New Greek Ancient Music Fragments

International Musicological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Acta Musicologica.

http://www.jstor.org

New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music Author(s): Thomas J. Mathiesen Source: Acta Musicologica, Vol. 53, Fasc. 1 (Jan. - Jun., 1981), pp. 14-32Published by: International Musicological SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/932567Accessed: 23-11-2015 07:14 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 139.230.244.118 on Mon, 23 Nov 2015 07:14:06 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=inmuso

http://www.jstor.org/stable/932567

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp



14 M. Rika Maniates: Musicology in Canada 1963-1979

traditional ones of 20th-century music and sociology. Judging from graduate students currently working on degrees, however, such lacunae will disappear provided that these men and women find appropriate positions within the Canadian establishment. And the recognition by this establishment of the work done by musicologists depends on our cultivating the attitudes advocated at the start of this

report. Then can Canadian scholars of music realize a unique opportunity of forging an organization that fosters all branches of research in such a way as to give each one equal status as a member of the humanities. This kind of cooperation will end the fragmentation and isolation evident on the national level, and it will furthermore add national prestige to deserving work already appreciated as such in the United States and in international circles.

New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music*

THOMAS J. MATHIESEN (PROVO/UTAH)

Scholars interested in the music of classical antiquity have long hoped that

someday, somewhere, the music for a complete tragedy or some other major poetic work would be discovered.1 In fact, in the past few years, six new fragments of ancient Greek music and some additional exemplars of pieces already known have been discovered. While these discoveries do not fulfill that elusive wish, they are discoveries of considerable moment. This is so not simply because they enlarge the

corpus of extant pieces, but rather because all these fragments provide evidence for

points of theory discussed in the Greek musical treatises. Moreover, one of the

fragments is of singular importance because (1) it appears to be the oldest fragment yet discovered, (2) it is a fragment from a late tragedy of Euripides, a composer well known for his progressive or-as some of the observers of his day thought-decadent settings, and (3), as a second example of a Euripides setting,2 it provides the

opportunity for comparisons illuminating the nature of ancient Greek music and of this composer's music in particular.

* This report was originally presented in a somewhat different form at the Forty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the American Musicological Society in New York in 1979. I wish to express my appreciation to the American Council of Learned Societies for a Grant-in-Aid, which has enabled me to acquire microfilms of many of the Greek codices musici; to the Institute for Ancient Studies of Brigham Young University for obtaining slides of the Oxyrhynchus papyri 3161 and 3162; and to Dr. E. Boswinkel of the Papyrological Institute of the Rijksuniversiteit in Leiden, who kindly supplied me with color slides of Inv. 510, all of which were used in the preparation of this report. I am also grateful to the Egypt Exploration Society for permission to reproduce plates of the Oxyrhynchus papyri and to the Papyrological Institute of the Rijksuniversiteit in Leiden for permission to reproduce a plate of Inv. 510. 1 The late Gustave Reese captured the sense of this desire in his inaugural lecture for the Ph.D. program in music at the CUNY: "How maddening it is that, of all the music that was once sung and played in connection with the plays of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes, only a tiny fragment of music for the Orestes of Euripides has been found. Of course, we must be resigned to the fact that this gap may never be narrowed, no matter how hard scholars may exert themselves. But scraps of ancient Greek music do continue to be found from time to time, and we may hope that the end has not yet been reached" (Perspectives and Lacunae in Musicological Research, in: Perspectives in Musicology, ed. Barry S. Brook et al. [New York 1972], p. 6-7).



Th. J. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music 15

These fragments have so far been virtually ignored by musical scholars and have received only scant notice among classicists. This report will introduce the new

fragments and exemplars, with a particular focus upon the new Euripides fragment and will also suggest that although we do not possess that longed-for complete tragic setting, we do have a considerable amount of ancient Greek music, more than

enough, in fact, to support convincing and enlightening analysis. First of all, let us begin with a listing of the new materials.

Papyrus fragments 1-4: Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3161. Texts with Musical Notation.

27 3B41D(4-6)a+27 3B 42E(3-4)a Fr. 1: 5.7 x 14.5 cm Four fragments dating from the third century A.D. The back of fragments 1 and 3 also contains text and notation.

fragment 5: Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3162. Text with Musical Notation. 10 1B.161/G(g) 7 x 7.5 cm

One fragment dating from the third century A.D.3 fragment 6: Leiden Inv. 510. Euripides Iphigenia Aulidensis 1500-1509(?), 783-93.

6 x 7.5 cm One fragment dating somewhat earlier than 250 B.C.4

Manuscript Hymns of Mesomedes 5

Berlin, Deutsche Staatsbibliothek Berolinensis Phillippicus gr. 1555, f. 72r-v

Hamburg, Staats- und Universititsbibliothek Hamburgensis cod. phil. 110 [Berlin], f. 10v

Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Monacensis gr. 215, f. 457r-v

Modena, Biblioteca Estense Mutinensis gr. 173 (c.V.7.1), ff. 110r-111v

Naples, Biblioteca Nazionale Neapolitanus gr. 259 (III.C.1), ff. 218v-219r

Paris, Bibliotheque Nationale Parisinus gr. 2458, ff. 82r-v Parisinus gr. 2532, ff. 98r-99r

2 The famous Orestes papyrus (P. Wien G 2315) is the other. The question of whether the music itself is Euripides' cannot be answered. In style, it would seem to fit contemporary accounts of Euripides' music, and since there is no evidence to suggest that tragedies were ever set by anyone but the poet, there seems to be no special reason to suppose the music is not, in general, a copy of Euripides' music. The Orestes papyrus has been the subject of a great many studies, some of which are summarized in the now standard edition: EGERT POHLMANN, Denkmdiler altgriechischer Musik, Erlanger Beitraige zur Sprach- und Kunstwissenschaft 31 (Niirnberg 1970), p. 78-82. See also two recent and important studies of the papyrus: GIOVANNI MARZI, Il papiro musicale dell' 'Oreste' di Euripide, in: Scritti in onore di Luigi Ronga (Milano 1973), p. 315-29; and JON SOLOMON, Orestes 344-45: Colometry and Music, in: Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 18 (1977), p. 71-83. 3 Fragments 1-5 are located at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford University. 4 Fragment 6 is located at the Papyrological Institute, Rijksuniversiteit, Leiden. s The list includes only those exemplars omitted in POHLMANN, Denkmiiler, p. 13-31. Some of these exemplars are noted in KARL VON JAN, Musici scriptores graeci (Leipzig 1895), p. xi-xciii; and IDEM, Musici scriptores graeci, supplementum (Leipzig 1899), p. 40-59, but they are not subject to collation and have dropped out of sight in Pohlmann's edition.



16 Th. J. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music

Salamanca, Biblioteca de la Universidad Salamantinensis Universitatis 2748 olim Matritensis Bibliothecae Regiae 38, ff. 134v-136v

Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Vaticanus gr. 1364, ff. 145v-147r

Koine Hormasia6 Bologna, Biblioteca Universitaria

Bononiensis gr. 2432, f. 42r-v Cambridge, University Library

Cantabrigiensis Universitatis gr. 1464 (Gg.II.34), f. 14r Florence, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana

Florentinus Laurentianus Acquisti e Doni gr. 64, f. 7r-v Florence, Biblioteca Riccardiana

Florentinus Riccardianus gr. 41 (K.II.2), f. 61v

The first four fragments to be considered, Oxyrhynchus Papyrus (P.Oxy.) 3161, were published in 1976 with transcription and critical notes by M. W. Haslam.7 Haslam's treatment is quite detailed, though there are a number of his points that

may profitably be reconsidered. Since it is beyond the scope of a single report to examine each fragment in detail, I shall instead concentrate on a number of Haslam's observations that will be pertinent to the ensuing discussion of the Leiden

Euripides fragment. The first fragment of P.Oxy. 3161 is exhibited in Figure 1 (v. p. 17).

In his discussion of the melody, Haslam observes that it has "appreciable but not absolute regard for word-accent."s In fact, while it is true that some of the syllables with acute accents have higher notes than syllables without, it is clear from the contour of the musical lines that there is almost total disregard for the so-called rule of accent and pitch:

1. Syllables in polysyllabic words with an acute, grave, or circumflex accent have a

pitch higher or at least not lower than unaccented syllables in the same words. 2. Grave syllables do not have a pitch higher than the accented syllable of the

following word. 3. Melismas and circumflexed syllables descend.9

6 The list includes only those exemplars omitted in POHLMANN, Denkmiiler, p. 32-35. Jan includes all these manuscripts in his list; he does not note the presence of the Koine Hormasia in any of them, however, and in the case of Bononiensis gr. 2432, incorrectly asserts (p. xci) that the Koine Hormasia is not present. 7 M. W. HASLAM, Texts with Musical Notation, in: Oxyrhynchus Papyri 44 (1976), p. 58-72, plates VI-VII. My study of the Oxyrhynchus papyri is based on a fresh examination of the fragments in the form of color slides. 8 HASLAM, Texts, p. 63. 9 POHLMANN, Denkmiiler, p. 140.



31 41 sI 61 71 8 91 101 II 121 13 14 15 CM

Figure 1. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3161, fragment 1, face

Reproduced by permission of the Egypt Exploration Society, London

0

0

0

NI




For example, a transcription of lines 5-9 of fragment 1 would exhibit the contour shown in Example 1.10

5 c c 6 0 (0)C(?)" ,tr ir tr U z , Z C C 5 6 7

8

_r rKVOv dh-

Oe r

-V Tal- Ta ha- p Ubv '

- 9jo. rb

T av-

TJ-K - vov a

. - v O - - K a - - -D67

Example 1. Transcription of lines 5-9, Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3161, fragment 1

In line 5, the second note, on an acute, is lower than the third, on an unaccented

syllable, which violates rule 1. In line 7, the second note, on a grave, is the highest note of the line and this is indeed the highest pitch of the entire fragment, which will

clearly violate rule 2. In line 8, the first note, on an acute, is this time higher than the

second, on an unaccented syllable, but it is much lower than the fourth note, which falls on a grave and which, again, represents the highest pitch of the fragment. While we cannot see for sure-because of the truncation of the fragment-, it appears likely that the fourth note would once again violate rule 2. And in line 9, the high note falls on two unaccented syllables, violating rule 1. The number of examples can

easily be multiplied. The point is, simply, that the musical line is not at all concerned with pitch-accent congruence. This decay of congruence was already seen in

Euripides' day, some 700 years before the present fragment and need not surprise us here. Actually, we should be more surprised if we were to find a marked concern with pitch-accent agreement.

Let us turn now to the question of tonos. In Figure 1, the prominence of the note Zeta (lines 1-2, 7, 9-10) and the absence of the note Xi may be immediately noted in

fragment 1. Fragment 4 (Figure 2, v. p. 19), by contrast, shows an absence of the note Zeta, with the exception of the end of line 4, and a prominence of the note Xi

(lines 2-6, 10-11). In both fragments, the note Sigma (round form) appears relatively frequently, suggesting a Hypolydian tonos. But in fragment 2 (Figure 2), we find the anomolous note Kappa (line 3), and in fragment 1, Chi (line 11). It might be possible to consider all this in the Ionian tonos, but other problems would then arise. Haslam suggests that there may be a modulation by reinterpreting the notes of the tetrachord diezeugmenon in the Hypolydian as notes in the tetrachord

synemmenon in the Ionian or meson in the Hyperionian."1 Though this process cannot be seen in these fragments because of the narrowness of the pieces and must

10 Haslam transcribes all the rhythmic values as quarter notes unless (1) the note carries a diseme, in which case he transcribes it as a half note, or (2) two notes appear to be grouped over a single syllable, in which case he transcribes them as eighth notes. In view of what we know from the theoretical writings, there seems to be no reason for this approach. Although we cannot determine the meter of the fragment, we can determine long and short syllables on the basis of ancient principles of quantity, and I have therefore given a double value to notes on a long syllable, subject to further modification or reinforcement by the rhythmic signs, and have used the chronos protos (here taken as equivalent to an eighth note) for the short syllables. 11 HASLAM, Texts, p. 63, n. 1.



Th. J. Mat-hiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music 29

therefore remain a conjecture, this very process will be seen clearly twice in the Leiden Euripides papyrus.

An additional noteworthy feature of fragment 2, as Haslam observes,'2 is the absence of notation in lines 10-16. He suggests that these lines are for spoken recitation or may be some sort of mise-en-scene. We will see a similar occurrence in the Leiden papyrus where it appears space has been left for material that has not been given, and I will comment further on this problem of missing notation later.

rt

R 9!

...................

MAN: IMM!;I!':!i i

.9 . . . . . . . . . .

91

15

1 2 31 41 51 61 71 8 91 O I 2 3 4 5 cm

Figure 2. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3161, fragments 2 and 4, face Reproduced by permission of the Egypt Exploration Society, London

12 Ibid., p. 61.




There remains now the question of the relationship of fragment 3 to fragments 1, 2, and 4. This question may be considered with an eye to the paleography of the four

fragments. If we consider the style of the hand on the reverse of fragment 3 and

compare it with the reverse of fragment 1, we note some apparent differences in the

shapes of the notational symbols, in the shapes of certain letters (the epsilon, for instance), and in the character of the pen strokes. These differences apparent on the back of fragment 3 accentuate similar, though less obvious differences between the face of fragment 3 (Figure 3) and of fragments 1, 2, and 4 (Figures 1 and 2). The

question may therefore be raised whether fragment 3 is a textual companion of

fragment 1, 2, and 4 (though certainly in other respects it does parallel them).

ii i!i ii ililiii iiii :i~i~ iiiiii : : i~iii~i iiiiii ........ ........iiii iiiiiii~ii":::~~i l~ ~

i!•i i :fiii-h-i:ii-ili!•!i:iiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiii.i i! iii~ i i iiiiiii:iiiij i:

: - ::: :::: :::::::: ::::: iiIiiiii iii~ii~i~i~ i i iiili'iiii•l .....iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiii-i iiiiii?'

i~ii? iiiiiiiiiii' ili:-iiiiiii•ij

.........; i

....-s

q R.. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .

,31

1 St 61 7 8t 9

lx, 11 1-2 13 A wiii-iiii

Ig~se~s Ir8~aes ~ ~ lMA --iiii::ii-iiiiii_ ti-qji

Figure 3. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3161, fragment 3, face Reproduced by permission of the Egypt Exploration Society, London

The fifth fragment, P.Oxy. 3162, has also been edited by Haslam 13 (Figure 4, v. p. 21). This exhibits, once again, the Hypolydian tonos. Although it is from a different

group, it simply supports the previous points and may be treated here with two brief observations. First, the fragment exhibits little pitch-accent congruence, just as we should expect. Second, the fragment offers a clearer picture of modulation in

comparison with the previous fragments because of its greater width. The modulation is tetrachordal: in line 3, the tetrachord synemmenon is used, while in line 2, the tetrachord diezeugmenon is employed; and in line 4, the shift from tetrachord to tetrachord can actually be observed: nete synemmenon (I), paranete synemmenon (M), nete synemmenon (I) reinterpreted as paranete diezeugmenon, moving to trite hyperbolaion (E), and then to nete diezeugmenon (Z).14

The Oxyrhynchus fragments date from the third century A. D. and represent the

type of Greek music probably familiar to the majority of the ancient Greek music

13 Ibid., p. 67-72. 14 Ibid., p. 69.




gum

WNW

- - - - - .. i------------- -

•il~l i!iii! ~ii~ii~ ~ iiiii~ ~ iiii~ iiiiiiii~ iii•i !iiiii!~ ll~ iiii~ii~iiiii i~l~iiiii !~iiii% i~ i ~ ~ iiii ii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~ i~ iiiiiiii~ iiiiiiiiiiiii l~ iiiiiiiiiii•i•~~~~~ii••iiii•••••!iiiiiiiiii~ i~i~il i!i% iiii~ iii~ ~!i!iiiii 0iiiiii ~l

Figure 4. Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 3162, face Reproduced by permission of the Egypt Exploration Society, London

theorists whose texts are extant, e.g., Ptolemy, Cleonides, and a number of others, all active between the second and fourth centuries A. D. For this reason, these fragments are especially important in providing musical examples for comparison with theoretical constructs. Although late, they are in fact of considerable value.

We come now to the additional exemplars of the Hymns of Mesomedes and the Koine Hormasia.'5 None of these exemplars is listed by Egert Pbhlmann in the Conspectus codicurnm for the editions of these pieces in his Denkmiiler altgriechischer Musik,16 yet they provide some noteworthy variants and affect consideration of the manuscript transmission. For instance, while the Hymns appear in association with the treatise of Dionysius in most of the manuscripts, they do not do so in Hamburgensis cod. phil. 110 [Berlin]. In this respect, Hamburgensis cod. phil. 110 [Berlin] is like Venetus Marcianus gr. 994 (318) and Vaticanus gr. 1772, both of which are cited and the former of which is included in P6hlmann's stemma.17

Hamburgensis cod. phil. 110 [Berlin] includes notation, however, while Venetus Marcianus gr. 994 (318) and Vaticanus gr. 1772 do not. Moreover, Pdhlmann shows in his stemma Neapolitanus gr. 262 (III.C.4) and Venetus Marcianus gr. 994 (318) descending from a common ancestor, y. But the contents of the manuscripts do not support this conjecture.8 Instead, Neapolitanus gr. 259 (III.C.1), an exemplar not

15 These exemplars, some of which have been previously noted by Jan (cf. n. 5-6), were located in the course of preparing their analytical descriptions for my catalogue of the Greek codices musici for RISM. 16 Cf. n. 2. 17 POHLMANN, Denkmiiler, p. 13. 18 Neapolitanus gr. 262 belongs to that class of manuscripts that links the treatises of Bacchius and Dionysius (Ps.-Bacchius) with the Dionysius epigram and the Hymns; Venetus Marcianus gr. 994 belongs to that class where the Hymns do not appear in association with the treatise of Dionysius. Moreover, Venetus Marcianus gr. 994 is a codex containing numerous mathematical and astronomical texts as well as the treatises of Bryennius, Nicomachus, and Bacchius, while Neapolitanus gr. 262 is strictly a codex musicus containing the treatises of Bryennius, Bacchius, Dionysius, Aristides Quintilianus, Bellermann's Anonymous, and 3.16 of Ptolemy's Harmonica.



22 Th. I. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music

noted by Pohlmann, is clearly the source for Neapolitanus gr. 262 (III.C.4), as a comparison of readings will easily show. POihlmann's stemma, accounting for only four manuscripts, is far too simple to accommodate the additional nine exemplars.

Some examples of the notational variants may be seen in a brief overview of the Hymns as they appear in Berolinensis Phillippicus gr. 1555, Hamburgensis cod. phil. 110 [Berlin], and Salamantinensis Universitatis 2748. In Berolinensis Phillip- picus gr. 1555, the Hymn to the Muse and the Hymn to the Sun appear on f. 72. The lines are, however, disarranged: on f. 72r, lines 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 of the Hymn to the Muse appear, and lines 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 of the Hymn to the Sun; on f. 72v (in two columns), lines 22 and 24 of the Hymn to the Sun appear, followed by lines 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 15 of the Hymn to Nemesis. The remainder of column 1 on f. 72v continues with lines 2, 4, 6, and 8 of the Hymn to the Muse, and lines 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, and 25 of the Hymn to the Sun. Column 2 on f. 72v begins VE I•a(og and adds lines 2, 4, 6 (only the first two words), 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16-20 of the Hymn to Nemesis. A number of marginal annotations, which are recorded in other manuscripts by P6hlmann in his critical apparatus, appear on f. 72r-v. This disarrangement of lines and these marginal annotations are common in the manuscripts and provide the means for a more exact consideration of the transmission of these Hymns, especially with the addition of these nine exemplars.

Hamburgensis cod. phil. 110 [Berlin] includes only a fragment of the Hymn to the Muse. Although the text is set out as if complete in five lines, the lines are actually thoroughly disarranged and the Hymn is incomplete. The lines appear in the order 1, 5, 9, 3, and 7. The notational symbols are displaced and some are missing.

Salamantinensis Universitatis 2748 exhibits the Hymns with disordered lines and some missing notation. F. 134v contains lines 1, 5, 2, and 6 of the Hymn to the Muse; 2, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18, 22, 1, 5, and 7 of the Hymn to the Sun; and 1, 5, 9, and 13 of the Hymn to Nemesis. On f. 135r appear lines 3, 7, 4, and 8 of the Hymn to the Muse; 4, 16, 20, 24, 3, and 9 of the Hymn to the Sun; and 3, 7, 11, and 15 of the

Hymn to Nemesis. Lines 11, 15, 19, and 23 of the Hymn to the Sun appear on f. 135v, as well as line 2 of the Hymn to Nemesis. On f. 136r, lines 13, 17, 21, and 25 of the Hymn to the Sun appear, and lines 4, 6 (first two words only), 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16-19 of the Hymn to Nemesis. Finally, f. 136v exhibits line 20 of the Hymn to Nemesis. Most of the notational symbols are present for the Hymn to the Muse

(although line 9 is missing); notational symbols are absent in lines 1-6 and 14-25 of the Hymn to the Sun; and no notation appears for the Hymn to Nemesis. Here again, marginal annotations common to the manuscripts appear from time to time, and patterns in the alternation of lines may be readily observed.

In the case of the Koine Hormasia, the additional exemplars support P6hlmann's contention that the manuscripts should be grouped into families and also indicate that the transmission was more balanced than that indicated in his stemma.-9 Bononiensis gr. 2432, Cantabrigiensis Universitatis gr. 1464 (Gg.II.34), and Florentinus Riccardianus gr. 41 (K.II.2) are all related to Neapolitanus gr. 260

19 POHLMANN, Denkmiiler, p. 32.




(III.C.2) -though they are not necessarily descended from it-while Florentinus Laurentianus Acquisti e Doni gr. 64 is copied from Heidelbergensis Palatinus gr. 281, the source of the other side of the stemma. Bononiensis gr. 2432 also exhibits the rubric HoXEmovao FLovaGLxdQ noted by P6hlmann in Neapolitanus gr. 260

(III.C.2).20 We come at this point to the most important of the six papyrus fragments, Leiden

Inv. 510, the discovery of which was announced in 1973 by Denise Jourdan- Hemmerdinger.21 Although this fragment has been mentioned by a few other classicists,22 it has been the subject of study only by Jourdan-Hemmerdinger, whose discussion of the musical aspects is largely erroneous, and more recently by Giovanni Comotti,23 whose treatment is unfortunately based entirely upon Jourdan- Hemmerdinger's description of the papyrus and is therefore subject to the same

misapprehensions. Comotti does attempt a partial transcription of the fragment, but he is misled by Jourdan-Hemmerdinger's description of the notational symbols.

Any study of this fragment must begin with a fresh examination of both sides of the papyrus, for the two published photographs 24 are not of sufficient clarity to offer unmistakable readings of the text, notation, and spacings. Figure 5 shows the face of the papyrus and Figure 6 immediately following provides a diplomatic facsimile and reconstruction of the papyrus (v. p. 24).

The paleographic style would seem to suggest a date somewhat earlier than 250 B. C.,2 making this our earliest known fragment of ancient Greek music.26 As can be seen in Figure 6, the papyrus preserves part of sixteen lines of text and notation, with the seventeenth easily conjectured. The lines are not arranged in cola, as they are in the Orestes papyrus with musical notation (P. Wien G 2315), nor are they arranged in stichoi, but rather in long systems.27 The first seven lines may exhibit verses 1500-1509 of Euripides' Iphigenia in Aulis,28 but the absence of any notation sets them apart from the remaining lines of the papyrus, which do exhibit notation. This absence of notation was also seen in lines 10-16 of fragment 2 of P.Oxy. 3161

(where the lines were, however, more closely spaced) and may be due to the failure

20 Ibid., p. 32. 21 [DENISE] JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Un nouveau papyrus musical d'Euripide (presentation pro- visoire), in: Comptes-rendus de l'Academie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres (1973), p. 292-302. The editio princeps of the papyrus announced on p. 299 as forthcoming in volume 19 of Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava does not in fact appear there; only a photograph of the face of the papyrus is published as Plate I. 22 WARREN D. ANDERSON, What Song the Sirens Sang: Problems and Conjectures in Ancient Greek Music, in: Research Chronicle of the Royal Musical Association 15 (1979), p. 1; SOLON MICHAELIDES, The Music of Ancient Greece: An Encyclopaedia (London 1978), p. 118, 290; ANNEMARIE J. NEUBECKER, Altgriechische Musik: eine Einfiihrung (Darmstadt 1977), p. 153; SOLOMON, Orestes, p. 72, n. 3; and MARIO PINTACUDA, La musica nella tragedia greca (Cefalii 1978), p. 208-209. 2 GIOVANNI COMOTTI, Words, Verse and Music in Euripides' Iphigenia in Aulis, in: Museum philologum Londiniense 2 (1977), p. 69-84. 24 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 295; and Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 19 (1978), plate I. My study of the Leiden papyrus is based on newly photographed color slides of the face and back. 25 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 299; COMOTTI, Words, p. 69; MICHAELIDES, Music, p. 290; and NEUBECKER, Altgriechische Musik, p. 153. 2 The other fragments dating from the third century B. C. are P. Wien G 2315 (the Orestes papyrus), P. Wien G 29825, P. Wien G 13763-1494, and P. Zenon 59533. 27 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 292-293. 28 Ibid., p. 299.




5

II

ff

VV 16

Figure 5. Pap. Leiden Inv. 510, face Reproduced by permission of the Papyrological Institute, Rijksuniversiteit, Leiden

(2)

3 5 o(.?)

(4)

SIso -6 (*C)

(t)

0OA 4

1F

Figure 6. Transcription and reconstruction of Pap. Leiden Inv. 510




of the notator, who is often a second hand, to complete his work. But it is striking that most of our musical fragments are choral, and it is possible that the solo parts, such as we have in what remains of these lines of Iphigenia, were left for improvisation or were so difficult to notate that the notation did not survive. Why then is there space between the lines for notation? The answer may be that since these particular lines are interspersed with two brief choral sections, which fall in the missing area of the papyrus, space was left to accommodate that notation. It must also be noted that the verses in the Leiden fragment are not textually adjacent. It is possible that the papyrus represents an anthology or a different version of the

play. Comotti asserts that the fragment clearly derives from an anthology, a genuine score composed for a theatrical spectacle. These spectacles, which began in the 3d century B. C., quickly supplanted the traditional theatrical forms in the public's interest.29 Comotti also maintains certain characteristics for the compositions in these spectacles and cites as his authority the well-known Prob. 19, section 15 of Aristotle (or Ps.-Aristotle).30 This section, which deals with the structure and performance of the nomes and dithyrambs, is not necessarily speaking of theatrical spectacles and is therefore a somewhat doubtful authority on this matter. The remains of lines 1-7 are so limited and the relationship of them to lines 8-17 so uncertain that it is impossible to draw definite conclusions about their function.

Examination of the remaining lines of the papyrus may yield more fruitful and positive results. These lines represent lines 783-93 of Iphigenia in Aulis, one of Euripides' last plays, first produced posthumously in 405 B. C. Lines 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 are lines of notation; the others are text. In line 8, all but the first note are reasonably clear; in line 10, all the notes are clear, though the meaning of the three vertical strokes is questionable; in line 12, the first note is unclear; and in line 14, the fifth note is uncertain. Many of the letters in the text have faded away, but enough remains to reconstruct this with little difficulty.

Now what shall we make of these lines ? We must first begin with the text because the rhythm of a piece of Greek music is derived from the meter, modified in some cases by rhythmic notation. Our first task must therefore be to determine the meter of the text and to see how the text compares with the manuscript paradosis.3' In Figure 7, on the left, the text is presented as it has come down through manuscript transmission. The lines may be arranged differently by different editors, but the text itself is generally clear for these lines.32 On the right, the text appears as preserved in the papyrus.33 A most striking feature immediately apparent is the difference

29 COMOTTI, Words, p. 69-70. 30 Ibid., p. 70, n. 7. 31 The articles by Jourdan-Hemmerdinger and Comotti contain detailed studies of the textual testimony offered by the papyrus. Since the textual evidence is extraneous to the subject of this paper, it will not be considered here. 32 The principal difficulties occur in lines 790-92. See COMOTTI, Words, p. 73-77; and JOURDAN- HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 293, 296-297. 33 The segments of the text within brackets represent parts not preserved in the papyrus but conjectured from the text as it is preserved in the manuscripts. Inasmuch as elision is clearly avoided in the part of the papyrus preserved, I have also removed it from the conjectured part of each line. This results in a recurring number of letters for the four lines: 48 (line 9), 62 (line 11), 48 (line 13), and 62 (line 15), which is to be expected from a




between the published text and the papyrus in the use of elision. For example, the

published text at the beginning reads ict' TEto 'i[t' ~otoLo while the papyrus has

T1~8 E4iOL Lt1•E

etOLOL. Thus the published text provides cretic and trochaic feet, while the papyrus provides a very clear choriambic pattern, i.e., long, short, short, long, long, short, short, long, etc. So we discover at the outset several lines of Aeolic verse.34 Figure 8 illustrates the rhythmic-metric scheme, bracketed to show patterns of repetition. The vertical divisions between feet are inserted only to facilitate

comparison of pattern since the verse is not organized by metra.

Published text Papyrus . * * i4T' 1Po'0 783 [P]dJr T oL'T udTE POUo[L TeXVWV TE~VOL;

4TI' JVOtoL TeXVWV TuxvouS kXxrus &6e ROTE X-0o]

Xi•~LS 56C or' "X-o,,

oLcav at noXuXPUootL Au6a, [xa,

puywv oiav aC RoXdxpuotL LXXoL oTdoaouOL napa i•LoCT o IUpucoat] Au6aL'

xaL, puyv aXoXoL TCd6 s &saXXdXa;- Tig ; [pa pu' E~ XoOXpou

oTcouotL nap' LOTO9S xOag1 Opa 6axpudsv] PuEUcoaL Td*6' s &XXiXas* T[aa]g y&s raTpcLaS oXo[pevas 6rOXoTLEC;

6L, oC, TaV X1Xvou 6oXLXa5Xcvos; y6vov,]

TLC &pa p' E6nXoxdpou xcdpag 790 os, aV y

iDpa 6axpudEv Tavdcaa iaxrpL6og 6XgupvaS &ao)wTLE~;

6tLh a, TaV XUxvou 6oXLXaUX•cvoS y6vov,

Figure 7. Text for Euripides Iphigenia Aulidensis 783-93

Lett. I I I Pap p/in. - uu - - u - - - - -- - n. 48 ifrLE COL -ITrc iOCOL T?XVov T?XVOLG 6XnRI 6L5E TOTCE 9XOL, 9

783 784 785

r I-

-u - ;- " -IU - -

I-j. v,

j - - -

Ijv- - U•-

- 62 oiva a noL TtOXXPUOOL

Au6a.OL X

.Opuy)V QXOXOL oaT•ouoL nLaph LOTo'L

1uECOUOaL 11

786 787 788 789 S95k

I I II

-- -

v I-- --

v

-V IV- V VIJ- -vv--

48 r6CE iE 6XXnXa, Te. pa, ic c Xox&Ocou x61ac Gibia 6cxpu6cv 13 790 791

;,I

- I

- - -

- u oi- -

,-v- .l ,, ,, u I- -

-I,, -I,- '

, 62 TaCLQ yQ nL-rpLaC 6Xo?L6vagc 7LOXWTLCE;

6LC e, TLV XVOU OXLXa6XEvoQ y6vov,15 792 793

Figure 8. Rhythmic-metric scheme for Euripides Iphigenia Aulidensis 783-93

paleographic point of view. If this restoration is correct, it yields a very strong and quite consistent metric pattern, as discussed in the paper and illustrated in Figure 8. Jourdan-Hemmerdinger does not address the issue but follows the elision of the manuscripts in her restoration of the balance of each line. Comotti, however, devotes considerable attention to the meter of the fragment (p. 75-77) but sees no need to preserve a pattern of hiatus in his restoration of each line because he believes the repeated vowels are simply scriptio plena to accommodate the presence of two notes for the short syllable (this leads him to a pattern of 47, 63, and 48 letters for lines 9, 11, and 13). But this approach (1) cannot be supported by an examination of the papyrus, which exhibits two notes in only one of the three instances of repeated vowels he notes as scriptio plena, (2) is inconsistent with his treatment of the doubled alpha in line 15 (ta- g) as a true doubled vowel, (3) is not metrically sound, (4) ignores the many descriptions in classical sources of Euripides' fondness for repeated vowels, and (5) is based on Jourdan-Hemmerdinger's misleading transcription of the notational signs. PINTACUDA, La musica, p. 209, on the other hand, does see the repeated epsilons as examples of hiatus.

4 This pattern is also observed in connection with these lines by D. S. RAVEN, Greek Metre: An Introduction, 2d ed. (London 1968), p. 127. Aeolic verse is common in the tragedies of Euripides. In my scansion of the text exhibited in Figure 8, I have followed the rules of quantity as given in Aristides Quintilianus De musica 1.13-29 and Hephaestion rather then following modern metric theory.



Th. i. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music 27

Turning to the notation on lines 8, 10, 12, and 14, we are at once struck by the considerable number of stigmai (or, dots): two in line 8, three in 10, two in 12, and one in 14.3s The meaning of the stigme has been debated for years by scholars. Is it an ictus mark, does it indicate stress, does it show arsis or thesis, and which part of the foot ought to be called arsis ? But in this fragment, its use is clear. In each line, it marks off the first metron to define the rhythmic pattern and then is used

subsequently to mark the long syllable of the next metron where the pattern changes. In lines 8, 10, and 12 the initial stigme can be clearly seen and its position in the meter is indicated by the superscript vertical line in Figure 8. The stigme in line 14 would probably have appeared where there is now a hole. The subsequent stigme in line 8 is still visible and would fall precisely over the Tau of 'xvwov if line 9 continued that far. This is the position where the metron changes from choriamb to bacchius. The subsequent stigmai in line 10 are especially interesting. The first falls over a syllable that would ordinarily be short. Here, however, the composer has set two notes, and he therefore wishes the syllable to sound as a long, which in fact also

changes the metron from trochaic to choriambic. So there may be no confusion, he also marks a diseme to indicate the value of two chronoi-the chronos equivalent to the value of a short syllable. The third stigme in the line falls over the first long syllable of the next foot, paralleling exactly the second stigme of the previous line and marking the shift to bacchius. In line 12, the subsequent stigme marks the shift from choriamb to palimbacchius. No subsequent stigmai are visible in line 14, but it is possible one has faded over the hole over the fifth syllable, ag, where we should expect it to mark the next long that expands the pattern of the contracted choriamb into a hemiepes: long, short, short, long, short, short, long. The large number of stigmai make the complicated meter clear, just as they do in the Orestes papyrus with its dochmii cola.

The other rhythmic markings visible are four disemes, a pentaseme, and a sign that may be a triseme. In Figure 6, the disemes may be observed in lines 8 (the fifth note, excluding stigmai),36 10 (the fifth note), 12 (the third note), and 14 (the second note); the pentaseme in line 12 (the fourth note); and the possible triseme in line 10 (the sixth note)."' These markings lengthen the value of the note or note group from a chronos protos (or eighth note, short syllable) to the value of two eighths (the diseme), three eighths (the triseme), or five eighths (the pentaseme). In other

35 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 294 (followed by COMOTTI, Words, p. 80) records only three stigmai. Comotti's treatment of the three stigmai noted (p. 80-81) is vitiated by his analysis of the meter. 36 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 294, takes the fifth note (excluding the stigme) as an upside down Tau. There is, however, no trace of a vertical over the horizontal line. In addition, the note would fall directly over the Mu-whereas the pitch notes fall over vowels or slightly to the left of them- and there is no syllable for it to sound since all the syllables to the left and right have pitch notes. Finally, the diseme makes clear here that the two previous notes sounding the hiatus between dITmE and ?ol0ot are two chronoi protoi. A diseme was not required for the hiatus earlier in the line because a single note is sung to these syllables and there is no possibility for confusion in the placement of two notes. Comotti, of course, follows Jourdan-Hemmerdinger in all these readings. 37 Comotti and Jourdan-Hemmerdinger do not deal with the question of the triseme because they convert the sixth note in line 10 to a supine E. The pentaseme is recorded by Jourdan-Hemmerdinger (followed by Comotti) as an indecipherable trace of a musical sign, but the note is quite clear.



28 Th. I. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music

papyri, the diseme is found over the note or notes to which it applies, but here it follows the notes, a position also exhibited by the Orestes papyrus and by another Vienna papyrus (P. Wien G 13763/1494), both approximately contemporary with the Leiden papyrus. The pentaseme, in line 12, appears at the very end of a word, unlike the pitch notes, which fall over their vowels or more commonly slightly to the left. In this line, the diseme provides a double value for the note over b6 (f#) to accommodate the repeated vowel, bE ,g, while the pentaseme multiplies the value of the note five more times for the three long syllables of

&X.i.kag. Finally, the three

vertical strokes in line 10 seem to be a rhythmic sign because of their position to the

right of the syllable and because they are associated with a long diphthong, or. It

appears that they represent a form of the triseme not recorded in the treatises.38

Jourdan-Hemmerdinger, followed by Comotti, transcribes this as a supine E,39 but there are objections to this: (1) it is not possible as a pitch note in her suggested mode, the Hyperdorian (nor indeed are several of the other notes she proposes);40 (2) there seems to be no trace of a bottom crossbar; and (3) the position of the sign as a pitch note would conflict with the other pitch-note positions. Instead, it seems reasonable that the three strokes represent three chronoi, to which the bottom

stroke, or diseme, can be added to make a pentaseme. Three chronoi complement the

long oi and give it a slightly greater length in relation to the preceding syllable, which would have been short by nature but has been made long by the composer.

We come now to the pitch notes. While most of these notes are quite clear, their combination is cause for some surprise: here we find a clear mixture of the so-called vocal and instrumental notations in a single line. This mixture does not appear in

any of the other fragments except P. Wien G 13763/1494 where it is not clear if an instrumental interlude may be present such as appears to be the case in the Orestes

fragment.41 The square Sigma42 seen in lines 8, 10, and 14 is exclusively represented in the so-called instrumental notation and the vertical Tau appears exclusively in the

38 The form in the treatises-which are late-is attested only in the Seikilos inscription (1st century A.D.) and doubtfully in the tiny P. Wien G 29825c (2d-3d century B.C.). 39 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 294; COMOTTI, Words, p. 71, 79, 81-82. 4o The Iota, Theta, upside down Omega, and the lunate Sigma. Jourdan-Hemmerdinger also proposed (p. 297-298) two unidentifiable notes: a diablo and a digamma. Comotti (p. 80) discusses the meaning of the diablo, concluding that it is actually a cancelled note, X, and correctly observes that the digamma is not an anomolous note. But in fact, there is no difficulty with either of these notes, and Comotti is misled by Jourdan- Hemmerdinger's description. The "diablo" is simply a faded and stained A (the fourth note in line 8, excluding the stigme) and the note identified as a digamma (the first note in line 10) is simply a square Sigma where the notator's brush has slightly curved the bottom stroke. 41 This same selected mixture, specifically involving the upside down Omega and square Sigma, appears in Hucbald's Lydian scale (see WARREN BABB, trans., Hucbald, Guido, and John on Music: Three Medieval Treatises, ed., with introduction by Claude V. Palisca, Music Theory Translation Series 3 [New Haven 1978], p. 9, 38). The square Sigma may have been preferred to the Zeta because the Zeta is also the partner of the upside down Omega and the notes might therefore be confused. This is the only spot in the Greek notational system where two nearly adjacent pitches are represented by the same symbols, reversed, in the so-called vocal and instrumental notation. By using the square Sigma, the twin note Zeta may be eliminated from the sequence. 42 Alypius refers to this note as a horizontal Pi, but the shape of the note is nothing like the pitch-note Pi appearing in line 14. Instead, the shape is exactly like the transitional Sigma form between I and C (see VIKTOR GARDTHAUSEN, Griechische Palaeographie, vol. 2: Die Schrift, Unterschriften und Chronologie im Altertum und im byzantinischen Mittelalter, 2d ed. [Leipzig 1913], p. 98-99). In view of the early date of development and archaicism of the shapes of notes in the so-called instrumental notation (within which this note appears in the later treatises), it seems more accurate to refer to the note as a square Sigma.



Th. i. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music 29

so-called vocal notation. I do not think the square Sigma can be thought of as a scribal variant for lunate Sigma because lunate Sigmas abound in the text and most of a pitch-note lunate Sigma can be observed in line 16 of the papyrus. It therefore

appears that the two notational systems originally functioned in some combination-a hypothesis intimated in 1957 by Isobel Henderson43 and now, I think, clearly demonstrated.

With respect to tonos, the notes fit quite comfortably into the Hyperaeolian mode,44 with shifts from tetrachord synemmenon to tetrachord diezeugmenon, and into the Hyperphrygian mode, with modulations from the one to the other by common-tone, just as the theorists say modulations might be accomplished.45 These two high tonoi also suit the character of the feminine lamentation that is the subject of the text. Figure 9 exhibits the notes in the two tonoi and Example 2 presents a

transcription of the fragment in these tonoi, following the rhythmic pattern and notation previously considered.

o 0)

o0 )1)

S 0 0 00

4-) * 0~) C0 ZO V. 0a

>1 w UrIS o 0Q 0 oo

o . •

-a .1-i -d~O~ 4 UU) >, *d *d0)( 0 U) r l .9 r c

SV 0V.() U r 0 >i 0

r-40 -4 Ei -H04 134

4r - 44-) H 0

>. 1 (d (d U1* 0

41 -H 04 0 0 S.44- 0 ) >1-H (1

(a 1 -r> d 4V4 C) C) =e P P rd rd E0 ri U

-1rd 4 H `4 .1)

P

a - U 0 0

z-E-

TC TT OI " -0iA HyIeraeolian 9 no0 0

V0 V. r. 0

.'4 0 EO - 4J

z >1 0 V

>4U)0 )) : r N-)

-H di (a -Hl Qi

F Hyperphrygian

Figure 9. Pitch notes, tonoi, and modulation pattern for Pap. Leiden Inv. 510

43ISOBEL HENDERSON, Ancient Greek Music, in: Ancient and Oriental Music, ed. Egon Wellesz, New Oxford History of Music 1 (London 1957), p. 359-360. See also COMOTTI, Words, p. 78. "44 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 298, proposes Mixolydian (Hyperdorian); CO- MOTTI, Words, p. 82, tentatively suggests Phrygian but admits that several of the notes do not fit. Comotti is also troubled by the presence of the horizontal line (or, as Alypius calls it, a horizontal Iota) and the supine E because he has taken these as pitch-notes. He proposes (p. 81) that they might be raised an octave but agrees that there is no particular evidence to support such a modification. Of course, as we have seen, these are not pitch-notes at all. 45 For example, Cleonides 13 or Aristides Quintilianus 1.11.



+ I O A 1 (A)

783-85

I, - re T - lo j IL ? - re T - jo" I - O L

7iKVuLwI rv-KVo(t

Elr I6e noIe X1 *0Lo

(I) C T E T I(

(?)?

786-89 o' - av ac to

-A - Xpv - - aoL Avu -6a IKal Dpul~yov AoXoolarT aouaL iralp, LaTooiLivueOaatcL]

A+ U I I I ". I . a. • .,J

789-91 r0' - e i x A r- Xji - XaQ . TL' Id Ipa A eblnthXoKiovKolIaI i6ga 6aKJpuoev]

F rI I+ T IT T

791-93 r[a - a&]lJ yd ar -- p - al 6 - Xo [ AMIvaac X DoLw)7Tl.E 6aC adE.l7v KKoLvou SoVI XaiLxevox Y,6vov,]

IC

794-96 [et 67 '

adrt L - - V j Tod, . p-reKev Ai6a ei Opv)tOt 7r raglovKJ]

( ) = conjectured sign and note + = uncertain reading ? = meaning of sign in doubt

Example 2. Transcription of Euripides Iphigenia Aulidensis 783-96 from Pap. Leiden Inv. 510

t3

o• o•

;t ..

Cr o•

o•

rt

•t

o• •t ;j

Et ,.,



Th. I. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music 31

What does this transcription reveal about the style of the piece? First, it shows that the piece pays little attention to pitch-accent congruence, as was also noted in the Oxyrhynchus papyri. It does, however, exhibit some expressive use of pitch. In the first and fourth lines of the transcription, the highest notes fall on circumflexed syllables and the highest note of the fragment falls on the first word of the interrogative passage: on rig (who?). We can also see that the melody stresses

standing tones: in the first line the diatonic lichanos meson (square Sigma) moving to the mese (A) by way of decorative notes; in the second line moving from whatever may be the opening tones to the hypate hypaton (T); and in the third line cadencing before the interrogative quotation on the mese (\). At the end of the third line, now in the Hyperphrygian mode, we begin on the nete synemmenon (upside down T) and at the beginning of the fourth line, we cadence on the mese (F). The end of the fourth line, now again in the Hyperaeolian, stresses the hypate hypaton. All of these are standing notes.

The transcription also illustrates Euripides' habit of repeating syllables, either for length as in the fourth line, first word, rcLa-g; or for hiatus as in the first and third lines: lE Eot ~i-E L

0Eoi•~ and r?d6b g. This same feature may be seen in the

Orestes papyrus in line 6, where dxob appears. Of course, the remarkable division of the third word in line 4,

n"rcT cL;a, is also an extraordinary expressive device.46 Such

treatment of text by Euripides was the subject of comment by Dionysius of Halicarnassus and scorn by Aristophanes, who puts it bluntly:

But he from all things rotten draws his lays, From Carian flutings, catches of Meletus, Dance-music, dirges. You shall hear directly. Bring me the lyre. Yet wherefore need a lyre For songs like these? Where's she that bangs and jangles Her castanets? Euripides' Muse, Present yourself: fit goddess for fit verse.47

Aristotle, however, took a different view: Art is cleverly concealed when a speaker puts together words chosen from the language of ordinary speech, as Euripides does, who was the first to show the way.48

We earlier saw how the music might lengthen what would normally be a short syllable or shorten what would naturally be long, e.g., the sixth syllable in the second line, which here receives two notes, and the sixth syllable in the third line, which is truncated to a single chronos, though long. This perfectly fits Dionysius of Halicarnassus' comment that music shortens the naturally long and lengthens the naturally short.49 It also contradicts A. M. Dale's dismissal of Dionysius'

46 JOURDAN-HEMMERDINGER, Nouveau papyrus, p. 296, comments further on this separation. I have taken the two punctuation points within the text (lines 13 and 15), the crrLyIaL T rXELaL, as equivalent to a chronos protos, which also suits the metric exigencies. 47 Ran. 1298-1304. Translation by BENJAMIN BICKLEY ROGERS, The Frogs, in: Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristophanes (Chicago 1952), p. 579. Later in this section (1314 and 1348), Aristophanes parodies Euripides' habit of repeating syllables, e.g., Et EL EL EL EL EL XooEtE. 48 Rh. 3.2.5. Translation by D. W. LUCAS, Euripides, in: The Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2d ed. N. G. L. Hammond and H. H. Scullard (Oxford 1970), p. 421. 49 De comp. verb. 11.



32 Th. i. Mathiesen: New Fragments of Ancient Greek Music

observation, a dismissal typical of modem metric studies. She writes: "Whatever the applicability of this to the music of Dionysius" own time, such wholesale inversion is unthinkable for fifth-century music.""" In fact, it seems increasingly clear that the ancient theorists were accurate in their analyses. Yet this conclusion is not shared by many modem students of metrics, for instance J. D. Denniston, who writes in one place: "The ancient metricians, of whom Hephaestion is the chief, do not help us greatly towards an understanding of Greek metric, and it is unlikely that

they represent a tradition dating back to the classical period.""• I would propose, rather, that the fragments support the ancient commentators most clearly.

Finally, the matter of chromaticism and modulation must be briefly considered. The transcription exhibits considerable chromaticism in the use of the tetrachord

synemmenon and in the use of chromatic movable tones: the Pi in line 4, the

Hemialpha in line 3, and the upside down Tau in line 3. This last note is also the focal point of the modulation from the Hyperaeolian to the Hyperphrygian since it is a common tone in both, as are the preceding notes in line 3. The modulation scheme is shown in Figure 9.

With the addition of these new fragments, there are now known 41 authentic

fragments of ancient Greek music ranging across seven centuries from the third

century B.C. to the fourth century A.D. Some of the pieces are of considerable

length and the majority are at least of sufficient length to lend themselves to the type of analysis demonstrated with the Leiden papyrus. From such analyses, we can discover specific examples of many of the theoretical points posited in the Greek treatises, for the music and the theory complement each other in ways illuminating to both. The task, I would propose, is one worthy of renewed musicological attention.

' A. M. DALE, The Lyric Metres of Greek Drama, 2d ed. (Cambridge 1968), p. 206. 51 J. D. DENNISTON, Metre, Greek, in: The Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2d ed. N. G. L. Hammond and H. H. Scullard (Oxford 1970), p. 679. DALE, Lyric Metres, p. 34, n. 1, expresses the same sort of sentiment on a question of dactylic meter: "Passing references in ancient metrical theory are of no great importance to the argument either way; neither the affirmative of Aristides Quintilianus and Marius Victorinus nor the denial of Hephaestion and his commentators need influence us."



New Greek Ancient Music Fragments

Documents

composers music

century music

nature of ancient greek

canadian scholars of

music of classical antiquity

jstor terms

jstor archive

utcyour use