MUSIC. 



681 



tbe ancient lyre was played with the hand, or 

 struck with a plectrum, and that there were no 

 fingerhoard and bow, like those of the violin, to 

 regulate the sound of the strings. They must 

 necessarily have given the sound to which they 

 were tutisd, like the strings of the modern harp. We 

 must believe the ears of the Greeks, then, to have 

 been differently constructed from our own, or to 

 have been most extraordinarily obtuse, if they 

 could have enjoyed the sounds which would have 

 been produced by either the consecutive or simul- 

 taneous touching of these strings, " a combination," 

 says Majer, " enough to drive a dog mad." But 

 on the other hand, what could be more natural or 

 more pleasing than to tune them at intervals of 

 thirds, thus forming the fundamental chord? It is 

 worthy of remark, too, that the outside strings 

 were considered as fixed, being the extremes of the 

 octave ; and the inside strings as movable, that is, 

 they might be tuned higher or lower. This, on 

 the supposition that the middle strings were the 

 third and fifth, would give an opportunity for a 

 change of key from major to minor, or the reverse, 

 without affecting the outside strings ; but it would 

 be to little purpose, if they were tuned as the 

 fourth and fifth. One would think the half 

 of the octave must be as much fixed as the ex- 

 tremes. 



It is extraordinary, if Meibomius, Martini, Bur- 

 ney, and others have interpreted the Greek system 

 of music aright, that they should have imagined the 

 ancients could have thought the fourth and fifth a 

 chord with the first. This is manifestly impossible. 

 It is a discord which the ear rejects with disgust 

 and pain ; and neither Timotheus, nor Philoxenus, 

 nor Sappho, nor Apollo himself could make any 

 thing else of it. Why should we insist, then, upon 

 the Greek music being discordant, rather than ima- 

 gine a few modern scholars to have fallen into 

 error, especially when, from the scanty means of 

 forming an opinion which are left, such an error is 

 very fairly excusable? Still the language of the 

 ancients respecting the tetrachords remains to be 

 explained in some way ; and if we may be allowed, 

 without incurring the charge of temerity, to make 

 a suggestion on this vexed subject, we should say 

 the difficulty might, perhaps, be solved, by suppos- 

 ing them to have divided their notes by semitones 

 instead of tones. It is obvious that the interval 

 between major thirds is two tones, or four half- 

 tones ; and here we have at once a tetrachord of 

 semitones, of which there would be three in every 

 octave,* and the first notes of each tetrachord 

 would be in harmony. Thus C, E, and G would 

 accord with each other, and with the C which would 

 complete the octave, and form the first note of the 

 following tetrachord. We merely throw out this 

 suggestion,' without venturing to assert that it 

 would solve the problem, but leaving it to others 

 to justify or reject it. " Non nostrum tantas 

 componere lites.' 



But the great subject of discussion among the 

 literati, who have treated of ancient music, is 

 whether or not the ancients understood counter- 

 point, or the arrangement of different parts or 

 voices in such manner, that there should be melody 

 in each, and harmony in the whole together. While 



* Suppose C to bo the tonic, tlie first tetrachord would con- 

 sist of C, elf, r>, ntt; the second of E, F, FJf, G ; the third of 



OJ.A.AJB. 



some have contended, that this complicated art 

 must have been understood, from the effects pro- 

 duced by music in ancient times, so far surpassing 

 what it is able to do now, others again, not con- 

 tent with denying them the finished skill of mo- 

 dern composers, have even refused them any thing 

 like harmony; and have contended, that the voices 

 and instruments, however numerous they might be, 

 were all in unison. In the absence of all histori- 

 cal record on the subject, one would say that each 

 of these extreme opinions was equally improbable. 

 With regard to the argument from the effects, it 

 has been somewhat ludicrously overstrained. Peo- 

 ple seem almost to have believed in sincerity, that 

 Ampbion built walls, Arion rode dolphins, and 

 Orpheus made trees dance, by the mere power of 

 harmony. Probably the influence of song upon 

 the modern art of navigation is quite as powerful 

 as it was upon the ancient art of masonry; yet no 

 one will contend that sailors are now-a-days very 

 accomplished musicians. Nor can it be imagined, 

 that these strange stories, though not taken lite- 

 rally, yet must be, considered as poetical represen- 

 tations of wonderful effects. The results, stripped 

 of their colouring, are no more extraordinary than 

 are constantly produced now; and indeed we are 

 persuaded it must have been no more difficult for 

 Timotheus to have stirred the excitable temper of 

 an Alexander to vehement action, than for a mo- 

 dern songstress to throw an audience into such 

 a kind of ecstatic delirium, as many have wit- 

 nessed, and some experienced, especially in con- 

 tinental theatres. Let it be remembered, that 

 the greatest effects in music are always pro- 

 duced by the human voice. Instruments and bar 

 mony and scientific combinations of tones are all 

 very delightful; but it is the song or the chorus 

 which melts the heart with tenderness, or fills it 

 with joy, or overawes it with sublimity. It is 

 sympathy with emotion expressed, which we feel ; 

 and, as the human voice can give greater depth and 

 variety of expression than any other instrument 

 whatever, it cannot fail, as long as human nature 

 continues unchanged, to produce the most power- 

 ful effects in music. 



And what was there to render ancient Greece 

 less musical than modern Italy? Had they not the 

 taste, refinement, the quickness of perception, the 

 climate, which seem suitable for the cultivation of 

 the art in perfection ? And shall we believe, that 

 all this aptitude for music was lost, thrown away 

 upon them, because a few students tell us they 

 had no knowledge of harmony, and no other rhyth- 

 mical divisions of sound than into one long and one 

 short one? Those who think more highly of 

 names than of nature will believe all this, hard as 

 it may be to credit; but we think the dictates of 

 nature are not to be set aside so easily. The musi- 

 cal ear must have fallen upon harmony by accident, 

 if it could not attain it by study; and, as for their 

 rhythmical divisions, to suppose they had but one 

 long and one short sound, is denying the Greeks 

 the musical instinct, of which, by general consent, 

 they had a large share. 



But this question need not be referred to nature 

 alone for decision. There are some passages of 

 ancient authors which would seem to be of difficult 

 interpretation, if the ancients had no just ideas of 

 harmony, but which are perfectly and at once in- 

 telligible, if such ideas be conceded. Take, for 

 instance, the following language of Longinus; 

 " For, as in music the principal note derives 



