THE MODES
OF
ANCIENT GREEK MUSIC
_MONRO_
London
HENRY FROWDE
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE
AMEN CORNER, E.C.
[Illustration]
New York
MACMILLAN & CO., 66, FIFTH AVENUE
_The Modes
of
Ancient Greek Music_
BY
D. B. MONRO, M.A.
PROVOST OF ORIEL COLLEGE, OXFORD
HONORARY DOCTOR OF LETTERS IN THE UNIVERSITY OF DUBLIN
Oxford
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1894
Oxford
PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
BY HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
DEDICATED
TO THE
PROVOST AND FELLOWS
OF TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN
[Greek: xeinosynês heneka]
[Blank Page]
PREFACE
The present essay is the sequel of an article on Greek music which
the author contributed to the new edition of _Smith's Dictionary of
Greek and Roman Antiquities_ (London, 1890-91, art. MUSICA). In that
article the long-standing controversy regarding the nature of the
ancient musical Modes was briefly noticed, and some reasons were
given for dissenting from the views maintained by Westphal, and now
very generally accepted. A full discussion of the subject would have
taken up more space than was then at the author's disposal, and he
accordingly proposed to the Delegates of the Clarendon Press to treat
the question in a separate form. He has now to thank them for
undertaking the publication of a work which is necessarily addressed
to a very limited circle.
The progress of the work has been more than once delayed by the
accession of materials. Much of it was written before the author had
the opportunity of studying two very interesting documents first made
known in the course of last year in the _Bulletin de correspondance
hellénique_ and the _Philologus_, viz. the so-called Seikelos
inscription from Tralles, and a fragment of the _Orestes_ of
Euripides. But a much greater surprise was in store. The book was
nearly ready for publication last November, when the newspapers
reported that the French scholars engaged in excavating on the site
of Delphi had found several pieces of musical notation, in particular
a hymn to Apollo dating from the third century B.C. As the known
remains of Greek music were either miserably brief, or so late as
hardly to belong to classical antiquity, it was thought best to wait
for the publication of the new material. The French School of Athens
must be congratulated upon the good fortune which has attended their
enterprise, and also upon the excellent form in which its results
have been placed, within a comparatively short time, at the service
of students. The writer of these pages, it will be readily
understood, had especial reason to be interested in the announcement
of a discovery which might give an entirely new complexion to the
whole argument. It will be for the reader to determine whether the
main thesis of the book has gained or lost by the new evidence.
Mr. Hubert Parry prefaces his suggestive treatment of Greek music by
some remarks on the difficulty of the subject. 'It still seems
possible,' he observes, 'that a large portion of what has passed into
the domain of "well-authenticated fact" is complete misapprehension,
as Greek scholars have not time for a thorough study of music up to
the standard required to judge securely of the matters in question,
and musicians as a rule are not extremely intimate with Greek' (_The
Art of Music_, p. 24). To the present writer, who has no claim to the
title of musician, the scepticism expressed in these words appears to
be well founded. If his interpretation of the ancient texts furnishes
musicians like Mr. Parry with a somewhat more trustworthy basis for
their criticism of Greek music as an art, his object will be fully
attained.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
§ 1. _Introductory._ PAGE
Musical forms called [Greek: harmoniai] or [Greek: tropoi] 1
§ 2. _Statement of the question._
The terms Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, &c. 3
§ 3. _The Authorities._
Aristoxenus--Plato--Aristotle--Heraclides Ponticus--the
Aristotelian _Problems_ 4
§ 4. _The Early Poets._
Pratinas--Telestes--Aristophanes 5
§ 5. _Plato._
The [Greek: harmoniai] in the _Republic_--The _Laches_ 7
§ 6. _Heraclides Ponticus._
The three Hellenic [Greek: harmoniai]--the Phrygian and Lydian--the
Hypo-dorian, &c. 9
§ 7. _Aristotle--The Politics._
The [Greek: harmoniai] in the _Politics_ 12
§ 8. _The Aristotelian Problems._
Hypo-dorian and Hypo-phrygian 14
§ 9. _The Rhetoric._
The [Greek: harmonia] of oratory 15
§ 10. _Aristoxenus._
The [Greek: topoi] or keys 16
§ 11. _Names of keys._
The prefix Hypo- --the term [Greek: tonos] 19
§ 12. _Plutarch's Dialogue on Music._
The Platonic modes--Lydian--Mixo-lydian and Syntono-lydian--the
Mixo-lydian octave--the keys of Sacadas--[Greek: tonos]
and [Greek: harmonia] 20
§ 13. _Modes employed on different instruments._
Modes on wind-instruments--on the water-organ--on the
cithara--on the flute 27
§ 14. _Recapitulation._
Equivalence of [Greek: harmonia] and [Greek: tonos] 28
§ 15._ The Systems of Greek music._
The musical System ([Greek: systêma emmeles]) 30
§ 16. _The standard Octachord System._
The scale in Aristotle and Aristoxenus 31
§ 17. _Earlier Heptachord Scales._
Seven-stringed scales in the _Problems_--Nicomachus 33
§ 18. _The Perfect System._
The Greater and Lesser Perfect Systems--Aristoxenus--enlargement
of the scale--Timotheus--Pronomus--the
Proslambanomenos--the Hyperhypatê 35
§ 19. _Relation of System and Key._
The standard System and the 'modes'--the multiplicity of
[Greek: harmoniai] 40
§ 20. _Tonality of the Greek musical scale._
The Mesê as a key-note--the close on the Hypatê--[Greek: archê] in
the _Metaphysics_ 42
§ 21. _The Species of a Scale._
The seven Species ([Greek: schêmata, eidê]) of the Octave--connexion
with the Modes 47
§ 22. _The Scales as treated by Aristoxenus._
Advance made by Aristoxenus--diagrams of the Enharmonic
genus--reference in Plato's _Republic_--Aristides
Quintilianus--the _Philebus_ 48
§ 23. _The Seven Species._
Aristoxenus--the _Introductio Harmonica_ 56
§ 24. _Relation of the Species to the Keys._
Use of the names Dorian, &c.--treatment of musical scales
in Aristoxenus--Species in the different genera 58
§ 25. _The Ethos of Music._
Regions of the voice--branches of lyrical poetry--kinds of
ethos 62
§ 26. _The Ethos of the Genera and Species._
Ethos depending on pitch--on the genus 66
§ 27. _The Musical Notation._
The instrumental notes--original form and date 67
§ 28. _Traces of the Species in the Notation._
Westphal's theory 75
§ 29. _Ptolemy's Scheme of Modes._
Reduction of the Modes to seven--nomenclature according
to _value_ and according to _position_ 78
§ 30. _Nomenclature by Position._
The term [Greek: thesis] in Aristoxenus--in the Aristotelian
_Problems_ 81
§ 31. _Scales of the Lyre and Cithara._
The scales on the lyre--on the cithara (viz. [Greek: tritai, tropoi,
parypatai, lydia, hypertropa, iastiaioliaia]) 83
§ 32. _Remains of Greek Music._
The hymns of Dionysius and Mesomedes--instrumental
passages in the _Anonymus_--Mr. Ramsay's inscription--melody
and accent--fragment of the _Orestes_ 87
§ 33. _Modes of Aristides Quintilianus._
The six Modes of Plato's _Republic_ 94
§ 34. _Credibility of Aristides Quintilianus._
Date of Aristides--genuineness of his scales 95
§ 35. _Evidence for Scales of different species._
The Hypo-dorian or common species--the Dorian--the
Mixo-lydian--the Phrygian and the Hypo-phrygian--Aristotle
on Dorian and Phrygian--the dithyramb 101
§ 36. _Conclusion._
Early importance of genus and key only--change in
Ptolemy's time in the direction of the mediaeval Tones 108
§ 37. _Epilogue--Speech and Song._
Musical nature of Greek accent--relation of musical and
ordinary utterance--agreement of melody and accent in
the Seikelos inscription--rhythm of music and of prose--the
stress accent (_ictus_)--music influenced by language--words
and melody--want of harmony--the
non-diatonic scales 113
APPENDIX.
Table I. Scales of the seven oldest Keys, with the species
of the same name 127
Table II. The fifteen Keys 128
Music of the _Orestes_ of Euripides 130
Musical part of the Seikelos inscription 133
The hymns recently discovered at Delphi:
Hymn to Apollo--the scale--the changes of genus
and key--the 'mode' identical with the modern Minor--the
other fragments--the agreement of melody and
accent 134
Index of passages discussed or referred to 142
THE MODES OF ANCIENT GREEK MUSIC.
§ 1. _Introductory._
The modes of ancient Greek music are of interest to us, not only as
the forms under which the Fine Art of Music was developed by a people
of extraordinary artistic capability, but also on account of the
peculiar ethical influence ascribed to them by the greatest ancient
philosophers. It appears from a well-known passage in the _Republic_
of Plato, as well as from many other references, that in ancient
Greece there were certain kinds or forms of music, which were known
by national or tribal names--Dorian, Ionian, Phrygian, Lydian and the
like: that each of these was believed to be capable, not only of
expressing particular emotions, but of reacting on the sensibility in
such a way as to exercise a powerful and specific influence in the
formation of character: and consequently that the choice, among these
varieties, of the musical forms to be admitted into the education of
the state, was a matter of the most serious practical concern. If on
a question of this kind we are inclined to distrust the imaginative
temper of Plato we have only to turn to the discussion of the same
subject in the _Politics_ of Aristotle, and we shall find the
Platonic view criticised in some important details, but treated in
the main as being beyond controversy.
The word [Greek: harmonia], 'harmony,' applied to these forms of
music by Plato and Aristotle, means literally 'fitting' or
'adjustment,' hence the 'tuning' of a series of notes on any
principle, the formation of a 'scale' or 'gamut.' Other ancient
writers use the word [Greek: tropos], whence the Latin _modus_ and
our mood or 'mode,' generally employed in this sense by English
scholars. The word 'mode' is open to the objection that in modern
music it has a meaning which assumes just what it is our present
business to prove or disprove about the 'modes' of Greek music. The
word 'harmony,' however, is still more misleading, and on the whole
it seems best to abide by the established use of 'mode' as a
translation of [Greek: harmonia], trusting that the context will show
when the word has its distinctively modern sense, and when it simply
denotes a musical scale of some particular kind.
The rhythm of music is also recognized by both Plato and Aristotle as
an important element in its moral value. On this part of the subject,
however, we have much less material for a judgement. Plato goes on to
the rhythms after he has done with the modes, and lays down the
principle that they must not be complex or varied, but must be the
rhythms of a sober and brave life. But he confesses that he cannot
tell which these are ([Greek: poia de poiou biou mimêmata ouk echô
legein]), and leaves the matter for future inquiry[1].
[Footnote 1: Plato, _Rep._ p. 400 _b_ [Greek: alla tauta men, ên d'
egô, kai meta Damônos bouleusometha, tines te aneleutherias kai
hybreôs ê manias kai allês kakias prepousai baseis, kai tinas tois
enantiois leipteon rhythmous.]]
§ 2. _Statement of the question._
What then are the musical forms to which Plato and Aristotle ascribe
this remarkable efficacy? And what is the source of their influence
on human emotion and character?
There are two obvious relations in which the scales employed in any
system of music may stand to each other. They may be related as two
keys of the same mode in modern music: that is to say, we may have to
do with a scale consisting of a fixed succession of intervals, which
may vary in pitch--may be 'transposed,' as we say, from one pitch or
key to another. Or the scales may differ as the Major mode differs
from the Minor, namely in the order in which the intervals follow
each other. In modern music we have these two modes, and each of them
may be in any one of twelve keys. It is evidently possible, also,
that a name such as Dorian or Lydian might denote a particular mode
taken in a particular key--that the scale so called should possess a
definite pitch as well as a definite series of intervals.
According to the theory which appears now to prevail among students
of Greek music, these famous names had a double application. There
was a Dorian mode as well as a Dorian key, a Phrygian mode and a
Phrygian key, and so on. This is the view set forth by Boeckh in the
treatise which may be said to have laid the foundations of our
knowledge of Greek music (_De Metris Pindari_, lib. III. cc.
vii-xii). It is expounded, along with much subsidiary speculation, in
the successive volumes which we owe to the fertile pen of Westphal;
and it has been adopted in the learned and excellent _Histoire et
Théorie de la Musique de l'Antiquité_ of M. Gevaert. According to
these high authorities the Greeks had a system of key ([Greek:
tonoi]), and also a system of modes ([Greek: harmoniai]), the former
being based solely upon difference of pitch, the latter upon the
'form' or species ([Greek: eidos]) of the octave scale, that is to
say, upon the order of the intervals which compose it.
§ 3. _The Authorities._
The sources of our knowledge are the various systematic treatises
upon music which have come down to us from Greek antiquity, together
with incidental references in other authors, chiefly poets and
philosophers. Of the systematic or 'technical' writers the earliest
and most important is Aristoxenus, a pupil of Aristotle. His treatise
on _Harmonics_ ([Greek: harmonikê]) has reached us in a fragmentary
condition, but may be supplemented to some extent from later works of
the same school. Among the incidental notices of music the most
considerable are the passages in the _Republic_ and the _Politics_
already referred to. To these we have to add a few other references
in Plato and Aristotle; a long fragment from the Platonic philosopher
Heraclides Ponticus, containing some interesting quotations from
earlier poets; a number of detached observations collected in the
nineteenth section of the Aristotelian _Problems_; and one or two
notices preserved in lexicographical works, such as the _Onomasticon_
of Pollux.
In these groups of authorities the scholars above mentioned find the
double use which they believe to have been made of the names Dorian,
Phrygian, Lydian and the rest. In Aristoxenus they recognise that
these names are applied to a series of keys ([Greek: tonoi]), which
differed in pitch only. In Plato and Aristotle they find the same
names applied to scales called [Greek: harmoniai], and these scales,
they maintain, differed primarily in the order of their intervals. I
shall endeavour to show that there was no such double use: that in
the earlier periods of Greek music the scales in use, whether called
[Greek: tonoi] or [Greek: harmoniai], differed primarily in _pitch_:
that the statements of ancient authors about them, down to and
including Aristoxenus, agree as closely as there is reason to expect:
and that the passages on which the opposite view is based--all of
them drawn from comparatively late writers--either do not relate to
these ancient scales at all, or point to the emergence in
post-classical times of some new forms or tendencies of musical art.
I propose in any case to adhere as closely as possible to a
chronological treatment of the evidence which is at our command, and
I hope to make it probable that the difficulties of the question may
be best dealt with on this method.
§ 4. _The Early Poets._
The earliest of the passages now in question comes from the poet
Pratinas, a contemporary of Aeschylus. It is quoted by Heraclides
Ponticus, in the course of a long fragment preserved by Athenaeus
(xiv. cc. 19-21, p. 624 _c_-626 _a_). The words are:
[Greek: mête syntonon diôke mête tan aneimenan
Iasti mousan, alla tan messan neôn
arouran aiolize tô melei.]
'Follow neither a highly-strung music nor the low-pitched Ionian, but
turning over the middle plough-land be an Aeolian in your melody.'
Westphal takes the word [Greek: 'Iasti] with [Greek: syntonon] as
well as with [Greek: aneimenan], and infers that there were two kinds
of Ionian, a 'highly-strung' and a 'relaxed' or low-pitched. But this
is not required by the words, and seems less natural than the
interpretation which I have given. All that the passage proves is
that in the time of Pratinas a composer had the choice of at least
three scales: one (or more) of which the pitch was high ([Greek:
syntonos]); another of low pitch ([Greek: aneimenê]), which was
called _Ionian_; and a third, intermediate between the others, and
known as _Aeolian_. Later in the same passage we are told that
Pratinas spoke of the 'Aeolian harmony' ([Greek: prepei toi pasin
aoidolabraktais Aiolis harmonia]). And the term is also found, with
the epithet 'deep-sounding,' in a passage quoted from the hymn to
Demeter of a contemporary poet, Lasus of Hermione (Athen. xiv. 624
_e_):
[Greek: Damatra melpô Koran te Klymenoio alochon Meliboian,
hymnôn anagôn Aiolid' hama barybromon harmonian.]
With regard to the Phrygian and Lydian scales Heraclides (_l. c._)
quotes an interesting passage from Telestes of Selinus, in which
their introduction is ascribed to the colony that was said to have
followed Pelops from Asia Minor to the Peloponnesus:
[Greek: prôtoi para kratêras Hellênôn en aulois
synopadoi Pelopos matros oreias phrygion aeison nomon;
toi d' oxyphônois pêktidôn psalmois krekon
Dydion hymnon.]
'The comrades of Pelops were the first who beside the Grecian cups
sang with the flute ([Greek: aulos]) the Phrygian measure of the
Great Mother; and these again by shrill-voiced notes of the _pectis_
sounded a Lydian hymn.' The epithet [Greek: oxyphônos] is worth
notice in connexion with other evidence of the high pitch of the
music known as Lydian. The Lydian mode is mentioned by Pindar, _Nem._
4. 45:
[Greek: exyphaine glykeia kai tod' autika phorminx
Lydia syn harmonia melos pephilêmenon.]
The Dorian is the subject of an elaborate jest made at the expense of
Cleon in the _Knights_ of Aristophanes, ll. 985-996:
[Greek: alla kai tod' egô ge thaumazô tês hyomousias
autou phasi gar auton hoi paides hoi xynephoitôn
tên Dôristi monên enarmottesthai thama tên lyran,
allên d' ouk ethelein labein; kata ton kitharistên
orgisthent' apagein keleuein, hôs harmonian ho pais
outos ou dynatai mathein ên mê Dôrodokêsti.]
§ 5. _Plato._
Following the order of time, we come next to the passage in the
_Republic_ (p. 398), where Socrates is endeavouring to determine the
kinds of music to be admitted for the use of his future 'guardians,'
in accordance with the general principles which are to govern their
education. First among these principles is the condemnation of all
undue expression of grief. 'What modes of music ([Greek:
harmoniai]),' he asks, are plaintive ([Greek: thrênôdeis])?' 'The
_Mixo-lydian_,' Glaucon replies, 'and the _Syntono-lydian_, and
such-like.' These accordingly Socrates excludes. 'But again,
drunkenness and slothfulness are no less forbidden to the guardians;
which of the modes are soft and convivial ([Greek: malakai te kai
sympotikai])?' '_Ionian_,' says Glaucon, 'and _Lydian_, those which
are called slack ([Greek: chalarai]).' 'Which then remain?'
'Seemingly _Dorian_ and _Phrygian_.' 'I do not know the modes,' says
Socrates, 'but leave me one that will imitate the tones and accents
of a brave man enduring danger or distress, fighting with constancy
against fortune: and also one fitted for the work of peace, for
prayer heard by the gods, for the successful persuasion or
exhortation of men, and generally for the sober enjoyment of ease and
prosperity.' Two such modes, one for Courage and one for Temperance,
are declared by Glaucon to be found in the Dorian and the Phrygian.
In the _Laches_ (p. 188) there is a passing reference in which a
similar view is expressed. Plato is speaking of the character of a
brave man as being metaphorically a 'harmony,' by which his life is
made consonant to reason--'a Dorian harmony,' he adds--playing upon
the musical sense of the word--'not an Ionian, certainly not a
Phrygian or a Lydian, but that one which only is truly Hellenic'
([Greek: atechnôs Dôristi, all' ouk Iasti, oiomai de oude Phrygisti
oude Lydisti, all' hê per monê Hellênikê estin harmonia]). The
exclusion of Phrygian may be due to the fact that the virtue
discussed in the _Laches_ is courage; but it is in agreement with
Aristotle's opinion. The absence of Aeolian from both the Platonic
passages seems to show that it had gone out of use in his time (but
cp. p. 11).
The point of view from which Plato professes to determine the right
modes to be used in his ideal education appears clearly in the
passage of the _Republic_. The modes first rejected are those which
are high in pitch. The Syntono-lydian or 'high-strung Lydian' is
shown by its name to be of this class. The Mixo-lydian is similar, as
we shall see from Aristotle and other writers. The second group which
he condemns is that of the 'slack' or low-pitched. Thus it is on the
profoundly Hellenic principle of choosing the mean between opposite
extremes that he approves of the Dorian and Phrygian pitch. The
application of this principle was not a new one, for it had been
already laid down by Pratinas: [Greek: mête syntonon diôke mête tan
aneimenan].
The three chapters which Aristotle devotes to a discussion of the use
of music in the state (_Politics_ viii. cc. 5-7), and in which he
reviews and criticises the Platonic treatment of the same subject,
will be found entirely to bear out the view now taken. It is also
supported by the commentary of Plutarch, in his dialogue on Music
(cc. 15-17), of which we shall have something to say hereafter.
Meanwhile, following the chronological order of our authorities, we
come next to the fragment of Heraclides Ponticus already mentioned
(Athen. xiv. p. 624 _c_-626 _a_).
§ 6. _Heraclides Ponticus._
The chief doctrine maintained by Heraclides Ponticus is that there
are three modes ([Greek: harmoniai]), belonging to the three Greek
races--Dorian, Aeolian, Ionian. The Phrygian and Lydian, in his view,
had no right to the name of mode or 'harmony' ([Greek: oud' harmonian
phêsi dein kaleisthai tên Phrygion, kathaper oude tên Lydion]). The
three which he recognized had each a marked ethos. The Dorian
reflected the military traditions and temper of Sparta. The Aeolian,
which Heraclides identified with the Hypo-dorian of his own time,
answered to the national character of the Thessalians, which was bold
and gay, somewhat overweening and self-indulgent, but hospitable and
chivalrous. Some said that it was called Hypo-dorian because it was
below the Dorian on the [Greek: aulos] or flute; but Heraclides
thinks that the name merely expressed likeness to the Dorian
character ([Greek: Dôrion men autên ou nomizein, prosempherê de pôs
ekeinê]). The Ionian, again, was harsh and severe, expressive of the
unkindly disposition fostered amid the pride and material welfare of
Miletus. Heraclides is inclined to say that it was not properly a
distinct musical scale or 'harmony,' but a strange aberration in the
form of the musical scale ([Greek: tropon de tina thaumaston
schêmatos harmonias]). He goes on to protest against those who do not
appreciate differences of kind ([Greek: tas kat' eidos diaphoras]),
and are guided only by the high or low pitch of the notes ([Greek: tê
tôn phthongôn exytêti kai barytêti]); so that they make a
Hyper-mixolydian, and another again above that. 'I do not see,' he
adds, 'that the Hyper-phrygian has a distinct ethos; and yet some say
that they have discovered a new mode ([Greek: harmonia]), the
Hypo-phrygian. But a mode ought to have a distinct moral or emotional
character ([Greek: eidos echein ethous hê pathous]), as the Locrian,
which was in use in the time of Simonides and Pindar, but went out of
fashion again.' The Phrygian and Lydian, as we have seen, were said
to have been brought to the Peloponnesus by the followers of Pelops.
The tone as well as the substance of this extract makes it evident
that the opinions of Heraclides on questions of theoretical music
must be accepted with considerable reserve. The notion that the
Phrygian and Lydian scales were 'barbarous' and opposed to Hellenic
ethos was apparently common enough, though largely due (as we may
gather from several indications) to national prejudice. But no one,
except Heraclides, goes so far as to deny them the name of [Greek:
harmonia]. The threefold division into Dorian, Aeolian and Ionian
must also be arbitrary. It is to be observed that Heraclides obtains
his Aeolian by identifying the Aeolian of Pratinas and other early
poets with the mode called Hypo-dorian in his own time. The
circumstance that Plato mentions neither Aeolian nor Hypo-dorian
suggests rather that Aeolian had gone out of use before Hypo-dorian
came in. The conjecture of Boeckh that Ionian was the same as the
later Hypo-phrygian (_De Metr. Pind._ iii. 8) is open to a similar
objection. The Ionian mode was at least as old as Pratinas, whereas
the Hypo-phrygian was a novelty in the time of Heraclides. The
protest which Heraclides makes against classifying modes merely
according to their pitch is chiefly valuable as proving that the
modes were as a matter of fact usually classified from that point of
view. It is far from proving that there was any other principle which
Heraclides wished to adopt--such, for example, as difference in the
intervals employed, or in their succession. His 'differences of kind'
([Greek: tas kat' eidos diaphoras]) are not necessarily to be
explained from the technical use of [Greek: eidos] for the 'species'
of the octave. What he complains of seems to be the multiplication of
modes--Hyper-mixolydian, Hyper-phrygian, Hypo-phrygian--beyond the
legitimate requirements of the art. The Mixo-lydian (_e.g._) is
high-pitched and plaintive: what more can the Hyper-mixolydian be?
The Hypo-phrygian is a new mode: Heraclides denies it a distinctive
ethos. His view seems to be that the number of modes should not be
greater than the number of varieties in temper or emotion of which
music is capable. But there is nothing to show that he did not regard
pitch as the chief element, or one of the chief elements, of musical
expression.
The absence of the name Hypo-lydian, taken with the description of
Hypo-dorian as 'below the Dorian,' would indicate that the
Hypo-dorian of Heraclides was not the later mode of that name, but
was a semitone below the Dorian, in the place afterwards occupied by
the Hypo-lydian. This is confirmed, as we shall see, by Aristoxenus
(p. 18).
§ 7. _Aristotle--the Politics._
Of the writers who deal with music from the point of view of the
cultivated layman, Aristotle is undoubtedly the most instructive. The
chapters in his _Politics_ which treat of music in its relation to
the state and to morality go much more deeply than Plato does into
the grounds of the influence which musical forms exert upon temper
and feeling. Moreover, Aristotle's scope is wider, not being confined
to the education of the young; and his treatment is evidently a more
faithful reflexion of the ordinary Greek notions and sentiment. He
begins (_Pol._ viii. 5, p. 1340 _a_ 38) by agreeing with Plato as to
the great importance of the subject for practical politics. Musical
forms, he holds, are not mere _symbols_ ([Greek: sêmeia]), acting
through association, but are an actual _copy_ or reflex of the forms
of moral temper ([Greek: en de tois melesin autois esti mimêmata tôn
êthôn]); and this is the ground of the different moral influence
exercised by different modes ([Greek: harmoniai]). By some of them,
especially by the Mixo-lydian, we are moved to a plaintive and
depressed temper ([Greek: diatithesthai odyrtikôterôs kai
synestêkotôs mallon]); by others, such as those which are called the
'relaxed' ([Greek: aneimenai]), we are disposed to 'softness' of mind
([Greek: malakôterôs tên dianoian]). The Dorian, again, is the only
one under whose influence men are in a middle and settled mood
([Greek: mesôs kai kathestêkotôs malista]): while the Phrygian makes
them excited ([Greek: enthousiastikous]). In a later chapter (Pol.
viii. 7, p. 1342 _a_ 32), he returns to the subject of the Phrygian.
Socrates, he thinks, ought not to have left it with the Dorian,
especially since he condemned the flute ([Greek: aulos]), which has
the same character among instruments as the Phrygian among modes,
both being orgiastic and emotional. The Dorian, as all agree, is the
most steadfast ([Greek: stasimôtatê]), and has most of the ethos of
courage; and, as compared with other modes, it has the character
which Aristotle himself regards as the universal criterion of
excellence, viz. that of being the mean between opposite excesses.
Aristotle, therefore, certainly understood Plato to have approved the
Dorian and the Phrygian as representing the mean in respect of pitch,
while other modes were either too high or too low. He goes on to
defend the use of the 'relaxed' modes on the ground that they furnish
a music that is still within the powers of those whose voice has
failed from age, and who therefore are not able to sing the
high-pitched modes ([Greek: oion tois apeirêkosi dia chronon ou
rhadion adein tas syntonous harmonias, alla tas aneimenas hê physis
hypoballei tois têlikoutois]). In this passage the meaning of the
words [Greek: syntonos] and [Greek: aneimenos] is especially clear.
In the same discussion (c. 6), Aristotle refers to the distinction
between music that is ethical, music suited to action, and music that
inspires religious excitement ([Greek: ta men êthika, ta de praktika,
ta ho enthousiastika]). The last of these kinds serves as a
'purification' ([Greek: katharsis]). The excitement is calmed by
giving it vent; and the morbid condition of the ethos is met by music
of high pitch and exceptional 'colour' ([Greek: tôn harmoniôn
parekbaseis kai tôn melôn ta syntona kai parakechrôsmena]).
In a different connexion (_Pol._ iv. 3, p. 1290 _a_ 20), dealing with
the opinion that all forms of government are ultimately reducible to
two, viz. oligarchy and democracy, Aristotle compares the view of
some who held that there are properly only two musical modes, Dorian
and Phrygian,--the other scales being mere varieties of these two.
Rather, he says, there is in each case a right form, or two right
forms at most, from which the rest are declensions ([Greek:
parekbaseis]),--on one side to 'high-pitched' and imperious
oligarchies, on the other to 'relaxed' and 'soft' forms of popular
government ([Greek: oligarchikas men tas syntonôteras kai
despotikônteras, tas d' aneimenas kai malakas dêmotikas]). This is
obviously the Platonic doctrine of two right keys, holding the mean
between high and low.
§ 8. _The Aristotelian Problems._
Some further notices of the [Greek: harmoniai] or modes are contained
in the so-called _Problems_,--a collection which is probably not the
work of Aristotle himself, but can hardly be later than the
Aristotelian age. What is said in it of the modes is clearly of the
period before the reform of Aristoxenus. In one place (_Probl._ xix.
48) the question is asked why the Hypo-dorian and Hypo-phrygian are
not used in the _chorus_ of tragedy. One answer is that the
Hypo-phrygian has the ethos of action ([Greek: êthos echei
praktikon]), and that the Hypo-dorian is the expression of a lofty
and unshaken character; both of these things being proper to the
heroic personages on the stage, but not to the chorus, which
represents the average spectator, and takes no part in the action.
Hence the music suited to the chorus is that of emotion venting
itself in passive complaint:--a description which fits the other
modes, but least of all the exciting and orgiastic Hypo-phrygian. On
the contrary (the writer adds) the passive attitude is especially
expressed by the Mixo-lydian. The view here taken of the Hypo-dorian
evidently agrees with that of Heraclides Ponticus (_supra_, p. 10).
The relation which Plato assumes between high pitch and the
excitement of passion, and again between lowness of pitch and
'softness' or self-indulgence ([Greek: malakia kai argia]), is
recognized in the _Problems_, xix. 49 [Greek: epei de ho men barys
phthongos malakos kai êremaios estin, ho de oxys kinêtikos, k.t.l.]:
'since a deep note is soft and calm, and a high note is exciting,
&c.'
§ 9. _The Rhetoric._
The word [Greek: tonos] occurs several times in Aristotle with the
sense of 'pitch,' but is not applied by him to the keys of music. The
nearest approach to such a use may be found in a passage of the
_Rhetoric_ (iii. 1, p. 1403 _b_ 27).
Speaking of the rise of acting ([Greek: hypokrisis]), which was
originally the business of the poet himself, but had grown into a
distinct art, capable of theoretical as well as practical treatment,
he observes that a similar art might be formed for oratory. 'Such an
art would lay down rules directing how to use the voice so as to suit
each variety of feeling,--when it should be loud, when low, when
intermediate;--and how to use the keys, when the pitch of the voice
should be high or low or middle ([Greek: kai pôs tois tonois, oion
oxeia kai bareia kai mesê], sc. [Greek: phônê]); and the rhythms,
which to use for each case. For there are three things which men
study, viz. quantity (_i. e._ loudness of sound), tune, and rhythm
([tria gar esti peri hôn skopousi, tauta d' esti megethos, harmonia,
rhythmos]).' The passage is interesting as showing the value which
Aristotle set upon pitch as an element of effect. And the use of
[Greek: harmonia] in reference to the pitch of the voice, and as
virtually equivalent to [Greek: tonos], is especially worthy of note.
§ 10. _Aristoxenus._
Our next source of information is the technical writer Aristoxenus, a
contemporary and pupil of Aristotle. Of his many works on the subject
of music three books only have survived, bearing the title [Greek:
harmonika otoicheia][1]. In the treatment adopted by Aristoxenus the
chapter on keys follows the chapter on 'systems' ([Greek:
systêmata]). By a [Greek: systêma] he means a scale consisting of a
certain succession of intervals: in other words, a series of notes
whose relative pitch is determined. Such a system may vary in
absolute pitch, and the [Greek: tonoi] or keys are simply the
different degrees of pitch at which a particular system is taken
([Greek: tous tonous eph' ôn tithemena ta systêmata melôdeitai]).
When the system and the key are both given it is evident that the
whole series of notes is determined.
Aristoxenus is the chief authority on the keys of Greek music. In
this department he is considered to have done for Greece what Bach's
_Wohltemperirtes Clavier_ did for modern Europe. It is true that the
scheme of keys which later writers ascribe to him is not given in the
_Harmonics_ which we have: but we find there what is in some respects
more valuable, namely, a vivid account of the state of things in
respect of tonality which he observed in the music of his time.
[Footnote 1: It is foreign to our purpose to discuss the critical
problems presented by the text of Aristoxenus. Of the three extant
books the first is obviously a distinct treatise, and should probably
be entitled [Greek: peri archôn]. The other two books will then bear
the old title [Greek: harmonika stoicheia]. They deal with the same
subjects, for the most part, as the first book, and in the same
order,--a species of repetition of which there are well-known
instances in the Aristotelian writings. The conclusion is abrupt, and
some important topics are omitted. It seems an exaggeration, however,
to describe the _Harmonics_ of Aristoxenus as a mere collection of
excerpts, which is the view taken by Marquard (_Die harmonischen
Fragmente des Aristoxenus_, pp. 359-393). See Westphal's _Harmonik
und Melopöie der Griechen_ (p. 41, ed. 1863), and the reply to
Marquard in his _Aristoxenus von Tarent_ (pp. 165-170).]
'No one,' says Aristoxenus (p. 37 Meib.), 'has told us a word about
the keys, either how they are to be arrived at ([Greek: tina tropon
lêpteon]), or from what point of view their number is to be
determined. Musicians assign the place of the keys very much as the
different cities regulate the days of the month. The Corinthians, for
example, will be found counting a day as the tenth of the month,
while with the Athenians it is the fifth, and in some other place the
eighth. Some authorities on music ([Greek: harmonikoi]) say that the
Hypo-dorian is the lowest key, the Mixo-lydian a semitone higher, the
Dorian again a semitone higher, the Phrygian a tone above the Dorian,
and similarly the Lydian a tone above the Phrygian. Others add the
Hypo-phrygian flute [_i. e._ the scale of the flute so called] at the
lower end of the list. Others, again, looking to the holes of the
flute ([Greek: pros tên tôn aulôn trupêsin blepontes]), separate the
three lowest keys, viz. the Hypo-phrygian, Hypo-dorian, and Dorian,
by the interval of three-quarters of a tone ([Greek: trisi
diesesin]), but the Phrygian from the Dorian by a tone, the Lydian
from the Phrygian again by three-quarters of a tone, and the
Mixo-lydian from the Lydian by a like interval. But as to what
determines the interval between one key and another they have told us
nothing.'
It will be seen that (with one marked exception) there was agreement
about the order of the keys in respect of pitch, and that some at
least had reduced the intervals to the succession of tones and
semitones which characterises the diatonic scale. The exception is
the Mixo-lydian, which some ranked immediately below the Dorian,
others above the Lydian. Westphal attributes this strange discrepancy
to the accidental displacing of some words in the MSS. of
Aristoxenus[1]. However this may be, it is plain that in the time of
Aristoxenus considerable progress had been made towards the scheme of
keys which was afterwards connected with his name. This may be
represented by the following table, in which for the sake of
comparison the later Hypo-lydian and Hypo-dorian are added in
brackets:
Mixo-lydian
semitone - {
Lydian
tone - {
Phrygian
tone - {
Dorian
semitone - {
Hypo-dorian [Hypo-lydian]
tone - {
Hypo-phrygian
tone - {
[Hypo-dorian]
[Footnote 1: _Harm._ p. 37, 19 Meib. [Greek: houtô gar hoi men tôn
harmonikôn legousi barytaton men ton Hypodôrion tôn tonôn, hêmitoniô
de oxyteron toutou ton Mixolydion, toutou de hêmitoniô ton Dôrion,
tou de Dôriou tonô ton Phrygion: hôsautôs de kai tou Phrygiou ton
Lydion heterô tonô.] Westphal (_Harmonik und Melopöie_ p. 165) would
transfer the words [Greek: hêmitoniô ... Mixolydion] to the end of
the sentence, and insert [Greek: oxyteron] before [Greek: ton
Dôrion]. The necessity for this insertion shows that Westphal's
transposition is not in itself an easy one. The only reason for it is
the difficulty of supposing that there could have been so great a
difference in the pitch of the Mixo-lydian scale. As to this,
however, see p. 23 (note).
The words [Greek: Hypophrygion aulon] have also been condemned by
Westphal (_Aristoxenus_, p. 453). He points out the curious
contradiction between [Greek: pros tên tôn aulôn trypêsin blepontes]
and the complaint [Greek: ti d' esti pros ho blepontes ... ouden
eirêkasin]. But if [Greek: pros tên ... blepontes] was a marginal
gloss, as Westphal suggests, it was doubtless a gloss on [Greek:
aulon], and if so, [Greek: aulon] is presumably sound. Since the
[Greek: aulos] was especially a Phrygian instrument, and regularly
associated with the Phrygian mode (as we know from Aristotle, see p.
13), nothing is more probable than that there was a variety of flute
called Hypo-phrygian, because tuned so as to yield the Hypo-phrygian
key, either by itself or as a modulation from the Phrygian.]
In this scheme the important feature--that which marks it as an
advance on the others referred to by Aristoxenus--is the conformity
which it exhibits with the diatonic scale. The result of this
conformity is that the keys stand in a certain relation to each
other. Taking any two, we find that certain notes are common to them.
So long as the intervals of pitch were quite arbitrary, or were
practically irrational quantities, such as three-quarters of a tone,
no such relation could exist. It now became possible to pass from one
key to another, _i. e._ to employ _modulation_ ([Greek: metabolê]) as
a source of musical effect. This new system had evidently made some
progress when Aristoxenus wrote, though it was not perfected, and had
not passed into general use.
§ 11. _Names of Keys_ ([Greek: hypo-]).
A point that deserves special notice at this place is the use of the
prefix _Hypo-_ ([Greek: hypo-]) in the names of keys. In the final
Aristoxenean system _Hypo-_ implies that a key is lower by the
interval of a Fourth than the key to whose name it is prefixed. This
convention served to bring out the special relation between the two
keys, viz. to show that they are related (to use modern language) as
the keys of a tonic and dominant. In the scheme of keys now in
question there is only one instance of this use of _Hypo-_, namely in
the Hypo-phrygian, the most recently introduced. It must have been on
the analogy of this name that the term Hypo-dorian was shifted from
the key immediately below the Dorian to the new key a Fourth below
it, and that the new term Hypo-lydian was given to the old
Hypo-dorian in accordance with its similar relation to the Lydian. In
the time of Aristoxenus, then, this technical sense of _Hypo-_ had
not yet been established, but was coming into use. It led naturally
to the employment of _Hyper-_ in the inverse sense, viz. to denote a
key a Fourth higher (the key of the sub-dominant). By further steps,
of which there is no record, the Greek musicians arrived at the idea
of a key for every semitone in the octave; and thus was formed the
system of thirteen keys, ascribed to Aristoxenus by later writers.
(See the scheme at the end of this book, Table II.) Whether in fact
it was entirely his work may be doubted. In any case he had formed a
clear conception--the want of which he noted in his predecessors--of
the principles on which a theoretically complete scheme of keys
should be constructed.
In the discussions to which we have been referring, Aristoxenus
invariably employs the word [Greek: tonos] in the sense of 'key.' The
word [Greek: harmonia] in his writings is equivalent to 'Enharmonic
genus' ([Greek: genos enarmonion]), the _genus_ of music which made
use of the Enharmonic _diësis_ or quarter-tone. Thus he never speaks,
as Plato and Aristotle do, of the Dorian (or Phrygian or Lydian)
[Greek: harmonia], but only of the [Greek: tonoi] so named. There is
indeed one passage in which certain octave scales are said by
Aristoxenus to have been called [Greek: harmoniai]: but this, as will
be shown, is a use which is to be otherwise explained (see p. 54).
§ 12. _Plutarch's Dialogue on Music._
After the time of Aristoxenus the technical writers on music make
little or no use of the term [Greek: harmonia]. Their word for 'key'
is [Greek: tonos]; and the octachord scales which are distinguished
by the succession of their intervals are called 'species of the
octave' ([Greek: eidê tou dia] [Greek: pasôn]). The modes of the
classical period, however, were still objects of antiquarian and
philosophic interest, and authors who treated them from this point of
view naturally kept up the old designation. A good specimen of the
writings of this class has survived in the _dialogus de musicâ_ of
Plutarch. Like most productions of the time, it is mainly a
compilation from earlier works now lost. Much of it comes from
Aristoxenus, and there is therefore a special fitness in dealing with
it in this place, by way of supplement to the arguments drawn
directly from the Aristoxenean _Harmonics_. The following are the
chief passages bearing on the subject of our enquiry:
(1) In cc. 15-17 we find a commentary of some interest on the
Platonic treatment of the modes. Plutarch is dwelling on the
superiority of the older and simpler music, and appeals to the
opinion of Plato.
'The Lydian mode ([Greek: harmonia]) Plato objects to because it is
high ([Greek: oxeia]) and suited to lamentation. Indeed it is said to
have been originally devised for that purpose: for Aristoxenus tells
us, in his first book on Music, that Olympus first employed the
Lydian mode on the flute in a dirge ([Greek: epikêdeion aulêsai
Lydisti]) over the Python. But some say that Melanippides began this
kind of music. And Pindar in his paeans says that the Lydian mode
([Greek: harmonia]) was first brought in by Anthippus in an ode on
the marriage of Niobe. But others say that Torrhebus first used that
mode, as Dionysius the Iambus relates.'
'The Mixo-lydian, too, is pathetic and suitable to tragedy. And
Aristoxenus says that Sappho was the inventor of the Mixo-lydian, and
that from her the tragic poets learned it. They combined it with the
Dorian, since that mode gives grandeur and dignity, and the other
pathos, and these are the two elements of tragedy. But in his
Historical Treatise on Music ([Greek: historika tês harmonias
hypomnêmata]) he says that Pythoclides the flute-player was the
discoverer of it. And Lysis says that Lamprocles the Athenian,
perceiving that in it the disjunctive tone ([Greek: diazeuxis]) is
not where it was generally supposed to be, but is at the upper end of
the scale, made the form of it to be that of the octave from Paramesê
to Hypatê Hypatôn ([Greek: toiouton autês apergasasthai to schêma
hoion to apo paramesês epi hypatên hypatôn]). Moreover, it is said
that the relaxed Lydian ([Greek: epaneimenên Lydisti]), which is the
opposite of the Mixo-lydian, being similar to the Ionian ([Greek:
paraplêsian ousan tê Iadi]), was invented by Damon the Athenian.'
'These modes then, the one plaintive, the other relaxed ([Greek:
eklelymenê]), Plato properly rejected, and chose the Dorian, as
befitting warlike and temperate men.'
In this passage the 'high-pitched Lydian' ([Greek: Syntonolydisti])
of Plato is called simply Lydian. There is every reason to suppose
that it is the mode called Lydian by Aristotle and Heraclides
Ponticus[1]. If this is so, it follows almost of necessity that the
Lydian of Plato, called slack ([Greek: chalara]) by him--Plutarch's
[Greek: epaneimenê Lydisti]--is to be identified with the later
Hypo-lydian.
[Footnote 1: An objection to this identification has been based on
the words of Pollux, _Onom._ iv. 78 [Greek: kai harmonia men aulêtikê
Dôristi, Phrygisti, Lydios kai Iônikê, kai syntonos Lydisti ên
Anthippos exeure]. The source of this statement, or at least of the
latter part of it, is evidently the same as that of the notice in
Plutarch. The agreement with Plato's list makes it probable that this
source was some comment on the passage in the _Republic_. If so, it
can hardly be doubted that Pollux gives the original terms, the
Platonic [Greek: Lydisti] and [Greek: Syntonolydisti], and
consequently that the later Lydian is not to be found in his [Greek:
Lydios] (which is a 'relaxed' mode), but in his [Greek: syntonos
Lydisti]. There is no difficulty in supposing that the mode was
called [Greek: syntonos] merely in contrast to the other.]
The point, however, is not free from difficulty: for (as we have
seen, p. 18), the name Hypo-lydian is not in the list of keys given
by Aristoxenus--the key which was ultimately called Hypo-lydian being
known to him as the Hypo-dorian. If, however, the confusion in the
nomenclature of the keys was as great as Aristoxenus himself
describes, such a contradiction as this cannot be taken to prove
much[1].