“A Permanent and Even European Reputation”: The Lost Work of the Reverend Walter Gregor

Vincent Thomas Sternberg's The Dialect and Folk-Lore of Northamptonshire appeared in March 1851 and was the first book to make use of W. J. Thoms' coinage of folklore (dating from 1846) in its title. It was sufficiently successful a publication to call for a second edition that same year, although with the title changed to The Dialect and Folk-Lore of Northamptonshire with Warwickshire Legends and Traditions. The content, however, remains the same. This second edition has hitherto not been noticed by bibliographers of English folklore and copies are scarce; for instance, COPAC records just a single copy of this book at the University of Liverpool.     

A. L. Lloyd and Reynardine: authenticity and authorship in the afterlife of a British broadside ballad

This paper presents new evidence concerning the broadside ballad “Reynardine,” which became popular in the British folksong revival movement of the 1960s and 1970s. It argues that the revival versions of this ballad were not products of the folk tradition, but rather descendants of a text authored by A. L. Lloyd, who was both a singer and a folksong scholar. The paper goes on to suggest reasons why Lloyd might have authored the ballad, and reasons why he might have concealed that authorship, placing its evidence and observations in the context of folkloristic concerns about authenticity and authorship, folklore and fakelore.     

Difference

Speaking in particular of Oceanic societies, my intention is to reverse the gestalt of Le totemisme aujourd'hui to foreground the role of difference as a fundamental condition of the possibility of society – difference between as well as within societies. I take the point that difference is not just an historical circumstance but that it is indeed a positive value. Accordingly, differentiation is not so much a natural process as it is a cultural intention.     

The Pendulum of Congressional Power: Agenda Change,Partisanship and the Demise of the Post-World War II Foreign Policy Consensus

Many scholars contend that Congress rarely matters in the realm of foreign policy. The source of this collective impotence is often explained by the weaknesses in congressional institutions vis-a-vis the president, as well as a general inability to respond effectively to a dynamic international political environment. We contend that the debate over congressional activism has not adequately addressed the role of agenda change. We analyze all roll call votes in the House of Representatives relating to the international affairs agenda between 1953 and 1998. We find that presidents have become significantly more likely to stake out positions on economic and trade issues as compared to other international issues. We also observe that presidential positions in the realm of foreign policy are increasingly characterized by interparty and interinstitutional conflict. While this increased conflict has dramatically decreased the president's ability to successfully pass executive priorities in foreign affairs more generally, presidential success on economic and trade issues has witnessed a significantly greater decline. We infer from these results that changes to the foreign policy issue agenda represent one important factor that has affected not only the incentives for political parties to participate actively, but also the willingness of Congress to challenge the president in the foreign policy debate.Asked one day whether it was true that the navy yard in his district was too small to accommodate the latest battleships. Henry Stimson (chair of the House Naval Affairs Committee early in the century) replied, 'That is true, and that is the reason I have always been in favor of small ships.'1Carriers have been, are and will be for the foreseeable future an absolutely essential part of our deterrence force…2John Warner, senator from Virginia, home state of Newport News Shipbuilding     

The Eisenhower Administration: Bridge to the Institutionalized Legislative Presidency

Eisenhower's contributions to the modern presidency are primarily institutional and to some extent, stylistic: his reliance on the professionalism of civil servants in the Bureau of the Budget, his continuation of the annual programming process as well as the procedures for coordinating the executive branch's legislative role, his creation of a White House office to represent him on Capitol Hill, and his respect for Congress as a legislative body. What Eisenhower did not do is equally significant: he did not reject the model of an activist presidency, reverse the New and Fair Deal policies of his Democratic predecessors, or pursue his centrist agenda in a blatantly partisan manner. The Eisenhower experience demonstrates that incivility, inhumanity, and inanity are not inevitable consequences of divided government.     

Executive Publicity and Congressional Resistance, 1905-1913: Congress and the Roosevelt Administration's PR Men

Theodore Roosevelt circumvented Congress and expanded presidential power at the beginning of the 20th century, in part, by using the press to establish executive leadership of public opinion. This article describes how Roosevelt and his chief forester, Gifford Pinchot, launched a crusade in the press for Progressive conservation despite the opposition of congressmen who tried to block the use of publicists by executive agencies. Although Congress forbade the hiring of "publicity experts" in 1913, they were already common in executive agencies.     

Milestones and Stumbling Blocks,Continued

This commentary is based on a banquet address I presented at the 1989 Pioneer America Society conference. It looks back over the 15 years since hearing an address by Fred Kniffen at the 1974 Pioneer America Society conference, which was published as "Milestones and Stumbling Blocks." Kniffen's work in folk architecture and the work of his friend, Henry Glassie, have greatly influenced my own work in vernacular architecture and material culture. I offer an opinion on our progress in answering Kniffen's call for new efforts to comprehend daily life and the American landscape–our "search for landmarks"–contemplate new trends. My remarks are based on the study of local architecture in Missouri. While I hope for increased activity in field recording of cultural heritage, I wish to emphasize the rather new arena of cultural conservation as we aspire to apply our knowledge in the documentation and encouragement of traditional cultural expression in our nation.