lip for centuries with curious
fidelity.
When oral tradition was recognized
rs n vehicle for actual information
more care was taken regarding its ac-
curacy than would be the case in
these days. The old r~eciters je~alously
guarded II time honored form of words.
even in their prose narratives. Bre-
ton peasants, notably those who pos
scss n talent as raconteurs, will re
peat n legend or n story with crupu-
lous fidelity to the established form in
which flanr~ hoe r1,-u... III A.. -,
cidents related, and will check n tray
eler who attempts to deviate from the
orthodox version with may, mon
sieur, the story should begin thus" re
pcating the regular form of the tale.
The eastern story teller deviatcs little
IN his time honored recitals of tales of
love, adventure and magic; we recog-
nize all our old friends from the
Arabian Nights if we halt to listen
10 n professional raconteur in the
streets of any Oriental town. In the
days Of ''war against prescribed books"
faithful memories were often utilized
10 preserve prohibited works from OBJ
livion. During the persecution of
the Waldenses, in the Thirteenth cen
fury, when their version of the Script
ures was prohibited and destroyed
wherever found, their ministers com
mittcd whole books of the sacred vol
ume TO memory, and repeated chap
tiers at their religious meetings. 1t
would be tedious to onumerate the
many instances in which tradition
has preserved what written histories
We're forbidden to chronicle.
On the whole, oral traditions are
strangely accurate; strangely, when
we consider how facts are frequently
altered and distorted when occur
rences arc related by different story
~tcllers. The child's game of Russian
scandal" Gn which n secret whispered
to n person and repeated to n circle
of others, is usually altered out of rec,
ognition when repeated aloud by the
last hearer) is played every day in
society. And yet local tradition will
faithfully chronicle the site of n battle,
the burial place of n hero, the date of
n siege, and sometimes, after genera
tons of historians and a~ntiquarians
have scotfcd Mt the unreliable local
legend, n later investigation will dis
w that the despised traditional
story was the true ono after all. Cen
turtles of repetition may have slightly
added TO the incidents or distorted
some of the facts, but the main tale is
strictly exact. The reputcd treasure
trovc' may prove but n triiling hoard,
the battlefield smaller in extent, the
graves of the heroes less numerous;
but in each case local tradition is true
regarding the facts that occurred and
the localities where they took place.
Traditions may at least claim to be
n accurate as written history though
this, perhaps, is faint praise. Oral
tradition is usually free from CON
scious party bias. The repeatcrs of
traditional lore carry on the tale rs
they heard it; but how many an elo-
qucnt historian appears TO assume q
brief for one side or another in every
party contest, and to write his history
with n view, not of calculating facts,
but OF representing certain historical
characters rs angels or the reverse.
Such writers re always the pleasant
est to read an impartial historian
Is sadly dull, as n rule; but when q
biased writer plays the part of Clio,
tradition may often prove the safer
guido of the two. Folk lore, if not
an altogether reliable guide, is seldom
totally ut fault in its statement of
facts, and tradition has frequently
kept alive memories which. might
otherwise have persisted altogether.
Books may be destroyed, and history
willfully garbled, but it is less easy to
extinguish local traditions .-Man-