[ 769 3 
fignifies a certain tenor or degree of tune ? and how 
can they be called infinite, if they depend on the 
conflitution of the oCtave? Yet, elfewhere, he argues, 
that they are no other than the fpecies of oCtaves, and 
as fuch, makes their number feven ; and accordingly, 
in all his fchemes, fets down their different modula- 
tions. But, in chapter fixth, he feems more plainly 
to take in both thefe differences ; for he fays, there are 
two principal differences with refpeCt to the change 
of the tone, one, whereby the whole fong is fung 
higher or lower, the other wherein there is a change 
of the melody to another fpecies than it was begun 
in ; but this, he thinks, is rather a change of the 
long, or melos, than of the tone; as if again he 
would have us think, this depended only on the 
acutenefs and gravity of the whole. So obfcurely 
has the beft of all the antient writers delivered him- 
felf on this article, that deferved to have been moft 
clearly handled. But, that I may have done with 
it, I fhall only fay, it muft be taken in one or other 
of the fenfes mentioned, if not in both 3 for another, 
I think, cannot be found (52).” 
Notwithfcanding the confufion in this author’s ex- 
planations, and his leaving the queftion thus unde- 
cided, it is his account of the modes, that feems 
chiefly to have been adopted by compilers fince. 
And hence wx find nothing better in the Cyclopaedia 
of Chambers, or the Mufical Dictionary of Grafii- 
neau, than a repetition of thefe doubts and perplexi- 
ties. Amongft: the French writers, Broffard, in his 
Ditfionaire dc Mujique , throws no light upon this fub- 
(52) Malcolm’s Treatife on Mufic, p. 538. lin. ult. 
jedt, 
6 
