Béla Bartók collected numerous traditional melodies in villages throughout the old “Hungary” in his pursuit of the old layer of Hungarian song. In the years before WW1 he made visits to many Romanian villages in Transylvania and Banat with the purpose of collecting material as he found that in the Romanian villagers they knew only the old layer of songs and not the newer art songs that dominated elsewhere.

There are many inconsistencies in Bartók’s place names as he used Hungarian spelling for Romanian names. These are mostly clarified by Tiberiu Alexandru ^[1].

Bartok separates Romanian music into 4 categories by function:

1. Colinde
2. Funeral songs
3. Instrumental dance music
4. Melodies not linked to a particular circumstance

Bartók’s observations and notations give an insight into the dance music in Romanian villages, and differences between the Romanian traditional music landscape compared to that Bartók had encountered before in Hungarian and Slovak regions.

This theme of the difference in distribution and variety of traditional Romanian music compared to his previous Hungarian and Slovak work is discussed in Bartók’s writings on Romanian music. His search for the old Hungarian pentatonic melodies has a consistency throughout old Hungary, in the mutual exchange with the Slovaks. Whereas, Romanian music has dialects that are almost independent, and mostly (the exception being central Transylvania) show no loans from their long time Hungarian neighbours.

My particular interest is in dances documented in Banat

• Sannicolau Mare (Jan-1910);
• Murani (Mar-1912);
• Igriș, Saravale, Vălcani (Nov-1912);
• Banloc, Ghilad, Jebel, Livezile, Alibunar, Seleuș, Vladimirovac (Dec-1912);
• Cenadu Mare, Cornești, Foeni (Feb-1913).

The popup in the map below on each location shows the dance melodies recorded at that location.

Methodology

Bartók adopted and continuously perfected the musical theory of Ilmari Krohn which orders the collected material based on categories, metrics, in a sequence from simple to the complex, from the number of melodic lines, the main cadence and the cadences of the other melodic lines ^[3].

Bartók understood the process of “tradition” and “variation” so employing this method allowed material to be classified relative to the other material.

The dance melodies are put in two classes: ^[4]

• Class A includes those of determined structure (consisting mostly of four melody sections),
• Class B includes those in which motifs (mostly of two or three bars) are repeated or follow each other without apparent system.

His method, might be termed caesura tone scheme and syllabic scheme ^[5], but is actually quite simple. Most traditional songs are in 4 phrases. Bartók documented by considering the ending note of each phrase relative to the final note of the melody in the belief that this is one of the most stable features of a melody type. Hence he categorised by the sequence of phrase ending notes (mostly 3) in numerical interval from the final note.

Secondly, the melodies are classified most broadly into “isometric” tunes (tunes with the same number of syllables per line) and “heterometric” tunes (tunes that set text lines of different length). These syllables are not representing a rhythm, just the number of syllables in the song words, and assumes some stability in the number of syllables per phrase, although recognising that developments can merge two, or divide one into two, through evolution.

Bartók’s conclusions

Bartók’s concluding comments are deeply interesting in the positioning of Romanian cultural communities in the shared space of old Hungary.

He discusses the Romanian regions he researched in broad outlines, the regions from Banat, from Bihor, from Hunedoara, from central Transylvania (Mezőség/Câmpia) and Maramureș (including Oaș).

The Romanian melodies are dissimilar across geographically regions, compared to the old Hungarian melodies that appear to be consistent throughout old Hungary (and Bartók attempts to further link these to the Finno-Uralic Mari of the Volga region in Russia). Bartók finds the musical repertoire totally different in each zone, but later he adds the confusion of intermediate forms between zones. Regarding the dance music, the local dance melodies of Bihor, Hunedoara, Banat and Maramureș have nothing in common with the popular Hungarian melodies ^[2].

The situation is completely different in central Transylvania (Mezőség/Câmpia). Here Bartók considers the Romanian song uses the old pentatonic melodies of the Szekler people. As Romanian songs are nearly always composed of 8 syllable verses, when a 10 or 11 syllable melodies are borrowed from the Hungarian repertoire some extra syllables like “tra-la-la” are added to the end of the text ^[2].

Some of the Romanian dance tunes from central Transylvania are very similar to the Hungarian melodies called verbunkos, and part of this fund of melodies are designated by the word “Țiganească” (Roma), which would seem to indicate that these melodies were propagated by Rom musicians ^[2]. The more recent Hungarian melodies with a “punctuated rhythm” and neo-Hungarian melodies have no influence on Romanian melodies. This shows a sharing of the old layer of Székelys songs, but no borrowing of later Hungarian melodies.

Regarding Maramureș, Bartok has an unresolved difficulty trying to place Maramureș melodies in his framework based on the concept of old Hungarian traits and widespread sharing in mixed ethnic regions. He notes a few potential Hungarian borrowings, but has problems attempting to relate this via Ruthenians back to Hungarian. He also notes a diffusion of these Maramureș songs into Transylvania.

Commentary

When using Bartók’s invaluable work we have to remember that he only had sparse samples of music from the areas he visited. Such an sparse catalogue of examples can lead to incomplete assumptions (such as the discussion on hora lunga type songs which his visit to the Brăilou archives in Bucharest in 1934 resolved) ^[6]. His discussion on asymmetric rhythms is logical, but from a position of not previously having encountered such rhythms.

As an outsider it is clear that his musical knowledge and understanding was different to that of  the villagers of Pădureni (Hunedoara) which leads to some interesting quotes showing the complexities of researching within a foreign community:

The Hungarian Institute for Musicology in Budapest has a large collection of research films dating from the 1950s to the 1990s. Unlike most “state folklore research institutes” this institute can be visited in Budapest, the collection index is searchable online, and a sizable collection of films are digitised and some can be viewed by searching the database.

The collection is predominantly Hungarian ethnicity dances, but there are some examples of Romanians dancing and dances that are known in Romanian repertoires.

This map and table is a summary to guide Romanian dance researchers into this valuable resource. As far as I am aware I have listed all the records that might be of interest to a Romanian dance researcher.

Some cautions:

1. The listing of Romanian dance names is dubious in some cases, or descriptive in Hungarian language, or the closest Hungarian title.
2. Where one film reference has multiple locations the list is for all of the locations.
3. I have attempted to make this interpretation Romanian friendly, using current village and county names, and transliterating some dance titles into Romanian.

Please visit the source database for complete information:

In Hungarian: http://db.zti.hu/neptanc_tudastar/tancok.asp

In English: http://db.zti.hu/neptanc_tudastar/dances_en.asp

Click “Search”, then use the “film index” from my table or map to find a specific recording, or select the village name (in Hungarian) for a specific location.

This map is all film locations that have a “Romanian” interest. Each marker on the live map gives the year and film reference, plus the list of dances recorded for that film.

Data tables

The first table gives a complete listing of the entries that are tagged to contain “Romanian”. I have indexed using the current village name and locations.

The second table gives the list of film sections that are available online from the database.

GT Niculescu-Varone – part 1: collector of dance words
GT Niculescu-Varone – part 3: locations

It is clear that Niculescu-Varone was primarily interested in strigături (rhythmic shouts) that accompany dancing, although he sometimes adds a paragraph describing the context and action at the dance event. His commentary on the dances does not extend beyond a simple description of the arrangement of the dancers, mostly in relation to dances such as Hora “by the hand”, or Sârba “by the shoulder”, or “couples” in formation etc.

I constructed this table by combining the information from his books attempting to organise into consistent columns. This table can be searched globally across his dance list publications, but it is recommended to refer to the original text where the respective entries are located.

The difficulties in assembling the data:

1. There are changes of spelling conventions in the dance names between 1930s and 1979.
2. Some titles are reversed in later editions, so become indexed by the title that was previously a secondary title listed in his comments.
3. The 1979 book uses the confusing academic method of “op.cit.” and “idem” which, together with some errors in his use of this and page numbering, makes it uncertain to which of his previous books he is referring in the 1979 citations.

GT Niculescu-Varone – part 1: collector of dance words
GT Niculescu-Varone – part 2: table of dances names

This map shows all locations where his publications include a reference to a dance name.

We can guess the locations that he visited and made detailed research, versus locations that he only knew about via a single source person. The former are likely to be the areas where he has a different dance list for each of many villages within a small region and also where he has detailed information on a particular dance repertoire at a single village, so this suggests that he researched at these locations.

He sometimes has the same dance (or few dances) listed for a number of villages in a region, so we can presume he had an informer that provided a list of village names for a particular dance. There are also many instances where he recorded a dance name with a list of surrounding villages, but in the absence of other dance variants we could assume he did not undertake research in these surrounding villages.

1930 book

Based on many records from surrounding villages:

• Comănești, Mehedinți and surrounding Cloșani
• Maramureș and Oaș zones
• Around Turda, Transylvania

Based on the inclusion of a longer list of dances:

• Maieru, Bistrița-Năsăud
• Bibești, Gorj
• Morteni, Dâmbovița
• Vârvoru, Dolj

1931 book

Based on many records from surrounding villages:

• Along the Arieș river in Alba from Abrud to the Mureș river
• Bran and surrounding villages

Based on the inclusion of a longer list of dances:

• Holod, Bihor
• Stoiceni, Argeș
• Stoicești, Argeș
• Bălcești, Argeș
• Broșteni, Argeș
• Dedulești, Argeș
• Ghermânești, Ilfov
• Otopeni, Ilfov
• Mierea, Dolj
• Buciumeni, Dâmbovița

1932 book

North-east Moldavia (Basarabia), from Chisinau to east of Botoșani.

1979 book

Based on many records from surrounding villages:

• Botoșani region

Based on the inclusion of a longer list of dances:

• Hințești, Argeș
• Mironești, Ilfov
• Iclod, Cluj
• Dridu, Ilfov

GT Niculescu-Varone – part 2: table of dances names
GT Niculescu-Varone – part 3: locations

(One of the) first folk dance collectors in Romania was G.T. Niculescu-Varone (1884-1984). Varone, a Romanian folklorist, was born in Bucharest in 1884. He graduated in law from Bucharest University in 1908, and between 1905 and 1930 he worked as a librarian in the Geological Institute in Bucharest.

He published a series of books and articles in the 1930s based on his earlier research. These books include a listing of dances, many quotations of strigături (rhythmic shouts) and the sources of his references, but no descriptions of the actual dance steps.

1. In his first book, Jocuri romanesti necunoscute, published in 1930 ^[1], the first section lists the dances he had collected alphabetically by dance name and the second section gives a bibliographic index of dance names from many published sources.
2. His second book published in the following year, Alte Jocuri Romanesti necunoscute – Noi contributii la folklorul nostru coreografic ^[2] has a second alphabetic listing of the dances he had collected.
3. In 1931 ^[3] he also published the first version of Dicţionarul Jocurilor Populare Româneşti in which he divides the dances listed into those he found in published sources, dances he collected during his trips over 11 years, and national dances.
4. He was the first researcher to document dances in Basarabia ^[10] in his 1932 Folklor Roman coreografic – material inedit ^[4] in which he also included a scattering of dances from the adjacent region of Botoșani on the west side of the Prut river.
5. At the age of 95 in 1979 he published an updated second version of the Dicţionarul Jocurilor Populare Românești ^[9] which also includes additional dances that he had collected from around Botoșani, as well as other dances from places including Icold in Transylvania and areas around Bucharest.

During the 1930s he also published the books: Jocurile Noastre Nationale (1933) which discusses ‘national dances’ ^[5], Folklor romanesc din Ardeal (1935) a monograph of the comuna of Nadășu, near Huedin, in Cluj county ^[6], and a book Strigături alese de la hora that lists selected strigaturi for Hora dances ^[8], and in 1938, the larger Jocurile Nationale Româneşti that references discussion on the national dances ^[1].

Over the past century more than 200 collections of national and traditional dances have been published in Romania. The table below includes all that I know about, however, there are more books, particularly those with small print runs and those that have been produced more recently.

A few are authored by members of the Institute of Ethnography and Folklore (IEF) in Bucharest (Anca Giurchescu, Constanian Costea, Vera Proca Ciortea, Andrei Bucșan, Emanuela Balaci). The IEF had a research programme (started around 1950 continuing until the 1980s) based on the sociology methodology used by the Gusti school (from the 1920s).

The majority of the books are authored by national and regional choreographers, these are often the regional experts and dance practitioners, rather than academic observers.

The contents of the books concentrate on notations of the dance patterns and musical notation. These are mostly referenced to a local informer, or details of an observation of a dance event in a particular village. The books generally have an introductory chapter, however only some have detailed discussion and analysis chapters regarding context and composition in the particular ethnographic zone.

Unfortunately the very large research collections of the IEF, which includes audio and film recordings in addition to the dance notation, remains closed to researchers outside of specific IEF projects.