[ 77 * ] 
The laft writer, that I have feen, who has treated 
this fubjedt, and with whofe opinion I fhall conclude 
thefe Iheets, is the anonymous author of a letter to 
Mr. Avilon, concerning the mufic of the antients, 
published with the effay of the latter on mufical ex- 
preffion, in 1753. This author, who profeffes but 
a (lender knowlege of the theory, either of modern 
or antient mufic, has, in a few pages, difcovered him - 
felf to be poffeffed of more than his modefty will 
permit him to lay claim to. In the matter of the 
tones, however, (fuch is the fatality, that feems to 
have conftantly attended this dodtrine) he does not 
appear to have fucceeded better than the writers that 
have gone before him. He blames Sanadon and 
Cerceau, for affirming, in their obfervations on Ho- 
race, carm. 5. 9. that the Dorian mode anfwered 
exactly to our A-mi-la with a minor third, and the 
Phrygian to our A-mi-la with a major third. Now, 
that thefe French critics, though right, inafmuch as 
they feem to confider the modes as different fpecies 
of diapafon, are, neverthelefs, miftaken in their ap- 
plication of them, does, indeed, appear from my firffi 
diagram, where it may be immediately feen, that 
what they affert of the Dorian and Phrygian modes, 
is true only of the Hypodorian and Lydian ; and had 
the anonymous writer gone no farther in his cenlure 
of them, I (hould readily have joined with him : but 
he rejects the mufical dodtrine entirely, and admits 
only of the harmonic. “ Surely (fays he (57), fpeak- 
ing of what thefe critics advance) this is a mufical 
error, and a dream from the ivory gate. Two modes 
(57) Pa £ e 6 - 
with 
