The sacred dance

by W. O. E. Oesterley

all through the present societies of savage men there prevails an extraordinary uniformity, in spite of much local variation, in ritual and mythology, a uniformity so striking as to suggest belief in an ultimately identical tradition, or, perhaps more reasonably, the psychologic theory that the human brain-cell in different races at the same stage of development responds with the same religious speech or the same religious act to the same stimuli supplied by its environment[2].

A survey over the whole field produces the conviction that the stimuli which, in its beginnings, induced the sacred dance appear to have been what we should now describe as the two prime spiritual and material needs, respectively, of man, viz. the response to his “god,” and the obtaining of food. To early savage man it was not, of course, a god as we understand the word, nor yet even as it would have been understood for millenniums among uncivilized men in remote ages; we merely use the word as a convenient term for expressing a supernatural power, or powers, at first vague, impersonal, “mana[3],” or something of that kind; at any rate, some power beyond the ken of man, of whose existence he had no doubt whatsoever, and to which he was impelled to respond to the best of his very feeble powers. Why he should have chosen this form of response (we are not contending that it was the only form) is a difficult, perhaps an impossible, question to answer, though we shall make the attempt to do so (see pp. 15 ff.); but that he did choose this form all the available evidence goes to show. That the sacred dance should have been believed to be the means of obtaining food is less difficult to understand when one remembers the universal belief in the efficacy of imitative magic among uncivilized men. The natives of New Guinea dance as a means of obtaining a good harvest; but there is evidence for the presumption that early man did the same thing for obtaining food long before harvests existed.

As a means of response to supernatural powers the dance was obviously a sacred act; but the epithet may also be applied, though perhaps in a modified way, to the dance as a means of obtaining food; for the belief in the existence of supernatural powers once attained, the conviction of their intrusion into all the affairs of life would naturally follow, as indeed we know to have been the case. But this implies that savage man believed that these supernatural powers were, in some sense, the givers of food; and this is hardly compatible with the idea that the dance as an act of imitative magic was the means of procuring food—an idea which is abundantly proved by the evidence to exist. If an act of imitative magic, such as the dance, is ipso facto the means of bringing out what it imitates, how can it be said that supernatural powers have anything to do with the matter? And how can the dance in this case be called sacred? It is a question, however, whether there was not a subconscious intention of setting in motion the “machinery” which brought about the thing imitated every time an act of imitative magic was performed. By the “machinery” we mean the active intervention of supernatural powers in an undefined, mysterious way. In this case the dance as a means of obtaining food would likewise be, strictly speaking, a sacred act.

However this may be, there is a large consensus of opinion that the dance in its origin was sacred, and that every other subsequent form of dance was ultimately derived from this. It is true to say that “the ritual or worship dance is the source of all others[4].” One of the earliest modern writers on the subject, de Cahusac, likewise says: “Aussi la danse sacrée est-elle la plus ancienne, et la source dans laquelle on a puisé dans les suites toutes les autres[5].” This point is particularly emphasized because it is only the dance in its sacred aspect that will be dealt with in the following pages.

II

As soon as one attempts to define what dancing in its essence is one realizes the difficulty of doing so. It can be defined in such a number of ways, all of which contain elements of truth; so much depends upon the point of view taken in regard to it. The recording of a number of definitions would be wearisome, Voss alone gives dozens by different people[6]. But one thing which these various definitions teach must be noted and insisted upon: they show that the term “dancing” connotes a great deal more than is attached to it now-a-days. When, for example, de Cahusac rightly defines dancing as “l’art des gestes[7],” it is obvious that these cannot be restricted to the feet or legs. A number of the Egyptian inscriptions make it clear that the arms played as important a part in the dance as the legs; representations of it on Greek pottery show that the motions of the head, and even more of the whole body, are necessary parts in the movements of the dance; among some savages the sacred dance is performed while the legs are more or less still, but the arms and the body are constantly in motion. To make but one reference to modern dancing: in some of the figures of the quadrille the dancers simply advance and recede, and at times they are stationary, merely bowing; yet this all belongs to the dance, and comes under the category of dancing. Crawley truly says that “dancing is an instinctive mode of muscular expression of feeling[8].” If, then, the feelings are restrained the muscular expression may take the form of a staid procession, as seems to be characteristic of the Assyrian sacred dance. We must, therefore, include under the many forms of the sacred dance such as range from a formal procession, stately and measured, to those of the wild orgy in the Dionysiac ritual. As we shall see, the intention which prompts the dance will have a great deal to do with its external form; a fact which gives point to Giraudet’s phrase that “la danse a été l’expression d’un état d’âme[9].”

The wide connotation which must be accorded to the word “dancing” is illustrated by what the Bedouin Arabs understand by it. They are a race which, as is well known, has retained many beliefs, customs, and practices which have been handed down from time immemorial; therefore the evidence afforded by them is valuable. By dance, which they call raḳṣ, they understand every rhythmic movement of hands or feet, whether remaining on the same spot or not[10]. Of them as of all other peoples rhythm is as inseparable from the movements of the dance “as it is from other bodily functions, and therefore belongs to it without saying[11]”; but, as the Arabs show, rhythmic movements can be performed while standing on one spot; emotions can be expressed by the rhythmic movements of the arms and of the body and of the head while the legs may be more or less motionless.

“The human instinct of play,” says Crawley, “is closely connected with the human love of excitement. The dance satisfies both, and its rhythmical character also makes it suitable for the expression of the most solemn and controlled emotions. It is at once the servant of Apollo and of Dionysus[12].”

The close, one may almost say the inseparable, connexion between the dance and music is as marked in its sacred as in its secular character. In the first instance it is the rhythmic instinct which demands this, so that among many savages the “music” which accompanies the dance is the mere clapping of hands, or the striking together of pieces of wood, or the beating of the tom-tom, all in rhythmical time. The same is also found among some peoples more advanced on the path of culture, though they usually add the sound of other instruments, among which the flute figures prominently. Singing is, of course, and always has been, another favourite accompaniment to the dance. The Bedouin Arabs accompany their dances by the beating of cymbals or of hand-drums, or by clapping of hands; sometimes singing accompanies the dancing[13]. This was also the case among the Israelites.