No sex please we're ECD!
Всем сторонникам теории, что леди никогда не танцевали с леди, и не приглашали сами джентльменов, посвящается.
Does anyone have any information about the practice at 17th C. or
18th C. dances when there was a gender imbalance at a dance?
mjoconor:
Your question presupposes that gender imbalance has always been with us.
At least for the upper echelons of society in the second half of the
18th century, "Assemblies" (what we would call dances) were tightly
regimented affairs overseen by a "manager" or a "director" whose
duties, among others, were to pair couples for the evening.
The Rules Observed at an Assembly of 1748-49:
The Subscribers, consisting of Gentlemen to chuse by a Majority four
of their Number to act as Directors under whose Management the whole
Assembly is to be during the Season.
The Directors are to furnish the Ladies with Tickets for the Season,
which must admit only the Lady whose Name is first wrote on the
Ticket by one of the Directors.
None are to be admitted without Tickets which are to be received at
the Door, by one of the Directors every Assembly Night, and returned
again ... before the Company are dismissed.
To Regulate the Dances
1. (Each set) to consist of ten Couples ...
3. The Director who has the composing of the Sets whilst the Minuets
are dancing, to couple those disposed for Country Dances and provide
Partners for such Gentlemen Strangers who come in unprovided.
*************************************
A letter dated at New Castle May 3d, 1749, said: "By the Governor's
encouragement there had been a very handsome Assembly once a
fortnight at Andrew Hamilton's House & Stores which are tenanted by
Mr. Inglis, - make a Set of good Rooms for such a purpose: It
consists of Eighty Ladies & as many Gentlemen, - one half appearing
every Assembly night. Mr. Inglis had the Conduct of the whole &
managed exceeding well".
******************************************
In 1779, the Chevalier de Chastellux, who served in America under
Rochambeau, says: " ... (a)t Philadelphia, as at London, Bath, Spa,
etc., there are spaces where the young people dance ... A manager, or
master of ceremonies presides at these methodical amusements: He
presents to the dancers folded billets which each contain a number;
thus it is fate which decides the partner which one is to have for
the whole evening. All the dances are arranged before hand, and the
dancers are called each in turn ... The Managers are generally chosen
from among the most distinguished officers of the army; at present
this important place is held by Colonel Wilkinson ... Colonel
Mitchell ... was formerly the Manager; but when I saw him he had
descended from the magistracy and danced like any private citizen. It
is said that he exercised his office with much severity, and it is
related that a young lady who was taking part in a quadrille, having
forgotten her turn, because she talked with a friend, he came up and
said to her aloud: 'come Miss, take care what you are about, do you
think you are here for your pleasure'?
Again from Chastellux, the following passage mentions women dancing,
but there is no mention of men. This at least hints that is was not
unheard of for ladies to outnumber men, and to dance together: "The
Assembly to which I was taken upon leaving Mr. Wilson's was the
second of the winter. I was apprized that it would be neither
numerous nor brilliant, for at Philadelphia as at Paris, the best
society seldom go to balls before Christmas. Nevertheless, upon
entering the room, I found twenty, or twenty-five women dancing. It
was whispered to me that having heard a great deal of the Vicomte de
Noailles and the Comte de Damas, they were come with the hope of
seeing and dancing with them; but the ladies were entirely
disappointed, for those gentlemen had left that morning."
Personally, I found the foregoing passage interesting, revealing as
it does (or at least seems to) an apparent surfeit of ladies seeking
male companionship at that particular time and place. It makes me
wonder if this is a war-time phenomenon then as it was in other
periods. Perhaps some of the Austenian authorities on the list might
have some insight into the effect, if any, of the Napoleonic wars on
gender balance at English Assemblies.
Egalitarianism became more of the rule in America after the
Revolution, as seen by this passage from Moreau de St. Mery's
"American journey": (1793-1798): "All American girls and women are
fond of dancing, which is one of their greatest pleasures. The women
like it almost as much as the men. They indulge in this pleasure,
either in the morning from eight to eleven or in the evening from the
end of the day far into the night. I believe I have already said
elsewhere that dancing for the inhabitants of the United States is
less a matter of self-display than it is of true enjoyment. At the
same dance you will see a grandfather, his son and his grandson, but
more often still the grandmother, her daughter and her granddaughter.
If a Frenchman comments upon this with surprise, he is told that each
one dances for his own amusement, and not because it's the thing to do."
While others on the list are undoubtedly more familiar than I with
other time periods, is seems from what little I know that the concept
of a "manager" hung on well into the 19th century. During the latter
part of that century, rules were not made by the various assemblies
themselves, but set forth in etiquette books, which became rather
standardized if for no other reason than that their authors freely
plagiarized from one another.
Brookes on Modern Dancing (1867) dictates:
"The etiquette of the Ball-Room varies slightly in country places,
and in different cities. In country ball-rooms generally, a gentleman
may ask a lady to dance with him, and enter into conversation or
promenade with her through the room; but in the city an introduction
must take place before the gentleman can be entitled to offer himself
as a partner; and though he may be intimately acquainted with a lady,
it is considered proper for him to ask the consent of the person
accompanying her; unless that person delegates the floor-manager or
some other gentleman to perform that duty in his stead; in such cases
he will apply to the proper parties. This consent must be obtained
for each and every dance.
Floor-managers or teachers of dancing, when attending a ball, have no
right to introduce partners to ladies, unless the ladies or their
gentlemen escorts so request it; notwithstanding the lady maybe the
teacher's own pupil.
A gentleman having ladies under his charge may address a stranger and
offer him a partner.
When there is a difference with regard to the pre-occupancy of a
place in a set, a quiet appeal to the floor-manager or master of
ceremonies should settle the matter.
It is improper to leave one set and go to another, unless you have
been directed to do so by the floor-manager or master of ceremonies;
you have the right, however, to retire from a set and be seated,
should an objectionable party take a place in the same set after you
have formed there. It is improper for two gentlemen to dance together
when ladies are present. Two ladies may dance together, if they wish,
without infringing proper etiquette, as privileges are always
accorded to them which may not be claimed by the other sex."
Note well that last sentence. Today, we are a society largely without
etiquette, aimlessly wandering in search of a concensus that our
ancestors never had to worry about because it was dictated by their
societal norms. Indeed, this very discussion may create something
that passes for a societal norm.
But that last smarmy remark of mine will be for the sociologists on
the list to dissect, I'm but a humble historian (and a poor one of
those.)
Best regards,
Ed St.Germain
Specific quotes from Wilson on the topic:
"A Dance may be formed wholly of Gentlemen or wholly of Ladies; or
Of an equal number or certain portion of each."
"Two Ladies, or two Gentlemen, cannot Dance together, without
permission of the Master of the Ceremonies; nor can permission be
given while there are an equal number of Ladies and Gentlemen."
"In the absence of Gentlemen, when Ladies are permitted to form
couples, and in the absence of Ladies, when it occurs that Gentlemen
are permitted to form couples, they must always stand at the bottom of
the Set."
"Ladies or Gentlemen forming couples, are not entitled to a call
according to either of their numbers, without the permission of the
Master of the Ceremonies, as they lose their privilege by standing up
together; and it is entirely optional with the Master of the
Ceremonies to permit two Gentlemen to stand together."
Susan
Да, эти цитаты свидетельствуют об Англии и Америке, а не о России. Да, это не значит, что у нас было так же. Но все-таки я бы не стала утверждать со всей категоричностью, что дама с дамой в 19-м веке не танцевали нигде и никогда!
Does anyone have any information about the practice at 17th C. or
18th C. dances when there was a gender imbalance at a dance?
mjoconor:
Your question presupposes that gender imbalance has always been with us.
At least for the upper echelons of society in the second half of the
18th century, "Assemblies" (what we would call dances) were tightly
regimented affairs overseen by a "manager" or a "director" whose
duties, among others, were to pair couples for the evening.
The Rules Observed at an Assembly of 1748-49:
The Subscribers, consisting of Gentlemen to chuse by a Majority four
of their Number to act as Directors under whose Management the whole
Assembly is to be during the Season.
The Directors are to furnish the Ladies with Tickets for the Season,
which must admit only the Lady whose Name is first wrote on the
Ticket by one of the Directors.
None are to be admitted without Tickets which are to be received at
the Door, by one of the Directors every Assembly Night, and returned
again ... before the Company are dismissed.
To Regulate the Dances
1. (Each set) to consist of ten Couples ...
3. The Director who has the composing of the Sets whilst the Minuets
are dancing, to couple those disposed for Country Dances and provide
Partners for such Gentlemen Strangers who come in unprovided.
*************************************
A letter dated at New Castle May 3d, 1749, said: "By the Governor's
encouragement there had been a very handsome Assembly once a
fortnight at Andrew Hamilton's House & Stores which are tenanted by
Mr. Inglis, - make a Set of good Rooms for such a purpose: It
consists of Eighty Ladies & as many Gentlemen, - one half appearing
every Assembly night. Mr. Inglis had the Conduct of the whole &
managed exceeding well".
******************************************
In 1779, the Chevalier de Chastellux, who served in America under
Rochambeau, says: " ... (a)t Philadelphia, as at London, Bath, Spa,
etc., there are spaces where the young people dance ... A manager, or
master of ceremonies presides at these methodical amusements: He
presents to the dancers folded billets which each contain a number;
thus it is fate which decides the partner which one is to have for
the whole evening. All the dances are arranged before hand, and the
dancers are called each in turn ... The Managers are generally chosen
from among the most distinguished officers of the army; at present
this important place is held by Colonel Wilkinson ... Colonel
Mitchell ... was formerly the Manager; but when I saw him he had
descended from the magistracy and danced like any private citizen. It
is said that he exercised his office with much severity, and it is
related that a young lady who was taking part in a quadrille, having
forgotten her turn, because she talked with a friend, he came up and
said to her aloud: 'come Miss, take care what you are about, do you
think you are here for your pleasure'?
Again from Chastellux, the following passage mentions women dancing,
but there is no mention of men. This at least hints that is was not
unheard of for ladies to outnumber men, and to dance together: "The
Assembly to which I was taken upon leaving Mr. Wilson's was the
second of the winter. I was apprized that it would be neither
numerous nor brilliant, for at Philadelphia as at Paris, the best
society seldom go to balls before Christmas. Nevertheless, upon
entering the room, I found twenty, or twenty-five women dancing. It
was whispered to me that having heard a great deal of the Vicomte de
Noailles and the Comte de Damas, they were come with the hope of
seeing and dancing with them; but the ladies were entirely
disappointed, for those gentlemen had left that morning."
Personally, I found the foregoing passage interesting, revealing as
it does (or at least seems to) an apparent surfeit of ladies seeking
male companionship at that particular time and place. It makes me
wonder if this is a war-time phenomenon then as it was in other
periods. Perhaps some of the Austenian authorities on the list might
have some insight into the effect, if any, of the Napoleonic wars on
gender balance at English Assemblies.
Egalitarianism became more of the rule in America after the
Revolution, as seen by this passage from Moreau de St. Mery's
"American journey": (1793-1798): "All American girls and women are
fond of dancing, which is one of their greatest pleasures. The women
like it almost as much as the men. They indulge in this pleasure,
either in the morning from eight to eleven or in the evening from the
end of the day far into the night. I believe I have already said
elsewhere that dancing for the inhabitants of the United States is
less a matter of self-display than it is of true enjoyment. At the
same dance you will see a grandfather, his son and his grandson, but
more often still the grandmother, her daughter and her granddaughter.
If a Frenchman comments upon this with surprise, he is told that each
one dances for his own amusement, and not because it's the thing to do."
While others on the list are undoubtedly more familiar than I with
other time periods, is seems from what little I know that the concept
of a "manager" hung on well into the 19th century. During the latter
part of that century, rules were not made by the various assemblies
themselves, but set forth in etiquette books, which became rather
standardized if for no other reason than that their authors freely
plagiarized from one another.
Brookes on Modern Dancing (1867) dictates:
"The etiquette of the Ball-Room varies slightly in country places,
and in different cities. In country ball-rooms generally, a gentleman
may ask a lady to dance with him, and enter into conversation or
promenade with her through the room; but in the city an introduction
must take place before the gentleman can be entitled to offer himself
as a partner; and though he may be intimately acquainted with a lady,
it is considered proper for him to ask the consent of the person
accompanying her; unless that person delegates the floor-manager or
some other gentleman to perform that duty in his stead; in such cases
he will apply to the proper parties. This consent must be obtained
for each and every dance.
Floor-managers or teachers of dancing, when attending a ball, have no
right to introduce partners to ladies, unless the ladies or their
gentlemen escorts so request it; notwithstanding the lady maybe the
teacher's own pupil.
A gentleman having ladies under his charge may address a stranger and
offer him a partner.
When there is a difference with regard to the pre-occupancy of a
place in a set, a quiet appeal to the floor-manager or master of
ceremonies should settle the matter.
It is improper to leave one set and go to another, unless you have
been directed to do so by the floor-manager or master of ceremonies;
you have the right, however, to retire from a set and be seated,
should an objectionable party take a place in the same set after you
have formed there. It is improper for two gentlemen to dance together
when ladies are present. Two ladies may dance together, if they wish,
without infringing proper etiquette, as privileges are always
accorded to them which may not be claimed by the other sex."
Note well that last sentence. Today, we are a society largely without
etiquette, aimlessly wandering in search of a concensus that our
ancestors never had to worry about because it was dictated by their
societal norms. Indeed, this very discussion may create something
that passes for a societal norm.
But that last smarmy remark of mine will be for the sociologists on
the list to dissect, I'm but a humble historian (and a poor one of
those.)
Best regards,
Ed St.Germain
Specific quotes from Wilson on the topic:
"A Dance may be formed wholly of Gentlemen or wholly of Ladies; or
Of an equal number or certain portion of each."
"Two Ladies, or two Gentlemen, cannot Dance together, without
permission of the Master of the Ceremonies; nor can permission be
given while there are an equal number of Ladies and Gentlemen."
"In the absence of Gentlemen, when Ladies are permitted to form
couples, and in the absence of Ladies, when it occurs that Gentlemen
are permitted to form couples, they must always stand at the bottom of
the Set."
"Ladies or Gentlemen forming couples, are not entitled to a call
according to either of their numbers, without the permission of the
Master of the Ceremonies, as they lose their privilege by standing up
together; and it is entirely optional with the Master of the
Ceremonies to permit two Gentlemen to stand together."
Susan
Да, эти цитаты свидетельствуют об Англии и Америке, а не о России. Да, это не значит, что у нас было так же. Но все-таки я бы не стала утверждать со всей категоричностью, что дама с дамой в 19-м веке не танцевали нигде и никогда!