The term “classical” is a dangerous one, because it is so value-laden. Thus “classical” art forms can easily seem to represent something more valuable or “high” than the “non-classical” folk or popular forms. In this connection classical forms generally refer to traditions which evolved from court traditions and which were added during the beginning of the 20th century to the curriculum of state art schools and universities. These traditions are now usually classified as “classical” dance in their respective countries. Besides those traditions, hundreds of “smaller” traditions live in Asia, which can be just as sophisticated and intricate as those classified as classical ones.
As mentioned above, one could generalise that the present classical forms in Asian theatre developed roughly between the 13th and early 20th centuries. As their background lies mostly in the court traditions, they understandably reflect the behavioural codes from the courtly milieu in which they were shaped.
One important feature of mainland Southeast Asian culture has been the conception of the god-king. This cult created an extremely intricate court etiquette, which was also reflected in dance and dance theatre. As the performances often featured the gods to which the living king was related, it was natural that the physical surroundings and the modes of behaviour of the artistic presentations followed the models set by the king’s actual court. Thus many dance theatre forms of the court, especially those on a grand scale, still reflect today the behavioural practices and etiquette of courts from centuries ago.
This is not only an Asian speciality. For example the 17th and 18th century opera seria or “serious opera” reflected the etiquette of contemporaneous courts in its rhetoric gestures and elaborate bows and curtseys. Similarly the Baroque dance was shaped and controlled in the 17th century French court by King Louis XIV himself. When the Baroque dance later evolved into Romantic ballet in the early 19th century many of the originally courtly practices were still retained as kinds of references to bygone days.
Similarly in Asia, many of the conventions, such as ways of standing, sitting, kneeling, crouching, gesticulating, saluting etc. which could now be easily be interpreted as being purely stylised theatrical conventions, can, in fact, be traced back to actual historical behavioural practices and codes.