26 Nov
2015
26 Nov
'15
3:50 p.m.
On 2015-11-24 0203, Colin Hume colin(a)colinhume.com [trad-dance-callers]
wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 01:45:30 -0800, JD Erskine iDance
island.dance(a)shaw.ca [trad-dance-callers] wrote:
Thank you Colin. Yes, I agree with you that it likely was.
Having read your page on conversions of Triple Minor dances five or six
years ago, I've been happily "decoding" or inspecting Three Couple
Longways whole set dances for that possibility since. Thanks for that.
I missed writing it as, "my correspondent said, 'it is a Three Couple
dance, . . .'"
I've read other articles on set formations of dances from the period and
they support your statements on this.
When we find a copy of Thompson's Compleat . . . then we may also say it
_was_ or _is_ this or that.
I was amused by the time it took me (about 1 1/2 years of dancing ECD)
to realise I'd been dancing L3 dances in my 3(=6 to 7) years of SCD.
That exposure to many a "dance for three couples in a four couple set",
(sometimes for three couples only) made noticing the ending kludge of
getting the actives to the bottom of the set quite easy.
Cheers, John
- who thinks it likely was a TM/L3
--
J.D. Erskine
Victoria, BC
Island Dance - Folk & Country
dance info - site & mail list
Vancouver Island & BC islands
http://members.shaw.ca/island.dance/
It appears it was/is a whole set dance, for three
couples,
published by Thompson, 1768, in a dance manual.
No, it would have been a triple minor. The final move, "Lead thro'
top & caft off" would put the ones in second place, and they would
then continue the dance with the two couples below them.
Colin Hume