The Lancashire Pace-Egg Play: a Social History

Folklore, Oct, 2002 by Peter Millington

By Eddie Cass. London: FLS Books, 2001. xiv 257 pp. Illus. 13.95 p&p. ISBN 0-903515-22-9

The title of this book is an understatement. Without doubt, it comprehensively covers folk drama in Lancashire and its social history, but many of its observations and conclusions apply to folk drama throughout Britain and Ireland. Thus, Cass's treatment of the Lancashire plays is an important extended case study.

Cass is inclusive of people with differing beliefs regarding origins of the plays, but follows recent authors in rejecting the theory that they are pagan or pre-Shakespearean relics. However, he is among the first to suggest alternatives. He proposes that the drama derived from the theatre booths of eighteenth-century fairs, evidenced, for instance, by the example of John Edwin in 1770. This is a good start and worthy of further development. One unknown is how the plays came to be attached to pre-existing calendar customs. Similarly, specific sources for texts remain unresolved, and instead Cass talks of a fund of speeches: "the primeval `soup' from which our play emerged" (p. 23). This view may change as research progresses. Meanwhile, as Cass points out, the first chapbook texts appeared synchronously with the earliest performances in the mid-eighteenth century. In Lancashire they were as important as oral communication for transmission. The rise and fall of Lancashire performances matches the growth and decline in chapbook editions.

The chapter on the Lancashire Peace Egg chapbooks stands alone as a bibliographic history, supported with full texts of four Lancashire editions. These are largely identical, although Cass has highlighted the significant differences. He concludes that the first Lancashire editions were copied from Yorkshire versions intended for performance at Christmas (although it is odd that a Christmas play should be entitled The Peace Egg). It was fifteen or more years later that Abel Heywood changed textual references from Christmas to Easter, to reflect local practice.

One-third of the book comprises an appendix listing all available information on Lancashire plays, under some eighty locations. It is a heterogeneous mix. Some entries quote full scripts and descriptions, while others just give bibliographic details and notes on provenance, and frustratingly no other information that reveals the nature of that play. In principle, Cass only aims to quote full sources if they are difficult to obtain. My main criticism concerns his many references to the Stuart Lawrence Collection, where neither full quotations nor advice on access are given. I understand that there are particular issues involved here, but Cass leaves us mystified. This could be a problem for future researchers.

Lancashire in this book means the larger pre-1974 county. It also covers those Easter plays that overflow into neighbouring counties. The plays are most common in southeastern "Cotton Lancashire," and in Furness. Non-play Pace-Egging customs are not included in the Appendix, although they are discussed as essential context in the body of the text. It would be good to see a second volume, in due course, that covers these customs in depth to complete the picture.

In Lancashire, children and youths performed the plays along with special Pace-Egging songs. Over time, their costumes changed from being non-representational to realistic, possibly because of special requirements for the female parts and the Doctor. Cass gives a detailed case study of the tradition in Rochdale, calling on material gathered by Peter Stevenson and Elaine Wedge. Here there was a "street play" that relied heavily on chapbook texts. However, this was supplanted by the "school play" reconstructed by schoolteachers around 1930. The perceived authority of this text led to the street play being regarded as inferior: it consequently failed to survive.

Cass observes that a new folk play tradition holds sway today, based mainly on Folk Revival groups. He presents nine case studies of such groups, including in-depth studies of the Middleton and the Bury Pace Eggers. I believe this represents the first ever comparative study of such revival groups, and although the cases are drawn from Lancashire, the stories could apply anywhere in Britain. This uniformity reflects the role of folk festivals and certain groups--such as the Coventry Mummers--in the promulgation of the revival. The folk play revival has now almost totally replaced the original traditions, and differs from them in several respects. For instance, the performers are adult men rather than boys and youths, and the proceeds are normally donated to charity rather than kept by the actors. Some groups may research and replicate their local tradition, but conversely may use non-native scripts, or write their own. They may even have a repertoire of versions from different parts of the country.

Revival groups share a wish to keep the tradition alive, but one wonders if they inadvertently compete with the original practioners. Observations on this and other social developments that have affected the plays come together in Cass's conclusions. One view is that Pace-Egging played a role in sustaining community spirit, but Cass is not sure. He thinks the main raison d'etre of the plays was self-gain. Changes in socio-economic conditions have reduced the pecuniary needs of the actors, and this is one reason for the ongoing decline. Having fun was another subsidiary factor, but again there have been changes in the nature of public entertainment, and thus attitudes and expectations. Some venues are no longer suitable for folk plays, and audience responses are variable, with people seeming to have difficulty reacting to live performances such as Pace-Egging plays. Will the plays survive these changes?