[F: c,, | c, | c G: c' | c'' | c''' | c'''']
[W: C_ | C | c : c' | c'' | c''' | c'''']
[W: Contra | Great | Small : 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th ]
Following out his system, he applied the newly acquired
syllables to each of the hexachords--for instance, the lowest
hexachord, G A B C D E, which was called hard, became _ut re
mi fa sol la_; the second, which was called natural, C D E F
G A, also became _ut re mi fa sol la_; and the third, which
was called soft, F G A B[flat] C D, became likewise _ut re mi
fa sol la_. The next three hexachords were treated in the same
manner; the last or seventh hexachord was merely a repetition
of the first and the fourth.
Now in the hymns, and also in the sequences, as they were called
(which were simply a series of notes forming a little melody
sung to two or three words), the voice was rarely called upon
to progress more than the interval of a sixth, and so this
solmization, as the new system was called, was very valuable;
for one had only to give the pitch, and _ut_ always meant the
keynote, _re_ the second, _mi_ the third, etc., etc. In time
_ut_ was found to be a difficult syllable to sing, and _do_
was substituted. This change, however, was made after the scale
was divided into a system of octaves instead of hexachords. The
improvement in singing soon made the limits of the hexachords
too small to be practical; therefore another syllable was added
to the hexachordal system, _si_, and with this seventh note
we have our modern scale. From this we see that the scale in
present use is composed of octaves, just as the older scales
were composed of hexachords, and before that tetrachords. Just
as in mediaeval times each hexachord commenced with _ut_,
so now every octave of our tonal system commences with _do_.
Before leaving the hexachordal system, it may be as well to
explain the mode of procedure when the voice had to go beyond
the interval of the sixth. We know that the first of every set
of six notes was called _ut_, the second, _re_, the third,
_mi_, etc. When the voice had to go beyond _la_, the sixth
note, to B[natural], that sixth note was always called _re_,
and was considered the second note of a new hexachord. If,
on the other hand, the voice had to go beyond _a_, to B[flat],
the fifth note was called _re_, since the syllables _mi fa_
must always come on the half-tone.
In a study of our system of writing music, it may be as well to
begin with the derivation of our sharps and flats. Observing
the third hexachord on our list we see that in order to make
it identical in structure with the first and second, the B had
to be lowered a semitone. Now the third hexachord was called
soft. The B[flat] in it was accordingly called a soft B or
B _molle_, which is still the name in France for a flat, and
_moll_ in German still means minor, or "soft" or "lowered." For
the fourth hexachord, which was called hard, this B was again
raised a semitone. But the flatted B was already indicated
by the letter _b_ or round _b_, as it was called; hence this
B natural was given a _square_ shape and called B _carre_,
[illustration]. The present French word for natural (when it
is specially marked) is _becarre_; the German word for major
also comes indirectly from this, for _dur_ means "hard."
An explanation of the modern German names for notes will be
easily understood in this connection. In the German nomenclature
the letters of the alphabet stand for the notes of the scale
as in the English, with the exception of B. This B, or "round"
B, in the German system stands for B[flat], which is more
logical than our English usage, since our flat is merely a
slightly modified form of _b_. The German B natural is our
letter _h_, which is merely a corruption of the square _b_,
[illustration], which by the addition of a line in time
became our [natural]. The Germans have carried the flatting
and sharping of tones to a logical conclusion in their present
nomenclature, for by "sharping" the sound of a single letter it
is raised a semitone from its normal diapason, thus F becomes
_Fis_, G _Gis_. On the other hand, in order to lower a tone,
the letter representing it is "flatted," and F is called _Fes_,
G _Ges_, the only exception to these rules being the B which
we have already considered.
In France the Guidonian system was adhered to closely, and
to this day the _becarre_ is used only as an accidental, to
indicate that the note to which it refers has been flatted
before. The _naturel_ (which has the same shape) is used
to designate a note that is natural to the key; thus the
distinction is made between an accidental and a note that is
common to the key. In F major, for instance, B[natural] is
_si becarre_, A[natural] would be _la naturel_. Our modern
sharp is merely another form of the natural or square B
([natural]) which gradually came to be used before _any_ note,
signifying that it was raised or sharped a half-tone; the flat
lowered it a semitone, and after a while the natural received
its present place between the sharp and flat. The first instance
we have of the sharp being used is in the thirteenth century,
when (in the Rondels of Adam de la Hale) it takes the form
of a cross [x] (the German word for the sharp still remains
_kreuz_). The French word _diese_ (sharp) comes from the Greek
_diesis_, a term used to indicate the raising of the voice in
the chromatic scale.
And now we have to speak of notation and its development.
Thus far we have found only two ways in which musical sounds
were indicated by the ancients. First, we remember the invention
of Aristophanes of Alexandria, his accents, high, low, and
circumflex. Then we know from Ptolemy, Boethius, and Alypius
that letters were used to designate the different tones; but as
there is no music extant in this notation to prove the theory,
we need not trouble ourselves with it.
The system of Aristophanes, however, was destined to become the
nucleus from which our modern notation sprang. We know that
an elementary idea, clearly expressed, has more chances of
living than has a more complicated system, however ingenious
the latter may be. Now this system is so plain that we will
find it is common to many aboriginal peoples, for instance
the American Indians have a system very similar.
In the period now under consideration (from the third to the
tenth century), music was noted in this way: an upstroke of
the pen meant a raising of the voice, a downstroke lowered it,
a flat stroke meant a repetition of the same note, thus [/ \ -]
[G: c' g' c' c']. Gradually it became necessary to indicate
the contour of the melodies with more accuracy; therefore the
circumflex was added [Over-slur] [G: g' c'' g'] and reversed
[Under-slur] [G: g' e' g']. Still later a sign for two steps was
invented [Step] [G: e' g' b'] and when the progression was to
be diatonically stepwise the strokes were thicker [Thick Step]
[G: g' a' b']. So this notation developed, and by combining
the many signs together, simple non-rhythmic melodies could be
indicated with comparative clearness and simplicity. The flat
stroke for a single note [-], indicating [G: b'], eventually
became smaller and thicker, thus [Thick -]. By combining these
different signs, a skip of a third and back came to be noted
[Crenellation], and if the note came down on a second instead
of the original note it became [Podium] [G: g' b' a']. The
_quilisma_ ([Upper Mordent]) indicated a repetition of two
notes, one above the other, and we still use much the same
sign for our trill. Also the two forms of the circumflex,
[Over-slur] [Under-slur], were joined ([Turn]) and thus we
have the modern turn, so much used by Wagner.
Now while this notation was ingenious, it still left much
to be desired as to pitch. To remedy this a red line was
drawn before writing these signs or _neumes_, as they were
called. This line represented a given pitch, generally E;
above and below it were then written the signs for the notes,
their pitch being determined by the relative position they held
in regard to the _line_. Thus [Podium, Turn, Upper Mordent] was
the equivalent of [G: c' e' d' e' d' c' d' e' d' e' d' e' d'],
considering the line as being middle C pitch, a fourth higher F.
This was the condition of musical notation in 1000 A.D.
To Guido d'Arezzo is ascribed its development up to some
semblance of our present system, although the claim has often
been denied. It is certain, however, that the innovations
were made at this period. In the first place Guido made the
red line _always_ stand for the pitch of F, and at a little
distance above it he added another line, this time yellow,
which was to indicate the pitch of C. Thus the signs began to
take very definite meaning as regards pitch; for, given a sign
extending from one line to the other, the reader could see
at a glance that the music progressed a fifth, from F to C,
or _vice-versa_. And now the copyists, seeing the value of
these lines in determining the pitch of the different signs,
of their own account added two more in black ink, one of which
they drew between the F and the C line, and the other above
the C line, thus [illustration]. By doing this they accurately
decided the pitch of every note, for the lowest line, being F,
the line between that and the C line must stand for A, and the
two spaces for G and B; the top line would stand for E, and the
space between it and the yellow line for D. Little by little
these copyists grew careless about making the lines in yellow,
red, and black, and sometimes drew them all in black or red,
thereby losing the distinguishing mark of the F and C lines. In
order to remedy this, Guido placed the letters F and C before
the lines representing these notes, thus [illustration]. In
this way our modern _clefs_ (_clavis_ or key) originated, for
the C clef, as it is called, gradually changed its shape to
[illustration] and [illustration], and the F clef changed to
[illustration], which is our bass clef in a rudimentary form.
Later, still another line was added to the set, thus giving
us our modern staff, and another clef, [illustration], was
added on the next to the lowest line. This, in turn, became
our present treble clef, [G:]. In the course of time the signs
themselves underwent many changes, until at last from [Podium],
etc., they became our modern signs.
Before this, however, a grave defect in the notation had to
be remedied. There was as yet no way of designating the length
of time a note was to be sustained; something definite in the
way of noting _rhythm_ was necessary. This was accomplished
by Franco of Cologne, in the beginning of the thirteenth
century. By disconnecting the parts of the sign [Podium] one
from another, the following individual signs were acquired
[illustration of Podium broken into three pieces]. In order
to have two distinct values of length, these signs were
called longs and shorts, _longa_ [illustration], and _brevis_
[illustration], to which was added the _brevis_ in another
position [illustration], called _semibrevis_. The _longa_
was twice the value of the _brevis_, and the _semibrevis_
was half the length of the _brevis_ ([L = B B B = S S]).
When notes of equal length were slurred, they were written
[illustration]. When two or more notes were to be sung to
one syllable in quicker time, the _brevi_ were joined one to
the other [illustration], as for instance in the songs of the
thirteenth century,