Page images
PDF
EPUB

was a great obstacle to furmount. How could they leave it for another, whofe advantages were not yet forefeen, and whofe difficulties were fo obvious?

In proportion as the language of articulate founds became more copious, there was more need of feizing early oppor-* 'tunities of improving the organ of fpeech, and for preserving its firft flexibility. Then it appeared as convenient as the mode of speaking by action: they were both indiscrimi nately used; till at length articulate founds became so easy, that they abfolutely prevailed.'

The Abbé having thus confidered the mode of fpeaking by action, and that of articulate founds, obferves, that speech, fucceeding the language of action, retain'd its character for fome time in order therefore to supply the place of the violent contorfions of the body, the voice was raised and deprefs'd by very fenfible intervals. The firft names of animals probably were made in imitation of their cries: a remark which is equally applicable to those that were given to winds, to rivers, and to every thing that makes a noise. It is evident that this imitation supposes the founds to have fucceeded each other by very diftinct intervals.

At the origin of languages the manner of pronouncing admitted of inflexions that were so distinct, as a musician might prick it down, making only fome fmall changes; I fhall fay then that it partook of the nature of mufic.

This profody was fo natural to mankind in the beginning, that to feveral it has appeared eafier to exprefs different ideas by the fame word pronounced in different tones, than to multiply the number of words in proportion to that of ideas. This language is ftill preferved among the Chinese. They have only 328 monofyllables; these they vary on five tones, which is equivalent to 1640 figns. It has been observed that our languages are not more copious. Other people, doubtless of a more fruitful imagination, chofe rather to inyent new words. Profody with them began infenfibly to recede from mufic, in proportion as the reafons for its former approximation, ceased to take place. But it was a long time before it became fo fimple as it is at prefent.

That

That the Greeks and Romans determined their recitation or declamatory speaking by notes and fignatures, and accompanied it with the found of inftruments, is beyond all manner of doubt: was therefore properly a kind of chant or fong. This is an evident confequence to fuch as have the least knowledge of the principles of mufic. In the first place,, they are not ignorant that it is impoffible to have any permanent marks of found, otherways than by measuring it, Secondly, that nothing can be measured in mufic, without the refonance of fonorous bodies. Thirdly, that this refonance does not produce any other founds, or intervals, than fuch as are admitted in vocal mufic.

It is also unquestionable, (fays the Abbé) that this musical recitation was not at all offenfive to the ancients. We do not find that they ever complained of its being unnatural, except in particular cafes, as we are apt to do ourselves, when we think a comedian overacts his part. On the contrary, they confidered vocal mufic as effential to poetry. The verfification of the very best Lyric poets, fays Cicero*, appears like profe, unless it be fupported by vocal mufic. Does not this evidently fhew that the pronunciation, which at that time was looked upon as natural in familiar discourse, partook fo much of the nature of chant or fong, that it was impoffible for them to imagine fuch a medium as our manner of declaiming ?

Some founds therefore at the origin of languages fucceeded each other with great velocity, and others very flowly., From thence arifes what grammarians call quantity, or the fenfible difference between long and fhort fyllables. Quantity, and pronouncing by diftinct intervals, have kept pace together, and altered very nearly in the fame proportion.; The profody of the Romans bordered upon vocal mufic; hence their words were compofed of very unequal fyllables: in the French the quantity has been no farther preserved, than as the weak inflexions of the voice have rendered it neceflary.

*Cic. de orat,'

As

As the inflexions by fenfible intervals introduced the ufe of mufical declamation, fo the diftinct inequality of fyllables added a difference of time and measure to it. The declamatory, fpeaking of the ancients, contained therefore those two things, which characterise vocal melody; I mean modulation and movement.

Movement is the foul of mufic: hence we fee that the an cients confidered it as abfolutely neceffary to their recitation. There was a perfon appointed at their theatres to determine it by ftamping with his feet; fo that the ancient comedians were as much tied down to measure as muficians and dancers in our times. It is beyond all doubt that such a recitation would deviate too widely from our manner of pronouncing, ever to feem natural to us. Far from requiring that an actor fhould follow a particular movement, we forbid him to make us fenfible of the measure of our verfe; nay, we infift on his breaking it fo, as he fhall seem to exprefs himself in profe. Upon the whole it appears, that' the pronunciation of the ancients, in familiar conversation, bordered fo near upon vocal mufic, that their declamation may be faid to have been mufical in the ftrict fenfe of the word.

In confequence of the changes which have happened in profody, the manner of declaiming is become so fimple, that, that it can no longer be afcertained by rules. It is become almost an affair of inftinct or tafte. With us it cannot conflitute any part of education; nay, it is ne glected to fuch a degree, that we have orators, who do not seem to think it an effential part of their profeffion; which the ancients would have found it as hard to conceive, as we to believe any of the most surprizing facts of antiquity. Not having made any early improvement in declamatory fpeaking, we do not refort to the theatres with the fame anxious defire as they, nor are we influenced fo much by the force of eloquence. The oratorical difcourfes which they have left us, retain only a part of their expreffion. We are acquainted neither with their tone nor gefture, which must have fo powerfully actuated the minds of their hearers.

In short, we scarce feel the force of Demofthenes's thunder, or the harmony of Cicero's eloquence.

It is plain therefore that if our theatrical entertainments are fo greatly different from thofe of the Greeks and Romans, it is a natural effect of the changes which have happened in our profody.

Our author's fentiments concerning profody in general, are founded on truth and experience.

• The moft perfect profody (fays he) is that whofe harmony ' is best adapted to exprefs all forts of characters. Now there are three things concurring to harmony; the quality of the "founds, the intervals by which they fucceed each other, and * the movement. A language must therefore have founds of * different softness, even some that are rough; in a word, fome * of all kinds: fecondly, it must have accents to determine "the voice to rife and to fall: thirdly, by inequality of fylla*bles it must be capable of expreffing all forts of move⚫ments.

To produce harmony, the cadences ought not to be * placed indifferently. Sometimes the harmony ought to be fufpended, and other times it ought to terminate with a fenfible pause. Consequently in a language, whose profody is perfect, the fucceffion of founds fhould be fubordinate to the fall of each period, fo that the cadences fhall be more or lefs abrupt, and the ear fhall not find a final paufe, till the mind be intirely fatisfied.

• If we confider the furprize with which Gicero fpeaks of the effects of oratorical numbers, it is fufficient to convince us that the profody of the Romans made much nearer approaches than ours to this point of perfection. He represents the people in raptures at harmonious periods; and to fhew that this was intirely owing to the numbers, he changes the order of words in a period that had met with great applaufe, • and affures us that they immediately perceived it had loft ⚫ its harmony. The laft construction is no longer preserved by *a proper mixture of long and fhort fyllables, and accents, the neceffary order for pleafing the ear*. The French lan"guage is foft and fimooth, but theres fomething farther Cicero de orat.

VOL. II.

6

[blocks in formation]

wanting to conftitute harmony. I do not find that in the • different turns or forms of expreffions, our French orators have ever hit upon any thing fimilar to thofe cadences, with which the Romans were fo greatly affected.

• Another reason that confirms the fuperiority of the Latin 6 profody, is the relish the Romans had for harmony, and the delicate ear for which even the common people were remarkable. The comedians could not commit the least de'fault in regard to quantity, but immediately the whole audience expreffed their disapprobation.

Facts like these we cannot read without furprize, because 6 we observe nothing of the fame kind in our own nation. The reafon is, the pronunciation of people of taste is fo fimple, that those who are guilty of a small mistake can be corrected by very few, there being but very few to whom it is fami• liar. Among the Romans it was fo ftrongly marked, and • the quantity of fyllables was fo determined, that even vulgar ears thoroughly understood it; fo that whatever difcom'pofed the harmony could not avoid being grating to them.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Ifhall continue my conjectures with obferving, that as the • Romans were more fenfible of harmony than our nation, so the Greeks had a greater sensibility than the Romans, and the Afiatics ftill a greater than the Greeks: for the more ancient the languages, the nearer their profody muft have bordered · upon mufic. And indeed we have reason to think that the • Greek language was more harmonious than the Latin, fince the latter borrowed its accents from the former. With regard to the Afiatics they were fond of harmony to fuch a degree, that the Romans looked upon it as an excess of affectation. This we learn of Cicero, when, after blaming those who, to render the fentence more fonorous, spoil it by forced tranfpofitions, he reprefents the Afiatic orators as greater flaves to numbers than the reft. Perhaps he would think, were he now living, that the nature of our lan< guage makes us fall into the oppolite extreme: but if in this we lofe fome advantages, we fhall prefently fee that we ⚫ are made amends in other refpects.'

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

What the Abbé has obferved on the mufic of the ancients, and their art of gefture, his comparifon between the mufical

and

« PreviousContinue »