Tracking the Mescolanzes

The topic of mescolanzes, four-facing-four country dances, and whether the famous dance La Tempête was the only surviving member of the genre by the mid- to late nineteenth century, came up in an email exchange recently.  Mescolanzes are one of those dance genres for which I have spent years slowly accumulating examples, so I thought I'd talk a little bit about the format and where dances called mescolanzes appeared over the course of the nineteenth century.

I'm going to limit this quick survey to more-or-less anglophone countries -- England, America, Scotland, Canada, and Australia -- since I've not yet collated all the information I have from other countries.  I'm also not going to discuss La Tempête specifically, since that is an enormous topic all on its own.  Here and now, I will only survey dances appearing under the name or classification "mescolanze" and its several (mis)spellings.

London dancing master and author G. M. S. Chivers claimed to have invented the mescolanze format in the late 1810s.  He published around two dozen different figures for them, including a version of La Tempête, in at least three of his books on dancing: The Dancer's Guide (c1820), The Modern Dancing Master (1822), and The Dancing Master in Miniature (c1825).  He also supposedly published both a book specifically on mescolanzes and some separate sets of them, but I have not yet been able to find copies of these publications.

No one at the time seems to have argued with him about the credit.  The Lowe brothers, part of a whole family of Scottish dance teachers, in Lowe’s Ball Conductor and Assembly Guide (Edinburgh; third edition c1830), wrote that the mescolanzes were "lately invented by G. M. S. Chivers".  And in The complete system of English country dancing (London, c1820), fellow London dancing master Thomas Wilson, always grumpy about his younger rival, quoted one of Chivers' ads as claiming he was "Inventor of the Mescolanzes, and the Swedish Country Dances" without arguing the point.  The quoted ad also apparently claimed that the mescolanzes "possessed all the beauty of the Quadrille with less exhibition", which I would take to mean they generally lacked the solo or two-person figures that would put extra pressure on the dancers to display the quality of their steps -- an interesting appeal to dancers' insecurity!

But Chivers' claim to invention of the form is actually quite a stretch.  A non-progressive four-facing-four format was found in French cotillions well back into the eighteenth century.  Some of the unusual figures found in mescolanzes, including the sideways-chassez-by-couples used in La Tempête, are borrowed directly from cotillions.

Converting cotillion figures into longways progressive figures was certainly an innovation, but it was not solely Chivers' innovation.  On the European continent, La Tempête, predated by well over a decade anything published by Chivers.  And in his Recueil Unique (c1820), Parisian musician and music publisher Collinet even noted that a square figure, La Mont-Ferine, could be augmented by borrowing figures from La Tempête.

Calling the four-facing-four format mescolanzes may have been Chivers' invention, but I'm a little bit suspicious of that as well.  The Lowes referred to them as "Spanish medley dances" and the word is Spanish or Italian, so I suspect that Chivers may have been less an inventor than an choreographer and promoter.  He was certainly enthusiastic about them; if one excludes the many appearances of La Tempête, Chivers probably published more mescolanze figures than everyone else put together.

But let's look at what happened to the mescolanzes after Chivers.

The Lowes seemed to have liked the mescolanze format and published a few rather good ones, including some in medley form with both duple-time and waltz figures.  Unfortunately, most other dancing masters who picked up the idea were not particularly creative, and most later published mescolanzes are just not terribly interesting as dances.

London dancing master J. S. Pollock, in the second edition of his Companion to La Terpsichore Moderne (London, c1830), published a trio of mescolanze figures of no particular distinction, noting that they, along with the Circassian Circle, while "extremely pleasing, are by no means generally known".  He also suggested that "in large parties this dance may be performed in lines of six or eight instead of four”.  Lines of eight would work, the dancers simply subdividing into lines of four, but lines of six would be problematic with some of the characteristic mescolanze figures.

Pollock's figures were copied exactly by Henry Whale in his Hommage à Taglioni (Philadelphia, 1836), and his verbiage was copied by W. G. Wells, with different figures, in The danciad, or companion to the modern ball room (Montreal, 1832).  But after this little cluster of sources, mentions of mescolanzes become few and far between.

A single mescolanze is found in the fourth edition of Francis Lowe's The Select Quadrille Preceptor (London, 1838).  I am uncertain what relation, if any, Francis Lowe is to the Scottish Lowe brothers.  

Thomas Wilson, in his final work on dance, The Art of Dancing (London, c1852), may still have been hostile to any Chivers invention, as he laconically described the format without even bothering with specific figures:

"All form two lines, a la militaire; all start together.  The figure may be selected from the Quadrille or Country Dance."

J. Albert Jarvis, in Diprose's Ball Room Guide (London, 1857) includes a single mescolanze figure, but he seems to have been a bit confused about the formation, describing it as having the gentlemen on the outside of each line and the ladies on the inside, though the figures he gave work fine with the dancers arranged normally.  He did offer the compliment that it "will be found a very pretty and rather graceful dance, as it does not admit of so much romping as most of the country dances.”

In America, a new set of four mescolanze figures turns up in Boston musician-caller-publisher Elias Howe's American Dancing Master and Ball-Room Prompter (Boston, 1862), credited to a Mr. Layland.  But I would not take this as solid evidence that mescolanzes (by name) were ever popularly known or danced in mid-nineteenth-century America.  Howe was a great collector of random dances, which he stuffed freely into his big compilation manuals.  It's unusual for him to offer a credit by name, and this particular name definitely indicates an English origin.

Mr. Layland was the proprietor of the Surrey Assembly Rooms on Blackfriars Road in London during the 1850s, where, according to The Bachelor's Guide to Life in London (London, c1855), he held subscription "Soirées dansantes" on Tuesday evenings and gave lessons.  He was also an inventor of dances, including the Omni Dance (1854), a number of which may also be found in Howe's manuals.  With his evident interest in composing mescolanze figures and Wilson's casual description of it as a format for dancing any suitable figure, it's possible that the form had some low-level popularity in England into the 1850s.  I find that much more likely than similar popularity in America.

Layland's mescolanze figures, with some minor differences, later appear in the Victoria Danse du Monde and Quadrille Preceptor (London, c1872), along with other dances of his invention copied by Howe, so I would guess that an earlier edition of a Quadrille Preceptor was Howe's source.  It is not unusual for a later edition to of a book to keep including older dances without regard to whether they were still popular.

A single mescolanze appears in Youens's Dance Album and Ball-Room Guide (London, c1870).  This book and the Victoria Danse du Monde are the latest sources I have for dances called "mescolanze" in England.  

Far off in colonial Australia, E. J. Wivell included a so-called mescolanze in The Ball Room Companion and Pupil's Self-Help (Adelaide, c1875), but half the dancers seem to have been lost in transit, as he describes the formation only as "a circle round the room in couples facing each other" and his figures require only four dancers.  La Tempête, by contrast, he describes with the usual "line of four" language.

Back in America, Howe would go on to reprint the mescolanze figures in his New American Dancing Master in 1882 and 1892.  All the same caveats as above apply to this as evidence.

That is all I have at the moment for dances called "mescolanze" in the nineteenth century, but it is not the whole story of the four-facing-four genre of country dances.  La Tempête, of course, was an international phenomenon all on its own.  Others turn up now and then, but since they are not labeled as mescolanzes, it takes detailed reading of dance instructions to find them.  This is where the hidden presence of mescolanzes in American reveals itself: the famous American contra Portland's Fancy is a mescolanze, at least in some versions, as are the contras Fireman's Dance and Down East Breakdown.  The format lingered into the twentieth century and makes very occasional appearances in the present day in living tradition New England contra dancing.

I have half a dozen or so other mescolanzes, including a pretty little one in waltz time, that I have found hiding under non-obvious names in dance manuals or on sheet music from England, Scotland, and America, with dates ranging from the 1820s into the 1890s.  I continue to keep  an eye out for such dances, and expect over time more will trickle into my files.

Despite this collection of references and all Chivers' enthusiasm and the form's possible mild popularity in the 1850s, La Tempête was still probably the only mescolanze of real note during the majority (if not all) of the nineteenth century, and the format as a whole was probably not particularly popular beyond 1850s England.  But the four-facing-four format is attractive choreographically and its periodic reappearance in sources over such a long period of time and range of locations makes me feel justified in including the occasional non-Tempête mescolanze at later nineteenth century balls.

Comments

[Libby aka Mrs Bennet]

Hi Susan
I really enjoyed your article and also dancing these mescolanzes! I only know 2 so far: the Tempest obviously and more recently, Figaro. Of the resources you mention which one would you recommend that contains some more good mescolanzes that I can try? Are you happy to share your favourties so that we can dance them in England again?!
I teach historic dance at Mrs Bennet's Ballroom in London, UK and I'm always on the hunt for interesting dances.
Thank you!
Libby

[Susan de Guardiola]

Hi Libby. The best sources for Regency-era English mescolanzes are various books written by G. M. S. Chivers -- The Dancers' Guide, The Modern Dancing Master, and The Dancing Master in Miniature. I'll publish a few reconstructions for you to enjoy!

[Susan de Guardiola]

I've posted the reconstructions here. Enjoy!

[Libby aka Mrs Bennet]

Thank you Susan for all these dances and information. It's really useful and we will be trying them out at our group Mrs Bennet's Ballroom!
Libby