He didn't go into any more specifics and I
wasn't wise enough to ask
any questions. But if you look at some of the old dances like
Petronella and Hull's victory, they have identical B parts and unique
A parts. The same applies to Chorus Jig and Rory O' More.
Pedantically: At the more-or-less-1800 time when these dances originated, the
match of figure to tune was not fixed the way we've fixed it for these
chestnuts and the way it's generally fixed for English dances now. New 32-bar
tunes were published in collections; people fit figures to them (Thomas
Wilson's "Complete System of Country Dancing" in various editions through
1810s has tables of figures, whether they're progressive or not, how many bars
they take, etc) and danced them, and might dance the same figures to a
different tune or different figures to this tune tomorrow night. (Not so much
unlike modern contra.) If you look at published suggested figures for dances,
or figures people wrote in their diaries as matches for tunes, etc, you'll see
a bazillion dances that are very much like:
A1: right hand star, left hands back
A2: 1s down the middle and back and cast off
B1: with the couple below (third couple in your triple-minor set)
circle left and right
B2: with the couple above, four changes of rights and lefts
The 'distinctive' Chorus Jig down the outside and back, down the middle and
back and cast off shows up in "Fisher's Hornpipe", "Trip to
setting of "The White Cockade", etc.
All of *that* is a long-winded way of saying that they weren't remotely
concerned with the novelty of the figure or whether they were dancing a "new"
dance. They got novelty from tunes.
Which is utterly irrelevant to the original question.
Alan Winston --- WINSTON(a)SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: 650/926-3056
Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park CA 94025