D A N C E. 
580 , 
have fcarcely any other amufement ; they naturally, 
therefore, fpend a great part of their time in alrnoft the 
only one they have. What the ancients called rhyth¬ 
mus,. we call time or tneafure, which is the connefting 
principle of the two arts ; mufic confilting in a fucceflion 
of a certain fort of founds, and dancing in a fucceflion of 
a certain fort of fteps, geftures, and motions, regulated 
according to time or meafure, and thereby formed into 
a fort of whole or fyftem ; which in the one art is called 
a fong or tune, and in the other a dance ; the time or 
meafure of the dance correfponding always exactly with 
that of the fong or tune which accompanies and di- 
redts it. 
“ A pantomime dance, by reprefenting fome adventure 
in love or war, gives fenfe and meaning to a mufic which 
might not otherwife appear to have any. It is more 
natural to mimic, by geftures and motions, the adven¬ 
tures of common life, than to exprefs them in poetry. 
The thought itfelf is more obvious, and the execution 
is much more eafy. If this mimicry was accompanied 
by mufic, it would of its own accord, and alrnoft with¬ 
out any intention of doing fo, accommodate, in fome 
meafure, its different fteps and movements to the time 
and meafure of the tune ; efpecially if the fame perfon 
both fupg the tune and performed the mimicry, as is faid 
to be frequently the cafe among the favage nations of 
Africa and America. Pantomime dancing might in this 
manner ferve to give a diftinot fenfe and meaning to mu- 
fie many ages before the invention, or at leaft before the 
common ufe, of poetry. We hear little, accordingly, of 
the poetry of the lavage nations of Africa and America, 
but a great deal of their pantomime dances. Poetry, 
however, is capable of exprefiing many things fully and 
diftincftly, which dancing either cannot reprefent at all, 
or can reprefent but obfcurely and imperfectly ; fuch as 
the reafonings and judgments of the underftanding; the 
ideas, fancies, and fufpicions, of the imagination; the fen- 
timents, emotions, and paflions, of the heart. In the 
power ol exprefting a meaning with clearnefs and dif- 
tinCtnefs, dancing is fuperior to mufic, and poetry to 
dancing. Of thefe three filler arts, which originally, 
perhaps, went always together, and which at all times 
go frequently together, there are two which can fublift 
alone, and feparate from their natural companions, and 
one which cannot. In the diftind'r obfervation of what 
the ancients called rhythmus, or time and meafure, con- 
fifts the elfence both of dancing and of poetry; or the cha- 
raCteriltical quality which diftinguifties the former from 
all other motion and action, and the latter from all other 
difeourfe. But, concerning the proportion between thofe 
intervals and divilions of duration which conftitute what 
is called time and meafure, the ear, it would feern, can 
judge with much more precifion than the eye ; and poe¬ 
try, in the fame manner ns mufic, addreffes itfelf to the 
ear, whereas dancing addreffes itfelf to the eye. In 
dancing, the rhythmus, the proper proportion, the time 
and meafure of its motions, cannot diftinitly be per¬ 
ceived, unlefs they are marked, by the more diftiriCt time 
and meafure of mufic. It is otherwife in poetry; no 
accompaniment is neceffary to mark the meafure of good 
verfe. Mufic and poetry, therefore, can each of them 
fublift alone; dancing always requires the accompani¬ 
ment of mufic. 
“ We might obferve, however, that the imitative 
powers of dancing are much fuperior to thofe of inftru¬ 
mental mufic, and are at leaft equal, perhaps fuperior, 
to thofe of any other art. Like inftrumental mufic, how¬ 
ever, it is not neceffarily or effentialiy imitative, and it 
can produce very agreeable effedts, without imitating 
any thing. In the greater part of our common dances 
there is little or no imitation, and they confift alrnoft en¬ 
tirely of a fucceflion of fuch fteps, geftures, and motions, 
regulated by the time and meafure of mufic, as either 
difpkiy extraordinary grace, or require extraordinary 
agility. Even fome of our dances, which are faid to 
have been originally imitative, have, in the way in which 
we pradlife them, alrnoft ceafed to be fo. The minuet, 
in which the woman, after palling and repafling the man 
feveral times, firft gives him up one hand, then the other, 
and then both hands, is faid to have been originally a 
Moorifh dance, which emblematically reprefented the 
pallion of love. Many have danced this dance, and ftiil 
more have feen it, who never once thought of the allego. 
rical meaning which it originally Intended to exprefs. 
“ A certain meafured, cadenced, ftep, commonly called 
a dancing ftep, which keeps time with, and, as it were, 
beats the meafure of, the mufic which accompanies and 
diredts it, is the effential charafteriftic which diftinguifiies 
a dance from every other fort of motion. When the 
dancer, moving with a ftep of this kind, and obferving 
this time and meafure, imitates either the ordinary or 
the more important adtions of human life, he fhapes and 
falliions, as it were, a thing of one kind, into the refem. 
blance of another thing of a very different kind : his art 
conquers the difparity which nature has placed between; 
the imitating and the imitated object, and has, upon that 
account, fome degree of that fort of merit which belongs 
to all the imitative arts. This difparity, indeed, is not 
fo great as in fome other of thofe arts, nor confequently 
the merit of the imitation which conquers it. Nobody 
would compare the merit of a good imitative dancer to 
that of a good painter or ftatuary. The dancer, however, 
may have a very confiderable degree of merit, and his 
imitation, perhaps, may fometimes be capable of giving 
us as much pleafure as that of either of the other two 
artifts. All the fubjedts, either of ftatuary or of hiftory 
painting, are within the compafs of his imitative powers j 
and, in reprefenting them, his art has even fome advan¬ 
tage over both the other two. Statuary and hiftory 
painting can reprefent but a fingle inftant of the attion 
which they mean to imitate : the caufes which prepared, 
the confequences which followed, the fituation of that 
fingle inftant, are altogether beyond the compafs of their 
imitation. A pantomime dance can reprefent diftindtly 
thofe caufes and confequences ; it is not confined to the 
fituation of a fingle inftant ; but, like epic poetry, it 
can reprefent all the events of a long ftory, and exhibit 
a long train and fucceflion of connected and interefting 
fituations. It is capable therefore of affeCting us much 
more than either ftatuary or painting. The ancient Rqc 
mans ufed to ftied tears at the reprefentations of their 
pantomimes, as we do at that of the moft interefting tra¬ 
gedies ; an effedft which is altogether beyond the powers 
of ftatuary or painting. 
The ancient Greeks appear to have been a nation of 
dancers, and both their common and their ftage dances 
feem to have been all imitative. The ftage dances of 
tlie ancient Romans appear to have been equally fo. 
Among that grave people it was reckoned indecent to 
dance in private focieties ; and they could therefore have 
no common dances. Among both nations imitation feems 
to have been confidered as effential to dancing. It is quite 
otherwife in modern times : though we have pantomime 
dances upon the ftage, yet the greater part even of our 
ftages dances are not pantomime, and cannot well be faid 
to imitate any thing. The greater part of our common 
dances either never were pantomime, or, with a very 
few exceptions, have alrnoft all ceafed to be fo. This re¬ 
markable difference of character between the ancient and 
the modern dances feems to be the natural effect of a 
correfponder.t difference in that of the mufic, which has 
accompanied and directed both the one and the other. 
In modern times we alrnoft always dance to inftrumental 
mufic, which being itfelf not imitative, the greater part 
of the dances which it directs, and, as it were, infpires, 
have ceafed to be fo. In ancient times, on the contrary, 
they feem to have danced alrnoft always to vocal mufic; 
which being neceffary • and elfentially imitative, their 
dances became fo too. The ancients feem to have had 
little or nothing of what is properly called inftrumental 
Hiufic, 
