Origins of Belly Dance: India

[Tarik Sultan]

Didn't the Ottoman Empire influence have some effect here, as it reigned over the majority of North Africa at one point and for some time, so it stands to reason that the dance could have evolved from this source and been to some extent heavily influenced also.

Well, like I said, the majority of Turkish dances are line and circle dances, so if there was an influence, we would have seen line and circle dances being the norm in Egypt, but this isn't the case. In fact, with the exception of the Nubians, solo improvisational dances are the rule in Egypt, but the exception in Turkey. Now there are Asiatic influences in Egyptian dance. The way the hands and arms are used are clearly Asiatic, but I tend to believe that it probably came into the region during the time of Persian domination of Egypt right before Alexanders conquest. Now I'll admit that this is just educated guess work on my part and those elements could have come into the area either through the larger islamic cultural exchange, or with the Turks, but I would go for the Islamic cultural exchange via the silk road as #2 and Turks as #3 for the arms. It is definately not of African origin.

 

[Tarik Sultan]

As for the African Origin Theory that was pretty much thrown out when they admitted to 3 rather then 1 branch of origin... which folklore has already explained. Iran, say what you will, is still the "cradle of civilization" and will likely stay that way.[/QUOTE]

Iran is not the cradle of civilization. No culture or region can make that claim. To do so is to invalidate the achievements of other cultures around the world. Egypt's ancient civilization was one that was birthed in North East Africa, not Asia. West Africa had several civilizations that evolved independently of anyone else. Not to mention all the American civilizations. No matter how old Iran's history may be, it doesn't mean that they influenced anyone else except those people closest to them.

 

[Ariadne]

Is this what you were referring to? As it's mostly from Internet forums and Internet histo-theologians (made that up :dance I'll google for more but until it comes from more legit scholarly sources, I'm thinking it's just a case of "veerry interesting".

Oh there is a lot more sources on the subject with documentations. The issue you will run into however when you study "history" that far back though is that a lot of it wasn't written down until hundreds, if not a thousand, years later. It's oral and just like in parts of Ireland etc where you had oral history much of it is lost with the exception of what was written by later generations who are repeating what they have been told rather then experienced. You basically have to piece together folk tales, stories from this religion or that one, so on an so forth but if you take the time the image that can emerge is fascinating. Especially since Archeologist are only just discovering new cities and tombs that add new light on a time that had literally fallen into the depths of the past.

I still remember when people where claiming that the entire story of Israel's founding had to have been made up because we had a list of pharaohs by which we could judge the era's and none of them matched up. Then they discovered an entire 500 years of pharaohs that had been erased from the list by the ones who won the war and replaced them. Now the question is when not if. In my experience with history, oral folk histories tend to have more then a grain of truth to them.

Mind you this all comes back to my original point (dancing wise) that you would have to go back very far to stretch for that kind of link and then from a time period where records are so lacking it can't be proven one way or the other.



On the side... hasn't pretty much everyone conquered Egypt at least once sometime in history? It's almost like you don't count as a super power if you don't have Egypt. Talk about a melting pot! It makes me cry to think of what happened to the library of Alexandria.

PS. I believe the "cradle" quote concerning Iran is a reference to it's age specifically (civil equaling cities) not it's cultural influence or lack thereof. At least that is how I have always understood it; age rather then "trendiness".

 

[bluetowels]

Oh there is a lot more sources on the subject with documentations. The issue you will run into however when you study "history" that far back though is that a lot of it wasn't written down until hundreds, if not a thousand, years later.

Sure. However, unless I'm lead to the sources that you would claim to be true instead of even more pseudoscientific forum hogwash, I will continue to be wading about random theories which I can't accept to be legit.

Are you a historian with specific interest in Vedism or was it just a random discovery kind of thing?

I'm of the 'came outta Cairo nightclubs' school of thought, I don't have an interest in going far into the earliest record of dance to ascertain who was the very first at moving hips. Right now though, I'm hunting down this Vedism link. And so far, I've got to Stephen Knapp's and Gene Matlock's books which cannot be taken as facts.

PS. I believe the "cradle" quote concerning Iran is a reference to it's age specifically (civil equaling cities) not it's cultural influence or lack thereof. At least that is how I have always understood it; age rather then "trendiness".

Doesn't really help does it, if it's merely a title? Scholars have a multiple-cradle theory with civilisations beginning at different parts of the world independent of each other as you already know. It doesn't matter which is the oldest if it just marks out the start of another age.

 

[Tarik Sultan]

On the side... hasn't pretty much everyone conquered Egypt at least once sometime in history? It's almost like you don't count as a super power if you don't have Egypt. Talk about a melting pot! It makes me cry to think of what happened to the library of Alexandria.

Egypt had been conquered several times, but by that time their civilization was already 3,000 years old. I really don't see why we need to place a date on the dance or how such a thing is even possible. Who knows, who cares and why do we need to know?

What we need to know, we can see with the naked eye. Its a North East variation on a larger African theme with some Central Asiatic influences. There isn't any reason to think that it came from anywhere else but where it is now, or that it had any other purpose than what it has now, just fun. But it being an African dance just done by the locals primarily done for fun doesn't sell tickets or fill dance classes does it? The mystique is much more fun. Especially for Westerners looking for a bit of escapism. India is "exotic and mysterious". Africa is that place full of strange darkies running around in grass skirts waving chicken bones in most peoples imaginations. We're use to thinking of them in terms of being slaves, starving and oppressed. Not as being the originators of anything of significance and so we have to divorce Egypt from the continent, then depopulate it so that it is free to be inhabited by Arabs and all kinds of Eastern mystics and fairy folk who brought with them this magical mystical dance.

PS. I believe the "cradle" quote concerning Iran is a reference to it's age specifically (civil equaling cities) not it's cultural influence or lack thereof. At least that is how I have always understood it; age rather then "trendiness".

I don't understand how this relates to the dance in question. Egypt was its own civilization and culture. It borrowed things from its neighbors, but in those cases its very easy to determine the sources an they did it on their terms. Iran has its dance traditions, but no where in Iran or on the Asian continent do we see the complexity of torso and hip articulations that we see in Egypt. We do however, see it in Egypt's neighbors to the south , South East and West. This is primarily one of many African dances done by an African people since god knows how long for the purpose of having fun.

What we need to understand is that our ideas of who or what is an African was shaped by colonialism. Therefore, any time we see something in Africa that doesn't conform to the stereotype, whether it be the appearance of a people, their culture or architecture, we have to explain it in terms of coming from somewhere else. So East Africans had to have come from somewhere else, because Africans can't have pointy noses, Egypt had to come from Arabians, first in prehistory and then with the coming of Islam and the dance also had to come from Arabs. Even though the evidence on the ground shows it to be an anomaly to the movement vocabulary. But even when we can see that it fits in very easily in the region where it is from, north and East Africa, some how, we still can't wrap our heads around that. There is more than one way to look African and there is more than one way to BE African

 

[khanjar]

Hey Tarik, given what you know, have researched and have seen, you would be a good person to write a book or paper to perhaps throw more light onto what this dance is. You prove your theories by giving examples, and you know what you are looking for, some educational work from you would be very good and a great help to us all and may go somewhere to scotching all the myths and egocentric hypothesis that are put forward by those who wish to gain or otherwise influence.

 

[Kharis]

Well, like I said, the majority of Turkish dances are line and circle dances, so if there was an influence, we would have seen line and circle dances being the norm in Egypt, but this isn't the case. In fact, with the exception of the Nubians, solo improvisational dances are the rule in Egypt, but the exception in Turkey. Now there are Asiatic influences in Egyptian dance. The way the hands and arms are used are clearly Asiatic, but I tend to believe that it probably came into the region during the time of Persian domination of Egypt right before Alexanders conquest. Now I'll admit that this is just educated guess work on my part and those elements could have come into the area either through the larger islamic cultural exchange, or with the Turks, but I would go for the Islamic cultural exchange via the silk road as #2 and Turks as #3 for the arms. It is definately not of African origin.

I've read that the the dancing of Turkey was influenced in part by the ancient Greeks, the Romans and the Persians and also historically by the Central Asians, and the Mongols. The Ottoman Empire covered the Balkans, Greece, Hungary, Egypt, southern Europe, Palestine, Algeria as well as Cyprus and there must have been cultural interchanges in all the performing arts which in turn have all gone into the melting pot to produce what we see today. How much of what is written is speculation, I wonder. What is the truth? It always seems so hard to pin down. This is why I get discombobulated with it all. I'm more concerned with the here and now, quite frankly. For me there seem to be too many people with conflicting opinions about what is right, wrong, pure and sullied, can I do this, can't I do that, am i right, wrong, will I offend....zzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Ariadne]

I don't understand how this relates to the dance in question.

It doesn't, which is what I was trying to point out. :lol:

My whole point was that we know it came out of Egypt (as you have said) and to try and claim an earlier source from India, or anywhere else, is as useful as claiming that as long as man has lived he's danced so you might as well claim an origin of Iran (oldest known) as India. It's me being amused, that's all.


@bluetowels I have two brothers who are historians and thanks to them I've read a lot on the history and origins of various religions. Don't bother looking for an ancient Vedic link to dance, as far as I know it doesn't exist. The origin of Vedism is only interesting in terms of the migration of idea's and beliefs, a subject I find fascinating personally. I have seen multiple reliable sources draw a logical connection between Abraham and Brahma but that is the extent of it. Everything beyond that is conjecture and wistful thinking. As a student of religious history though the conjunction of the origins of every major religion is irresistibly fascinating to me. The time period it occurred in even more so but difficult to study due to a lack of records/evidence. If it isn't something that interests you though don't bother as it really does have nothing to do with bellydance. I only mentioned it to illuminate a point... and because I couldn't resist. Bad Ariadne. :lol:

 

[khanjar]

Curious the letters used in both Abraham and Brahma, if it wasn't for the ' A ' in Abraham, the two names would be too similar, maybe there is after all a common thread to the worlds religions and beliefs.

 

[Tarik Sultan]

Hey Tarik, given what you know, have researched and have seen, you would be a good person to write a book or paper to perhaps throw more light onto what this dance is. You prove your theories by giving examples, and you know what you are looking for, some educational work from you would be very good and a great help to us all and may go somewhere to scotching all the myths and egocentric hypothesis that are put forward by those who wish to gain or otherwise influence.

I'm working on something. But it takes a lot of time, which is why I've been spending less time here. I have to get my act together in a lot of areas so that I can do things like that.

 

[PoleDanceABCs]

I just have to say thanks to all the good info here. I love all those videos on the first page.

 

[Rp1983]

I'm sorry to bring up such an old topic and apologize if I say anything that's been stated.

I would say Bollywood dances (the kind you see in films) are the type of Indian dance that takes elements from ME Belly dance, such as hip drops, ohmis (spelling?), chest lifts, arms/hands, and belly rolls. Here are two Bollywood videos where you might see that.

YouTube - ‪AAJA NACH LE‬‏

YouTube - ‪Mehboob Mere‬‏

The type of Indian dance that the OP posted is just one type of classical dance (bharatnatyam) that some Indians don't even like to do. Don't get me wrong-I'm not criticizing Bharatnatyam as I think it's beautiful (but found it tiring myself!), but that dance alone doesn't define Indian dancing as a whole. Some Indians strictly learn classical dance, while others would rather do Bollywood, folk or Bhangra.

I just started taking belly dancing classes and do notice the distinct difference between Indian dancing. Sure, there may similarities, but belly dancing is more refined and isolated with an emphasis on posture.

I admit I used to think "Why take belly dancing classes, if the moves are similar to what you see in hindi film dances?" I was definitely proven wrong. :lol: Regardless where it belly dancing came from, I just love it. It's so fun.

 

[Amanda (was Aziyade)]

I'm sorry to bring up such an old topic and apologize if I say anything that's been stated.

I would say Bollywood dances (the kind you see in films) are the type of Indian dance that takes elements from ME Belly dance, such as hip drops, ohmis (spelling?), chest lifts, arms/hands, and belly rolls. Here are two Bollywood videos where you might see that.

Oh I don't think there's any doubt that Bollywood borrows from whatever the choreographer wants! Bollywood is extremely similar in that way to Western theatrical/Broadway-style dance. There are no boundaries

But the question is, can we trace the origins of what we now call Belly Dance to particular regions in India (or even the Romani) -- and I think the overwhelming majority of the evidence says no. Most (but not all) dance historians and scholars agree that "belly dance" is a product of North Africa, with more African roots than Indian ones.

Lots of dance forms "borrow" from belly dance -- either as it actually is done, or as it is THOUGHT to be done (which can be kind of funny if not outright bizarre. )

 

[Farasha Hanem]

Oh I don't think there's any doubt that Bollywood borrows from whatever the choreographer wants! Bollywood is extremely similar in that way to Western theatrical/Broadway-style dance. There are no boundaries

But the question is, can we trace the origins of what we now call Belly Dance to particular regions in India (or even the Romani) -- and I think the overwhelming majority of the evidence says no. Most (but not all) dance historians and scholars agree that "belly dance" is a product of North Africa, with more African roots than Indian ones.

Lots of dance forms "borrow" from belly dance -- either as it actually is done, or as it is THOUGHT to be done (which can be kind of funny if not outright bizarre. )

Kinda like the non-bellydance community does in this country?



Don't get me wrong, I love America's Best Dance Crew, but that week's challenge...oyyyyy...

sorry for the temporary thread hijack! ^^;;;;