Thread

strathspey@strathspey.org:45602

Previous Message Next Message

  • GOSS9@telefonica.net

    GOSS9@telefonica.net June 21, 2006, 1:56 p.m. (Message 45602)

    Re: Double triangles (was Divided by a common language)

    Not quite so, since there are no triangles in the first place, since 
    the corners to not touch hands with each other I would go for "double 
    angles" two for the man, and two for the woman.
    
    Aside, the figure is an error in the first place. It was so defined by 
    the RSCDS in a revival of a dance taken from notes. Unfortunately, no 
    one either had access to, or had checked Wilson´s description of the 
    figure, which simply describes the track of a single couple, from 
    starting place moving anticlockwise around the outside of the two 
    corners, forming for both the pattern of the star of David on the floor.
          

Previous Message Next Message