The following originally formed part of a discussion on a particular seasonal tradition; but as that post was longer than usual; and the topic will surely arise again; I’ve extracted this to post separately here.
Given the frequently-localised forms of many traditions, it can’t be assumed that the customs mentioned in works from regions outside the subject area (specifically, within and around and the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site: see Project Study Areas), and periods (the Georgian and early Victorian eras), are necessarily relevant to our studies.
However, it can be useful to bare such sources in mind in considering shared traditions, and making comparisons. Whether similar traditions developed simultaneously, or at different times; or spread from other regions to the Midlands, is often at present impossible to tell; but this question will be taken into consideration when examining subjects in detail.
A related issue is the question of exactly when customs developed and transformed. Magical practices, based on a recognisable system of beliefs (albeit often sufficiently flexible to be transferred across different places), seem to frequently devolve over time to more amorphous traditions involving vague notions of good and bad ‘luck’ – as will be seen .
For instance (to take one tradition that I’m looking at, and will write more about in the future), the 19th century custom of depositing pins within springs to appease associated water spirits (perceived locally variously as ‘fairies’ or freshwater ‘mermaids’) may well transform over the following century to the practice of throwing coins within such features for ‘good luck’.
The development of tourism during and after the 1800s; and publication of associated inexpensive guides, and popular, frequently ‘ahistorical’, folklore collections (some by authors who’ve not questioned origin, explored heterogeneity, or considered mutability over time – consequently often jumping to specious conclusions regarding applicability and meaning); seem to have significantly altered how customs were and are understood during and after the 20th century.
This has tended to ‘fix’ many traditions (sometimes inaccurately-conceived) to one particular point in time – as recorded in print, or other mass media; and led to the projection of local customs onto communities elsewhere.
The process can sometimes be seen whereby customs published in late 19th – mid-20th century regional collections have been adopted at some point in the recent past by communities outside those from which they were collected, on the erroneous assumption that such practices represent ‘ancient’, and since ‘lost’, homogenous, traditions.
While many customs have historically spread through various mechanisms of exchange (such as trade, migration, warfare, marriage, etc.), the speed of transmission today (especially given the reach of online information) is liable to give rise to false impressions regarding meaningful culture in the past.
We consequently must be cautious before assuming the widespread adoption in the past of traditions encountered within popular works covering counties – especially bearing in mind that boundaries have often changed over time; but also recognising that the county (essentially an administrative unit) may have been largely irrelevant to many (or most).
However, providing these caveats are acknowledged when interpreting the past, creating new traditions in the modern day, by adopting and ‘reviving’ ostensibly ‘ancient’ regional customs, might be considered as another part of the story of their development.
Where this is achieved with the intention of bringing people together to in an inclusionary way (rather than restricting traditions to certain groups and excluding ‘others’ – for instance, according to ‘birth right’), such shared social interactions can become positive experiences that extend beyond local communities.