Thread: When researching history...

I've seen all too many dancers read a book about the history of belly dance and then quote comments from the book as though it were Truth.

I think it might be helpful to remind folks that historical accounts of belly dancing (or anything else) are largely shaped by the writer's opinion. Yes, even mine. Every writer must make decisions on what to include and what to exclude. Also, every writer possesses limited knowledge. Meaning, there's a lot that I (or anybody else) who has studied the history of belly dance just plain don't know.

Whenever possible, it's best to look at the same primary source as the author of your book or article looked at. For example, in a perfect world you'd be able to see the actual Mesopotamian plaque that led the author of the article you're reading to draw certain conclusions about Near Eastern history. If you can't see the actual plaque, the next-best thing is to see a clear photo of it. You may interpret the image differently from how the author of the article did.

Example: I once read a book that asserted that ancient people did a sacred circle dance. The book's author drew this conclusion from the fact that an ancient dwelling place had a circular indentation worn into the rock surrounding a fire pit. Now, I suppose that a ritualistic dance could be one possible explanation for an indentation of this sort. But it seems equally plausible to me to imagine a family all crouching together around the fire on a cold night to keep warm. Or, family members squatting around the fire to cook meals. Or, something else entirely. So when you see a book say, "An indentation was found around a firepit, and therefore we think ancient people did a ritualistic circle dance," stop and ask yourself what other explanations there could be for the observed phenomenon. And as you read the rest of the book, remember those alternate explanations. It's okay for the author to have theories, but it's also okay for you to question them.

Here's a quote from page 79 of Layne Redmond's book "When the Drummers Were Women":

"Scholar Joan Rimmer describes a large number of figurines and plaques of women holding 'flat circular objects'. She interprets these as frame drums.... These sculptures of women with frame drums have been identified as 'woman with votive disk' or 'woman with cake'. There is a traditional position of holding and playing the frame drum still practiced today... that looks identical to the position labeled 'woman with cake'. Furthermore, anyone who has actually baked a cake would only attempt to carry it in this position once."

In other words, when you're reading information about history, if you see a photo of something and a caption titling it something, remember to look carefully and determine whether the caption is the only possible explanation. What other plausible explanations can you think of? Do you think the writer's explanation is the most logical one? Maybe, maybe not!

My point is that people interpret what they see through the filters of their own personal experience and imaginations. Whenever you read someone else's account of history, remember that they are viewing history through their own personal lens, which may or may not be different from yours. So always try to find out where the writer got the "facts" she is stating, and if possible view the original source for yourself. You may end up concluding that the writer's interpretation is the one that seems most plausible to you, but then again, you might not!

There's a marvelous book by Ronald Hutton-a British history professor. I forget the name-he's written about 3 books. Anyway, in this book he writes about myths that have shaped the modern western world-King Arthur and the like.

There is a story that he tells of an anthropologist in England that went to a faire that's been held for many, many years in the countryside. While there, she saw that the grand marshall for the activities was wearing women's garb. From this she concluded (and published an article about!) that the faire was a remnant from ancient matriarchal cultures and had originally been about a fertility rite.

Imagine her surprise when she returned a few years later to find that the same grand marshall was dressed-as a clown! Turns out that the GM always dresses in costume, and it's pretty much whatever costume he feels like wearing that year.

So, you can't even trust your own eyes if you are determined to jump to conclusions. Just did a quick search: Witches, Druids, and King Arthur

Kitty

Originally Posted by *Shira*

Whenever you read someone else's account of history, remember that they are viewing history through their own personal lens, which may or may not be different from yours. So always try to find out where the writer got the "facts" she is stating, and if possible view the original source for yourself. You may end up concluding that the writer's interpretation is the one that seems most plausible to you, but then again, you might not!

When I talk to my Historical Recreation friends about this sort of issue, what comes up a great deal is citations, and following those citations. I find it's an issue with a work with it's lightly cited, when it gives facts without a solid basis in another work, or when it's clearly opinion that's without any presented foundation.
A negative example was the history section in GRANDMOTHER'S SECRETS. The author spent page after page on the early history of dance, but gave maybe a cite per page. It was impossibe to follow her assertions, to do my own research on what she was saying, and she didnt even claim (as I recall) that this was some kind of distant, passed-down oral history.
If I find that kind of work, I become very doubtful about it's statements, and give it less weight than, say, the well-researched and documented information in LOOKING FOR LITTLE EGYPT, or A TRADE LIKE ANY OTHER.

In cases like these I like to mention this book about body language by Desmond Morris. I have it in German, it's probably "Bodywatching" in English (maybe somebody can find it at a library).

It's about different body parts and their meanings in different cultures.

In the chapter "belly" he describes a scene about bellydancing "harem girls" who try to make the fat, old sultan horny with their dance in such vibrant colors as if he had been there and watched them.
And hey, he is a famous researcher and writer, so it must be true, right? ..c::

Just because something is written in a book, doesn't mean it's true.
If possible it's always best to have 3 different, independent sources.

MEISSOUN

There's a marvelous book by Ronald Hutton-a British history professor. I forget the name-he's written about 3 books. Anyway, in this book he writes about myths that have shaped the modern western world-King Arthur and the like.

Ron Hutton (yes you got the name right) is pretty fab. He's probably one of the very few genuinely academic researchers and writers who is able to write in an intelligent and informed way, using primary research, about an area of history that (let's face it) is usually only discussed in terms of wishful thinking and/or out and out fantasy.

I'd also recommend, if you *really* want to take this stuff seriously, reading some proper dance anthropology written in the last 40 years. If anybody uses Curt Sachs as a source (unless of course they are only mentioning him to critique him), take a step back. If anybody uses Wendy Buonaventura in the same manner, take two steps back. It's not that the author is necessarily wilfully ignorant, only that they're using a highly outdated source that have been critiqued quite effectively by anthropologists since the early 70s if not before.

What's the deal with Curt Sachs? We had to read his world dance history or big manifesto on world dance when I was in ballet. Is he way off? I just remember it being very dry and boring.

Also, Layne's book -- When the Drummers were Women -- is it considered an okay reference or not? I found a couple of points where I wondered about her interpretations, but for the most part didn't have a problem with it.

I used to be *really* naive about this stuff. If it was printed in a book, then it must be irrefutable fact, right? HAH! Since then I've been involved in the publishing process, now I know better. There's likely NO ONE verifying ANY of the facts in a book. Maybe a university press is more stringent than a typical publisher? I don't know. The only sources that I consider even half-way dependable are peer-reviewed journals.

Certain stuff gets repeated SO often. You read the same info on 15 or 20 websites and don't realize that they're all getting it from each other, or from the same flawed source.

Shira, just PMd you on a related note.

When I was still school teaching it became compulsory to teach britain fro 1945 to the present day. It made me hoot with laughter to read the books on the 1960s and 70s decade I remembered very clearly as a child and teenager and the text books were so way off and generalised so much. You can only get an idea or an impression. One persons fact is not someone elses when it comes to history of anything. You can't say every body did this or everybody wore that because they didn't. Social history is particularly hard to record. So many people claim to have invented stuff or been the first to do stuff.

If anybody uses Wendy Buonaventura in the same manner, take two steps back. It's not that the author is necessarily wilfully ignorant, only that they're using a highly outdated source that have been critiqued quite effectively by anthropologists since the early 70s if not before.

Amen. Great pictures; shameful, shameful writing and shocking referencing for someone who is supposedly from an academic background.

Maybe a university press is more stringent than a typical publisher?

Not necessarily. Depends on who it is really, but not a guarantee of quality in terms of either content, critical evaluation or referencing. I have personally corrected and edited some appallingly inaccurate referencing from one of *the* most famous university presses in the world and their response to this was 'Accuracy, accountability, who needs all that stuff?'




Always, always keep the salt cellar to hand when doing research. There are some great authors out there and some great publishers but a hell of a lot gets through the net.

Originally Posted by aziyade

Also, Layne's book -- When the Drummers were Women -- is it considered an okay reference or not? I found a couple of points where I wondered about her interpretations, but for the most part didn't have a problem with it.

I enjoyed the book, but I did have a couple of issues with it. Take what I'm about to say with a grain of salt, because it has been about 5 years since I read it...

One concern I had with it was that it adhered to the idea that there was once this big matriarchal society in which women were empowered and served as the rulers, including positions of priestess, civil/tribal rulers, etc. Modern historians say that no such utopia-for-women ever existed. They may have been more equal to men in power than what was allowed by the patriarchal religions that came later, but not rulers.

Another concern that I had with it was that Redmond took a rather strong editorial position throughout the book, making a number of wry comments or even open criticisms of the assumptions made by male researchers and their interpretations of the primary sources.

Now, in her defense, she was trying to establish that the dominance of men in the field of archeology and anthropology has led to evidence being filtered through a "woman as homemaker" cultural preconception, and that much "history" we've seen written has been based on this foundation. I do feel she has a legitimate point of view.

So, it's legitimate for her to state that she sees things a different way from the establishment and present her evidence of why. But the thing I found troubling was that she stated her position with what appeared to be a lot of sarcasm and emotion. It made her seem less like a researcher with an opposing point of view and more like someone who had an axe to grind.

Which books would you ladies recommend? Since I've only been dancing for a little over two years, I want to make sure that I am picking up and recommending reputable bellydance books.

Thanks bunches!

Originally Posted by aziyade

What's the deal with Curt Sachs? We had to read his world dance history or big manifesto on world dance when I was in ballet. Is he way off? I just remember it being very dry and boring.

I don't have the really good critical article to hand, but the problems with Sachs are multiple. One of the chief criticisms is that he didn't personally witness much of what he writes about, so he relied upon secondary sources without checking them (and without making that clear in his work). Secondly, he ascribes to an evolutionary model which has been challenged for many years. Sachs believed that all dance stemmed from a single root, and evolved. At the bottom end you have Primitive Man copying birds and at the top end you have ballet. Sachs also believed that cultures could not change unless they came into contact with more developed cultures - I'm not quite sure how the "developed" cultures got more developed, though I have an awful feeling it has something to do with being Aryan - so he believed that if certain kinds of movements were present in the dances of "primitive" cultures, that kind of dance must be very old. Ergo, since "primitive" people in the Pacific, etc, moved their hips when they danced, dances with hip movements must go back to neolithic times. This view assumes that cultures aren't independently creative and that all cultures are effectively the same, just at different stages of development. It's problematic - and, as Shay and Sellers-Young point out in their article which critiques Sachs, racist. Shay and Sellers-Young also criticise Sachs for overvaluing ideas of antiquity and sexuality when talking about BD, which they see as an Orientalist position.

I have to confess I haven't read his whole book, but I have read the sections on belly dance. It was all a bit vague really. I'd like to nab it and read it all one day.

Something that is very, very important when talking about history is a recognition that there isn't one. Histories are narratives and they're culturally constructed, and they are multiple. There is no singular truth, only sets of facts/figures/ideas that overlap in enough narratives for us to be able to think they probably have some credibility. Cultural contextualisation is also key. Again, I'm sorry I don't have the article to hand, but Anthony Shay critiques someone's assumption (possibly Sachs') that very old images of people with their hands held in a "rhomboid" position must be praying. Shay, being someone who knows quite a lot about Persian dance, points out multiple historical images which their creators explicitly said showed dancers, in which people are doing the same thing. And for him, what they're doing is very clearly something people still do, which is a finger snap. Thus he argues that these images must be of dancers.

I do think it's risky to make assumptions about an image because it looks like something we do now, but I think Shay is probably right.

Originally Posted by khadiya

Amen. Great pictures; shameful, shameful writing and shocking referencing for someone who is supposedly from an academic background.



Not necessarily. Depends on who it is really, but not a guarantee of quality in terms of either content, critical evaluation or referencing. I have personally corrected and edited some appallingly inaccurate referencing from one of *the* most famous university presses in the world and their response to this was 'Accuracy, accountability, who needs all that stuff?'

I've read fairly glowing reviews of Wendy B in academic journals as well. It's because it's being looked at as a feminist text, not critiqued in terms of its anthropology or dance historical content. The reviewers just get caught up in all the swoony Women's Culture stuff and go ooh and ahh at the pretty pictures, I suspect. They don't pick up on the problems with the actual history because that's not their field of expertise.

It has to be said, Serpent of the Nile is a very compelling book and a lot of women fall in love with it. Those rich, exotic fantasies of a sturdy, sensual, ancient women's culture are very appealing. I was picking holes in Rosina al Fawzi the other day and found myself feeling all 80s feminist looking at the pictures. It definitely strikes a chord and feels real. (I think those same unconscious fantasies and desires are behind the appeal of old-school Tribal. It looks like those paintings and those Orientalist descriptions. I've never heard anyone talk about falling for BD the way people talk about falling for tribal.)

Originally Posted by Sitara9

Which books would you ladies recommend? Since I've only been dancing for a little over two years, I want to make sure that I am picking up and recommending reputable bellydance books.

Thanks bunches!

A Trade Like Any Other by Karin Van Nieuwkerk
Looking for Little Egypt by Donna Carlton

One of the things that has always bugged me in researching history (and "primitives") is that many researchers assume that earlier folk lacked a sense of humor and a need for leisure.

When I was at Carrowmore in Ireland a few years back, the guide pointed out that Neolithic folk of the area had to put in only 3 hours a day of work to survive-compare that to the amount of time that YOU put into survival! That means that there were a lot of hours left to fill. So, why not build large monuments and move around a lot of rocks into pleasing shapes? And once you have done that-why not use them for those bodies that you were just disposing of?

In other words, maybe the cave paintings really were just paintings-do you never doodle? And, sometimes, my dance ISN"T simply fraught with deep meaning-sometimes I'm just having fun! And, sometimes, I do parody numbers to laugh a little.

Maybe everything needs to be taken with a little grain of salt. After all, these were MY ancestors, too; my world approach came from somewhere!

Originally Posted by Sitara9

Which books would you ladies recommend? Since I've only been dancing for a little over two years, I want to make sure that I am picking up and recommending reputable bellydance books.

Thanks bunches!

I did a Amazon Listmania of books I've found to be solid awhile back. It's not 100% BD, as I include some books on cultural issues, like Eward Said's Orentalism, but the core are works that deal with the dance from an academic prespective.

Ah, research.

And my math students would believe anything they read on the internet. On one page on the internet. I at least want to see something from a source I know, or repeated by a number of sources. Though the way bellydance mythology passes from teacher to student, and then said student becomes a teacher.......

Originally Posted by *Shira*

A Trade Like Any Other by Karin Van Nieuwkerk
Looking for Little Egypt by Donna Carlton

Definitely! Also Shay's stuff is worth a look.
Shay, Anthony & Sellers-Young, Barbara (2005) Belly Dance - Orientalism, Transnationalism & Harem Fantasy, Costa Mesa, Ca: Mazda Publishers - general cover

Shay, Anthony (2002) Choreographic Politics, Middletown: Wesleyan University Press

No so much "belly dance" as state folklore troupe - an interesting piece on the Reda Troupe if that side interests you (warning - a slightly less easy read than "Belly Dance")

One of the things that has always bugged me in researching history (and "primitives") is that many researchers assume that earlier folk lacked a sense of humor and a need for leisure.

Oh yeah. I've met this, and related approaches, more than a few times over the years. There is a fatal tendency to assume that person's from the past were entirely cretinous due to their lack of access to/not having invented 'modern attitudes' and facilities.

My old tutor used to refer to this as the

'Shakespeare was an idiot because he hadn't heard of Marx' approach.

One thing I've always found "interesting" in history books is the assertion that ancient people worshiped a great mother goddess, and they base this on the evidence of carvings of voluptuous women such as Venus of Willendorf. Well, I'd agree that the idea of these being totem/goddess figures is one valid *theory*, but I think an equally valid *theory* is just that some guy really liked a certain woman and made a carving of her. Maybe a guy wanted to honor his mother, or maybe he wanted to honor the woman who gave birth to his child.

One thing I've always found "interesting" in history books is the assertion that ancient people worshiped a great mother goddess, and they base this on the evidence of carvings of voluptuous women such as Venus of Willendorf. Well, I'd agree that the idea of these being totem/goddess figures is one valid *theory*, but I think an equally valid *theory* is just that some guy really liked a certain woman and made a carving of her. Maybe a guy wanted to honor his mother, or maybe he wanted to honor the woman who gave birth to his child.

I couldn't agree with you more!

There's nothing necessarily wrong with complex theories but I've always thought it equally probable that people are motivated by more banal reasons such as 'I just took a fancy to it'; 'because it's there'; and 'I had something like it to hand at the time'.

Maybe it was neolithic porn!

Originally Posted by asim1

I did a Amazon Listmania of books I've found to be solid awhile back. It's not 100% BD, as I include some books on cultural issues, like Eward Said's Orentalism, but the core are works that deal with the dance from an academic prespective.

Good list, Asim.

Thanks everybody!!..g.:

Originally Posted by zumarrad

Maybe it was neolithic porn!

That's my theory. Every time new media is invented (in my time it's been super8 film, pay-per-minute phone lines, VHS, the internet) the pornographers get there first. Why would stone carving be any different?

(just being flip, I don't mean to offend any goddess worshippers)

Originally Posted by kashmir

Definitely! Also Shay's stuff is worth a look.
Shay, Anthony & Sellers-Young, Barbara (2005) Belly Dance - Orientalism, Transnationalism & Harem Fantasy, Costa Mesa, Ca: Mazda Publishers - general cover

Shay, Anthony (2002) Choreographic Politics, Middletown: Wesleyan University Press

No so much "belly dance" as state folklore troupe - an interesting piece on the Reda Troupe if that side interests you (warning - a slightly less easy read than "Belly Dance")

Totally agree read this one. An academic read for sure. Still tons of interesting information right up to modern day.

Originally Posted by asim1

I did a Amazon Listmania of books I've found to be solid awhile back. It's not 100% BD, as I include some books on cultural issues, like Eward Said's Orentalism, but the core are works that deal with the dance from an academic prespective.

Originally Posted by *Shira*

A Trade Like Any Other by Karin Van Nieuwkerk
Looking for Little Egypt by Donna Carlton

Thanks!

just read 'A trade like any other' I thought it was excellent and will recommended it to my interested students...