fubject which, though now involved in fuch impenetrable obfcurity as to baffle the utmost efforts of human ingenuity and penetration, was hitherto perhaps never treated with so much accuracy, difcernment, and force of conjecture. In general, the writers who have engaged in this difficult enquiry were: perfons only converfant in the ordinary knowledge of antiquaries; and if poffeffed of claffical learning, were too deficient in the elements of mufic to pursue their researches with: any probability of fuccefs.

Dr. Burney is the first writer that ever published a History of Mufic in the English language; and indeed, when we confider the extraordinary application which he has bestowed onthe present work, we are led rather to admire his perseverance and induftry, than to congratulate him on the applause, however great, to which he is juftly entitled by the execution of it. The following extract from the preface will fhew in what unfavourable circumstances, and with how much labour, it was accomplished.

If I might prefume to hope, however, for any unusual indulgence from the public with refpect to this work, it must be from the peculiarity of my circumftances during the time it was in hand. For fhould the materia's be found ill digested, or the diction incorrect; it is humbly hoped that part of thefe, and other defects, will be attributed to want of leisure and health, as well as want of abilities, to render it lefs unworthy the public patronage: for it may with the utmoft truth be faid, that it was compofed in moments ftolen from fleep, from refection, and from an occupation which required all my attention, during more than twelve hours a day, for a great part of the year.

If it be afked, why I entered on fo arduous a task, knowing the difadvantages I muft labour under, my. answer is, that it was neither with a view to rival others, nor to expofe the defects of former attempts, but merely to fill up, as well as I was able, a chasm in English literature. I knew that a history of mufic was wanted by my countrymen, though I was utterly ignorant that any one elfe had undertaken to fupply it; and, to confefs the truth, I did, at first, imagine, though I have been long convinced of my mistake, that, with many years practice and experience in mufical matters, fome reading, and the pof. feffion of a great number of books on the fubje&t, I should have been able to compile fuch a history as was wanted, at my leisure hours, without great labour or expence.

But, after I had embarked, the further I failed, the greaterfeemed my distance from the port: doubts of my own abilities, and refpect for the public, abated my confidence; my ideas of what would be required at my hands were enlarged beyond my powers of fulfilling them, efpecially in the narrow limits of two

volumes, and in the little time I had allowed myself, which was made ftill lefs by fickness.

A work like this, in which it is neceffary to give authorities for every fact that is afferted, advances infinitely flower, with all the diligence that can be bestowed upon it, than one of mere imagination, or one confifting of recent circumftances, within the knowledge and memory of the writer. The difference in point of time and labour is as great as in building a house with scarce materials dug out of the earth, or produced in remote regions of the world, or with bricks made upon the spot, and timber from a neighbouring wood; and I have frequently fpent more time in afcertaining a date, or seeking a short, and, in itself, a trivial paffage, than it would have required to fill many pages with conjecture and declamation.

However, after reading, or at leaft confulting, an almoft innumerable quantity of old and fcarce books on the fubject, of which the dulnefs and pedantry were almoft petrific, and among which, where I hoped to find the most information, I found but little, aud where I expected but little, I was feldom difäppointed at length, wearied and difgufted at the fmall fuccefs of my researches, I fhut my books, and began to examine my felf as to my mufical principles; hoping that the good I had met with in the courfe of my reading was by this time digefted and incorporated in my own ideas; and that the many years had fpent in practice, theory, and meditation, might entitle me to fome freedom of thought, unfhackled by the trammels of authority.'

I

With respect to the plan of this work, the judicious author informs us, that he has blended together theory and practice, facts and explanations, incidents, caufes, confequences, conjectures, and he adds confettions of ignorance, juft as the subject produced them. He has collected into one point the most interefting circumftances relative to its practice and profeffors; its connection with religion; with war; with the stage; with public feftivals, and private amusements. He has alfo endeavoured to point out the boundaries of mufic, and its influence on the paffions; its early fubfervience to poetry, and its fubfequent feparation from that art.

The preliminary Differtation begins with fo interefting and animated an account of the obfcurity in which the ancient mufic is now involved, that for the gratification of our readers we fhali infert the introductory part.

It is with great, and almoft hopeless diffidence, that I enter upon this part of my work; as I can hardly animate myself with the expectation of fucceeding in enquiries which have foiled the most learned men of the two or three last centuries. It has been remarked by Tartini, in fpeaking of ancient mufic, that doubt, difficulty, and obfcurity, fhould not be all imputed to the author, but to the fubject, fince they are in its very effence: for what, befides conjecture, is now left us,

con

concerning things fo tranfient as found, and fo evanefcent as tafte ?

The land of conje&ture, however, is fo extenfive and unap propriated, that every new cultivator has a right to break up, fresh ground, or to feize upon any spot that has long lain fallow, without the fanction of a grant from any one who may arrogate to himself the fovereignty of the whole, or of any neglected part of it. But though no one has an exclufive right to thefe imaginary regions, yet the public has a juft power of cenfuring the methods of improvement adopted by any new inhabitant, and of condemning fuch productions as may be deemed unfit for use.

The opinions of mankind feldom agree, concerning the most common and obvious things and confequently will be fill lefs likely to coincide about others, that are reducible to no ftandard of truth or excellence, but are fubject to the lawless controul of every individual who fhall think fit to condemn them, either with, or without understanding them.

Dr. Johnfon has well faid, that thofe who think they have done much, fee but little to do;" and with respect so ancient mufic, I believe thofe who have taken the greatest pains. to investigate the fubject, are the leaft fatisfied with the fuccefs of their labours.

The whole is now become a matter of faith; but it is difficult to believe implicitly every pompous defcription given us by the ancients of the powers of their mufic, while we fee their inftruments, as reprefented in fculpture, fo fimple, and, feemingly, incapable of producing great effects.

Read their theorifts, and even the practical musician Ariftoxenus, and what do we learn, but that the ears of the Greeks were very delicate as to intonation, and the divifions of their fcales; but among all that author's fpeculations, we can find no traces of melody, or harmony, fuch as we understand by air accompanied with different parts.

What the ancient mufic really was, it is not now eafy to determine; but of this we are certain, that it was fomething with which mankind was extremely delighted: for not only the poets, but the hiftorians and philofophers of the best ages of Greece and Rome, are as diffufe in its praises, as of thofe arts concerning which fufficient remains are come down to us, to evince the truth of their panegyrics. And fo great was the fenfibility of the ancient Greeks, and fo foft and refined their language, that they seem to have been, in both refpects, to the reft of the world, what the modern Italians are at prefent. For of thefe laft, the language itfelf is mufic, and their ears are so polished and accustomed to fweet founds, that they are ren dered faftidious judges of melody, both by habit and education.

But as to the fuperior or inferior degree of excellence in the ancient mufic, compared with the modern, it is now as impoffible to determine, as it is to hear both fides.

• In

Indeed it is fo entirely loft, that the ftudy of it is as unprofitable as learning a dead language, in which there are no books; and yet this ftudy has given rife to fo much pedantry, and to fuch an ambition in modern mufical authors, to be thought well verfed in the writings of the ancients upon mufic, that their treatifes are rendered both difgufting and unintelligible by it. Words only are come down to us without things. We have fo few remains of ancient mufic by which to illuftrate its rules, that we cannot, as in painting, poetry, fculpture, or architecture, judge of it, or profit by examples; and to feveral of these terms which are crammed into our books, we are utterly unable to affix any precife or ufeful meaning. To write, therefore, in favour of ancient mufic now, is like the emperor Julian's defending paganifin, when mankind had given it up as indefenfible, and had attached themselves to another religion.

However, it is, perhaps, a fortunate circumstance for modern mufic that the ancient is loft, as it might not have fuited the genius of our language, and might have tied us down to precedent; as the writers of modern Latin never dare hazard a fingle thought or expreffion without claffical authority.

The fubject itself of ancient mufic is fo dark, and writers concerning it are fo difcordant in their opinions, that I should have been glad to have waved all difcuffion about it. For to fay the truth, the ftudy of it is now become the bufinefs of an antiquary more than of a musician. But in every history of music extant, in other languages, the practice had been fo conftant for the author to make a display of what he knew, and what he did not know concerning ancient mufic, that it feemed abfolutely neceffary for me to fay fomething about it, if it were only to prove, that if I have not been more fuccefsful in my enquiries than my predeceffors, I have not been lefs diligent. And it appeared likewife neceflary, before I attempted a hiftory of ancient Greek mufic, to endeavour to investigate its properties, or at least to tell the little I knew of it, and ingenuously to confefs my ignorance and doubts about

the rest.

Indeed it was once my intention to begin my history with the invention of the present mufical feale and counterpoint; for "What can we reafon, but from what we know?" But it was impoffible to read a great number of books upon the fubject, without meeting with conjectures, and it was not eafy to perufe thefe, without forming others of my own. If those which I have hazarded fhould throw any light upon the fubject, it will enable my readers to travel through the dark maze of inquiry with more facility, and confequently lefs difguft; and if I fail in my researches, and leave both the fubject and them where I found them, as the expectation which I encourage is but small, fo it is hoped will be their disappointment. For with respect to all I have to fay, I must confefs that the Spanish motto adopted by Francis le Vayer, is wholly applicable.

• De las cofas mas figuras

La mas fegura es dudar :

In wading through innumerable volumes, with promifing titles, and fubmitting to the drudgery of all juch reading as was never read, I frequently found that those who were moit diffuse upon the fubject, knew leaft of the matter; and that technical jargon, and unintelligible pedantry fo loaded each page, that not an eligible thought could be found, in exploring thoufands of them. Indeed my researches were fometimes fo unfuccessful, that I feemed to resemble a wretch in the street, raking the kennels for an old rusty nail. However, the ardour of enquiry was now and then revived by congenial ideas, and by gleams of light emitted from penetration and intelligence: and thefe will be gratefully acknowledged, whenever they afford affiftance.'

In the first section of the Differtation Dr. Burney treats of the notation or tablature of ancient mufic, including its scales, intervals, fyftems, and diagrams. He obferves, it does not appear from hiftory that the Egyptians, Phoenicians, Hebrews, or any ancient people, who cultivated the arts, the Greeks and Romans excepted, had mufical characters; and these had по other fymbols of found than the letters of their alphabet, which likewife ferved them for arithmetical numbers, and chronological dates. He further remarks, that as the notation of the Greeks was imagined in the infancy of the art of music, when the flute had but few holes, and the lyre but few ftrings, the fimplicity of expreffing the octave of any found by the fame fign, as in modern mufic, was not thought of; the most ancient and conftant boundary of mufical tones having been the diateeren, or fourth, the extremes of which interval were fixed, though the intermediate founds were mutable: and in the manner of tuning thefe confifted the difference of intervals in the feveral genera.

He proceeds to obferve, that the Greek fcale, in the time of Ariftoxenus, the oldest writer upon mufic, whose works now remain, extended to two octaves, and was called fyftema perfellum, maximum, immutatum; because its extremities formed a perfect confonance, including all the fimple, double, direct, and inverted concords, with all the particular fyftems; and it was the opinion of the ancients that this difdiapafon, or double petave, was the greatest interval which could be received in melody.

According to our author's accurate reprefentation, this whole fyftem was compofed of five tetrachords, or different feries of four founds, and one note added at the bottom of the fcale to complete the double octave; whence the firing was

The moft fecure of all fecure things, is, to doubt.

called