This is the more general way of playing the game. In those versions where the reply, “Very well, ladies,” occurs, this is sung by the line of children just before they sing, “We’ve come to see Jenny Jones.” Sometimes, as in the [Berrington and Chirbury game], two lines of children facing each other advance and retire, singing the verses. They then carry Jenny Jones to a corner, lay her down, stand in a circle round, and sing to her the last verse. In the Hants versions sent by Miss Mendham, six or eight children carry Jenny stretched out and flat, lay her down, cover her over, and then sing the last lines. The rest of the children follow them. In the [Irish (Belfast) version] the game is played in the same way; the funeral is arranged, when Jenny suddenly comes to life again (W. H. Patterson). In the [Southampton version], after the carrying of Jenny by her head and feet to the grave, and the other children following and standing round, Jenny Jones rises up and pursues the children. She is called the Ghost. The children run away in affected terror, calling out, “The Ghost!” Whoever she catches becomes Jenny Jones in the next game. This incident is also played in the Barnes, [Northants], [Annaverna, co. Louth], [Enborne] and [Liphook] versions.

(c) This game is played very generally throughout the country, and I have other versions collected from Earls Heaton (Mr. H. Hardy), Barnes (A. B. Gomme), Cambridge (Mrs. Haddon), Hampshire (Miss Mendham), Frodingham (Miss Peacock), Cowes, Isle of Wight (Miss E. Smith), Sulhampstead, Berks (Miss Thoyts), and Platt, Kent (Miss Burne). These versions are so similar to the [Hanwell version], with the exception of the “Very well, ladies,” that it is needless to print them in full; special differences are noted hereafter. In some places the game is said in a sing-song manner.

Some of the versions differ from the general type in two ways—first, in the method of playing; secondly, in the wording of the verses. The differences in the method of playing direct attention to the connection of the game with ancient custom. The game is always played by the players taking sides; but one method is for one side to consist of only two children (Mother and Jenny Jones), and the other side to consist of all the other players; while the other method is for the players to be divided into two sides of about equal numbers, each side advancing and retiring in line when singing their part. Jenny Jones in some cases walks with the girls in her line until the funeral, when she is carried to the grave, and in others she stands alone behind the line. The way of performing the funeral also differs. Generally two of the players carry Jenny to the grave, the rest following two by two; but in one Hampshire version six or eight children carry Jenny, stretched out and flat, to the grave, and cover her over; in [Holywood, co. Down], she is carried sitting on the crossed hands of two players; while in some versions no funeral is apparently performed, the words only being sung. Another significant incident is the Ghost. An additional incident occurs in the [Liphook version], which represents her being “swung to life again” by two of the players.

These differences may perhaps be immaterial to the meaning and origin of the game, but they are sufficiently indicative of early custom to suggest the divergence of the game in modern times towards modern custom. Thus the players divided line-by-line follow the general form for children playing singing games, and it would therefore suggest itself as the earlier form for this game. The change of the game from the line-by-line action to the mother-and-line action would indicate a corresponding change in the prevailing custom which influenced the game. This custom was the wooing by a band of suitors of girls surrounded by their fellow-villagers, which became obsolete in favour of ordinary marriage custom. The dropping out of this custom would cause the game to change from a representation of both wooing and burial to one of burial only. As burial only the mother-and-line action is sufficient, but the presence of a wooing incident in the earlier form of the game is plainly revealed by the verse which sings, “Fare ye well, ladies,” or, as it has become in the English variant, “Very well, ladies.”

The difference in the wording of the versions is slight, and does not need formal analysis. Domestic occupation is shown throughout, washing and its attendants, drying, folding, starching and ironing being by far the most numerous, brewing, and baking only occurring in one. Illness, dying, and death are the usual forms for the later verses, but illness and dying are lost in several versions. The choosing of colours is in some versions not for the mourners but for the dead maiden, and in these cases (six) white is the colour chosen, for “white’s what the dead wear.”

This question of colours for the dead is a very important one. The dressing of the dead body of a maiden in white by her girl companions, and the carrying of the body by them to the grave, are known village customs, the whole village being invited to the funeral. The rising of the dead lover, and the belief that excessive mourning over a loved one disturbs his or her rest in the grave, thus causing the dead to rise and speak, are shown in old ballads; the belief that spirits of the dead haunt churchyards and places of their former abode may also be adduced in illustration of the ghost incident.

(d) The methods of playing, and the incidents revealed by the verses sung, show that this is perhaps the most realistic of all the singing games, the daily occupation, the illness, death, and burial being portrayed, first, in the words of the rhymes, and secondly, by the accompanying action. The Scottish versions make the opening incident that of a lover coming to the house of the loved one, then proceed to the domestic occupation, and finally to the death incident; while the English versions give the idea of village friends calling upon a favourite companion, and subsequently attending her funeral. That the former is the older of the two versions is confirmed by the great probability of the name “Jenny Jones” being a degraded form of “Janet jo.” There is some evidence for this. The [Sporle version] gives it as “Jenny Joe,” which is clearly a misunderstood rendering of “Jenny jo.” The corruption of this into “Jenny Jones” is exactly what might be expected from modern English ignorance of the pretty meaning of the word jo, “dear;” and to what lengths this corruption may proceed under such influences may be seen by versions from Earls Heaton, where we have “Jingy Jog;” Leeds, where we get “Jilly Jog;” and the Edinburgh version, where we have “Georgina.”

This would be an argument for the Scottish home of the rhymes, and for the direct borrowing of the name from Scotland by the English villagers. In furtherance of this view the following passage from Chambers may be quoted:—

In the Stewartry of Kirkcudbright, “Janet Jo” is a dramatic entertainment amongst young rustics. Suppose a party has met in a harvest or winter evening round a good peat fire, and it is resolved to have “Janet Jo” performed. Two undertake to personate a goodman and a goodwife; the rest a family of marriageable daughters. One of the lads, the best singer of the party, retires, and equips himself in a dress proper for representing an old bachelor in search of a wife. He comes in, bonnet in hand, bowing, and sings—

Guid e’en to ye, maidens a’,
Maidens a’, maidens a’,
Guid e’en to ye, maidens a’,
Be ye or no.
I’m come to court Janet jo,
Janet jo, Janet jo,
I’m come to court Janet jo,
Janet, my jo.
Goodwife sings—What’ll ye gie for Janet jo,
Janet jo, Janet jo?
What’ll ye gie for Janet jo,
Janet, my jo?
Wooer—I’ll gie ye a peck o’ siller,
A peck o’ siller, peck o’ siller,
I’ll gie ye a peck o’ siller,
For Janet, my jo.
Goodwife says—Gae awa’, ye auld carle!
Then sings—Ye’se never get Janet jo,
Janet jo, Janet jo,
Ye’se never get Janet jo,
Janet, my jo.