Note 1 — “Edmundo.” (continued 2)

Benfey (in Ausland, 1858 : 969, 995, 1017, 1038, 1067) has made a somewhat exhaustive study of the Märchen, which he calls “Das Märchen von den Menschen mit den wunderbaren Eigenschaften.” As a matter of fact, he examines particularly the stories of our type II (see above), to which he connects the folk-tales of our types III and IV as a later popular development. As has been said in the notes to No. 11 Benfey thinks that the “Skilful Companions” cycle is a droll or comic offshoot of this much older group. Our type I he does not discuss at all, possibly thinking that it is not a part of the “Rival Brothers” cycle. It strikes me, however, as being a part fully as much as is the “Skilful Companions” cycle, which is perhaps more nearly related to the “Bride Wager” group than to the “Rival Brothers.” Professor G. L. Kittredge, in his “Arthur and Gorlagon” (Harvard Studies and Notes in Philology and Literature, No. 8), 226, has likewise failed to differentiate clearly the two cycles, and his outline of the “Skilful Companions” is that of our type II of the “Rival Brothers.” I am far from wishing to quarrel over nomenclature,—possibly “Rival Brothers” is no better name for the group of tales under discussion than is “Skilful Companions,”—but, as G. H. Gerould has remarked (“The Grateful Dead,” Folk-Lore Society, 1907 : 126, note 3), Kittredge’s analysis would not hold for all variants, even when uncompounded. However, Mr. Gerould does not attempt to explain the cause of the confusion, nor was he called upon to do so in his study of an entirely distinct cycle. Consequently, as no one else has yet done so, for the sake of clearness, I propose a division of the large family of sagas and folk-tales dealing with men endowed with extraordinary powers1 into at least two cycles, – the “Rival Brothers” and the “Skilful Companions” (see No. 11). The former of these, which is the group discussed here, I subdivide, as has already been indicated, into four types. Of intermixtures of these types with other cycles we shall not concern ourselves here, though they have been many.2 We now turn to an examination of the four types.3