The 
                Fanes' saga - Remarks on single Works 
              . 
              Cesare Poppi (1987): The Contìes [Tales] of the Archives Massimiliano Mazzel and Simon de Giulio.  A Check of their Sources and Confirmations in the contemporary oral Tradition,  Mondo Ladino [Ladinian World] XI, 1-2: 19-57
              In 1987  prof. Poppi published these remarks on the state and the structures of the oral  tradition in the Fassa valley, starting from the two quoted collections, the  last remains yet of a disappearing occurrence. I don’t know whether  deliberately or not, the paper appeared on Mondo Ladino at the time of Simon de  Giulio’s departure, the last of the storytellers. As a matter of fact, Poppi’s  work begins with the flat statement: “The oral tradition of narrative  sequencies typical of the popular culture in the Fassa valley, is over”. 
                For  several years I’ve wished to publish at least a summary of this text on this  site, as I consider it very important in order to understand the occurrence of  the oral tradition of legends. I’ve been hindered by the difficulty of  summarizing a text by prof. Poppi: each of his words contains a concept, no  summary can really preserve its full significance. I decided to do it now  because, having eventually translated from German both Wolff’s Foreword to the  Ninth issue of the Dolomitensagen and his Integrations, which exhibit several  data about the state of oral tradition at his time, I can compare Poppi’s results  with those, eighty years earlier; and the cross-check shows, as far as I can  see, several points of interest (see also my remarks at bottom). 
                
              Foreword
              In the Fassa  valley, there is no longer any community who transmits ancient traditional  tales orally one generation to the other. By saying so, we aren’t talking of  the oblivion of single tales, but generally of the usage of oral narration as  transmission means. This didn’t happen suddenly: it’s a process that has been  taking place several decades along, and now has just arrived to its dead end.  There are several reasons: mainly, the “learned” culture and the one promoted  by clergy have extended down to all social classes, removing the conflict with  the popular culture, which had expressive means of its own. The deep social,  political and cultural transformations that the valley sustained after WWII  just helped bring the process to its completion. 
               
              The status of the oral  tradition today
              In 1976,  prof. Poppi carried on a first study on the oral tradition in the Fassa valley  and he observed its state of deep decay. Ten years later, the process has come  to its conclusion. The last key informers, who were not even specialists of  storytelling, but just the last people who were still remembering something, have  deceased. Only fragments remain, hearsays, single names detached from their  contest, or in the best case a few isolated episodes. 
                Oral  tradition was preserved in the evening spinwatches (filò, vila), which  were events reserved to grown-up people. Most times, they were even prohibited  to young unmarried women. Children were sent to bed, and it seems that there  was not even the usage of telling them fairy tales. Therefore, as the usage of  evening watches has extinguished, the elderly people of  today have no way to remember events they  never took a part in, and about which even their mothers couldn’t tell them  anything. The last man who preserved a remembrance of the tradition seems to  have been Simon de Giulio, from Penia, who died in 1987. 
                Many tales  from the collections under scrutiny talk about wizardry and sorcery. They  express in a narrative form several beliefs widespread in Fassa, and in a few  instances they repeat what can be found in the interrogation proceedings of the  witches’ trials in the past centuries. The beliefs are still known (taken for  true or not), but the structure of the tale that had been “built” to back up  (or even to generate?) that sort of belief is almost never known any longer.  And this is significant of the fact that the narration has faded as a way of  expression, even earlier than the contents that were narrated. 
                The same can  be told for vivenes and bregostenes, figures whose existence many  can quote, but about whom nobody can tell any detail any longer, as well as  characters like Soreghina or Albolina, whose names are still remembered, but  nobody knows whether they have been heard from oral tradition first, or they  have been read on Wolff’s texts. 
                The last  traces of oral tradition can (or could) be found in the uppermost sector of the  valley, beyond Canazei, specially at Alba and Penia. Here Fernando Iori de Mita lived, the last “true” specialist storyteller, who died in the early ‘70s. He  is remembered as entering homes for the evening watches and usually telling the  tales that his audience wished listening to, i.e. no longer vivanes and bregostanes,  but stories extracted from literary texts. His celebrated “Count of  Montecristo”, narrated in Ladinian, required up to a week of evening watches to  reach completion. 
                We can  conclude that oral tradition didn’t fade away because the contents have been  forgotten, but because they have been considered as something unworthy of being  remembered, or even maybe as something that people “refused to remember”. 
               
              The genres of oral  narrative
              In the  collections under scrutiny, the fairy tales properly called (those structured  according to the sequences detected by Propp) are a genre of absolute minority,  either because they have been forgotten quicker, or because they have been so  since ever. As a matter of fact, in the Fassa valley the witnessing tale (contìa)  is predominating; it incorporates a few of the structures of a fable, but  something of an historical narration as well. Differently from a fable, the contìa is always located, however, not in a “land far away” but in a historical  and geographical situation that the listener knows very well, and thence gets  him emotionally carried away much more. 
                Among the contìes,  a special role is played by the tales about the bregostenes, which are  always referred to the past, but have a linear flow, as historically happened  events, and to precisely determined persons. 
                The same  holds for the tales about magic/sorcery, that constitute the majority of both  collections. Episodes attributed to “historical” witches are inserted into the  context of the tales, that become this way almost a proof of the truth of the  superstitions they describe. More or less the same can be also told concerning  other beliefs in supernatural, e.g. about the “procession of the dead”.  What is “believed” and what is “narrated” remain therefore strictly related and  mutually support each other. 
                The patofjes,  also present in great number in the collections, are a genre of humorous  narrative, generally relevant to well determined characters who lived  historically; they exhibit a funny behaviour, at times stupid, at times sly. It  seems that each patofja is part of a single storyteller’s assets, and  even when they are re-narrated, both their main character, and the storyteller  who had told them first, are always mentioned. Only when the historical memory  of their main characters begins fading, the patofjes start taking the  less determined features of the contìa. 
                We have then  the falopes, tales whose core consists of a clear and obvious lie, told  on the purpose to astonish the audience. But falopa is also the  assessment that a skeptical audience assigns to a tale believed not to be  really credible: this can happen to several tales of magic/sorcery, today  considered as mere cock-and-bull stories. 
                Last, the  etiological legends, i.e. those that use a myth to “explain” a natural  phenomenon. Some of them certainly derive from a long-time oral tradition;  more, several that we know having been alive in the early XIX century, seem to  have been lost completely. Other ones clearly show a more recent origin, and  appear as having been “invented” on patently “literary” purposes. 
               
              The collections by Mazzel  and Simon de Giulio 
              
              Informants and sources 
              Simon de Giulio himself indicated who his sources were, in a fully reliable  way. Most are members of his own family, almost all the remainders are his  countrymen from Penia. Just a few refer to a “widespread tradition”, which  everyone or so knew in the village. Simon de Giulio has perhaps been the only  man to write down his tales while preserving the form and style of an oral  narration. 
                Don Massimiliano Mazzel represents a more complex problem because, in  his reading of tales in Ladinian language at the Bolzano broadcasting station,  his purposes were not only cultural, but also moralistic, and therefore he  added remarks that had nothing to do with oral tradition. Probably, on the  contrary, he didn’t modify much the content of his tales, while it is almost  certain that he filtered out just those which better adhered to his purposes.  Many legends of the etiologic type have almost certainly been invented, in a  romantic-like style, by him or by his direct informants; only a few among them  we also know by name. The style is intermediate between the “literary” one and  that of the oral tradition proper; the contents are such that they “might” be  derived from oral tradition, even when it is certain that they are the  invention of single Authors. 
               
              The spreading of themes and motives by area 
                 
                Locating the place where the single themes and motives of the  collections were originated is a difficult task. Only a few of them are widely  known all over the valley, and probably they are the most ancient, like those  about the bregostene. We can say for sure that most tales come from the  upmost section of the valley, Canazei, Alba and Penia; it is doubtful whether  this derives from the circumstance that most informants had been selected from  the upper valley, or that only in the upper valley it was still possible to  find informants. Generally speaking, it seems that the circulation of the tales  was rather restricted, and their possible spreading very slow. 
                 
                 
                The problem of authenticity 
    
                By authenticity, we mean the direct  derivation of a tale from the circuit of oral tradition. Several stories of  both collections are the written re-elaboration of widespread beliefs, often  composed by their extensor, who built around them a story of his own, in a way  more or less detectable according to cases. 
              For many  legends, our judgementr of authenticity must be left pending, as they are built  around fragments of remembrances and hearsays, and they might even be traced  back to the reading of K.F.Wolff’s literary works. Notice, on the purpose, that  Simon de Giulio was rather prone to negate the authenticity of Wolff’s elaborations. 
. 
              Appendixes: 
              Appendixes  include: 
              
                
                
                  
                    
                      Genre  | 
                      Simon de Giulio  | 
                      Don Massimiliano Mazzel  | 
                     
                    
                      Fairy tale  | 
                      1  | 
                      5  | 
                     
                    
                      Contìa  | 
                      19  | 
                      24  | 
                     
                    
                      Magic/sorcery  | 
                      14  | 
                      15  | 
                     
                    
                      Etiological legend  | 
                      12  | 
                      13  | 
                     
                    
                      Patofia or historical anecdote  | 
                      22  | 
                      26  | 
                     
                   
                 
                
                  - Biographical remarks about the main  informants/contributors to the collections: Giovanni Giacomo Iori (“Zot de  Rola”) from Penia, 1896-1972; Giovanni Battista Costa (“Tita de Megna”)  from Canazei, 1884-1968; Ferdinando Iori (“Ferdinando de Mita”) from  Penia, 1909-1971.
 
                 
               
              . 
              Remarks: the situation described by prof. Poppi  in comparison with that described by Wolff in his Forewords and Integrations to  the Dolomitensagen
              What’s  most funny is that both Poppi in 1987 and Wolff about eighty years earlier  start by stating that the oral tradition of legends has ceased to exist. Are we  dealing then with a Phoenix, that is born again from its ashes? If we just go a  little deeper, we can discover that both had two rather different concepts in  mind: Wolff refers to thoese poetical legends, certainly often quite ancient,  from the scattered fragments of which he composed (re-composed?) the body of  his work; Poppi, on the contrary, to the concept itself of re-narrating as  means of transmitting to posterity the traditions that had been learned from  the past generations. Poppi, who isn’t only reporting his analysis of both  collections mentioned in the title, but also the results of his own  observations, limits to the “filò” [spinwatch] alone (the evening watch  built around the task of spinning, but during which several different domestic  or agricultural tasks were performed) the occasion when this process could take  place. Wolff indicates also the different environment of the evenings in the  shepherd mountain huts, where the ambience was often much coarser, as they were  dominated by the presence of men instead of women. We may add, beyond that, as  a third possible environment where ancient legends were narrated, that “popular  theater” (that was one of  Wolff’s  recurring thoughts), whose existence and importance was suggested to him by  Cassan and Moroder-Lusemberg. According to the latter, it seems that this  traditional form had already ceased to exist with the early Napeoleonic wars in  the Dolomites. It might be, therefore, that the very poetical legends, that Wolff a century later found already scattered into isolated and mostly  forgotten fragments, and that according to Poppi the last Fassan storytellers  themselves doubted had ever existed, had their roots in the popular theater and  never succeeded to completely transmigrate into the environment of spinwatches. 
                For a  full comparison between both descriptions, it would be anyway interesting to  know whether Poppi in 1985 didn’t meet the mountain shepherd hut environment,  indicated by Wolff, because it didn’t exist any longer, o just because, being  it totally extraneous to both collections under scrutiny, he had no way to  approach it himself. 
              We can  make the further remark that Poppi only considers the Fassa valley, while Wolff was active all around the Dolomites; but he was also specially acquainted with  the Fassa valley, and in any case the differences among the several valleys  don’t look to have really been significant. The sociological process under way  must not have been uniformly synchronous, but substantially they must have been  everywhere the same. 
              To tell  the truth, a more recent collection of popular Ladinian traditions does esist.  It is based on the survey performed early in this millennium by Dr. Andrea  Zinnecker and by Wolfgang Karreth on behalf of the Bayerischer Rundfunk of  Munich, which radioed their results under the title “Zakan… wer weiß, wann?”  [Once upon a time, who knows when?] and which, by its Authors’ courtesy and  through the benevolence of kind ms. Tarabiono, is available in this site. It is  of special interest that we are dealing with the recording of orally narrated  legends (part of them in German, part in Ladinian), not of written or  transcribed ones. Unfortunately this collection hasn’t been analyzed yet in  depth; I promise to proceed at least to a preliminary examination,  notwithstanding my well-known difficulties with both languages. Anyway, the  fact the after year 2000 some material, partially even original, could still be  retrieved, makes me suspect that oral traditions in the Dolomites, although  certainly in a deep crisis, haven’t yet (at least for now…) completely ceased. 
              A  second interesting topic emerging from the comparison of Wolff’s remarks and  Poppi’s ones is given by the different setting that can be found eighty years  apart in the women’s involvement in the spinwatches. While Poppi twenty years  ago detected that young girls were just prohibited from attending, this at Wolff’s times didn’t happen at all; elderly women, however, provided a sort of  “preventive censorship” to make sure that the contents of the tales to be  narrated didn’t show elements that could be considered as inappropriate. Wolff’s hint to the spinwatch as a place traditionally assigned to  entertainment and dancing, at least before the counter-reformation, makes us  believe that moralistic restrictions started at that time and became over and  over stricter and more widespread. 
            Finally, it might be interesting to compare the  genres of the tales in Wolff’s collection and in those under Poppi’s scrutiny,  but unfortunately it would make little sense. Wolff, indeed, as he clearly  admitted, was very selective and discarded all material that, for several  reasons, he didn’t consider suitable to his job as a poet of traditions – and  he näively stated never having realized that his scraps might turn out of a  high ethnological significance!   |