which came first: pickin' or singin'?
Wayne Harrison
date in the past, say the time at which wooden stringed instruments played
with fingers or a plectrum came into popular usage, were they utilized
primarily as accompaniment to the human voice, or as an instrument alone?
wayne harrison (well, hell, it's the middle of winter, and all...)
Dorgan
"Wayne Harrison" <wa...@triad.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4TZOb.245229$Vu5.18...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> another query for the historians around this joint: choosing an arbitrary
> date in the past, say the time at which wooden stringed instruments played
> with fingers or a plectrum came into popular usage, were they utilized
> primarily as accompaniment to the human voice, or as an instrument alone?
>
Grinnin' came first.
Dorgan
Bob Alman
guitarprincess
follows...
The human voice is really the foundation of all music; and whatever the
development of the musical art, however bold the composer's combinations,
however brilliant the virtuoso's execution, in the end they must always
return to the standard set by vocal music ---Richard Wagner
It is not known when or where art music--as distinct from folk music--began,
but there is evidence the various Mesopotamian cultures that thrived from
3500 to 500 B.C. already considered music an art, and their writings mention
both professional musicians and liturgical music. It is a song, the Sumerian
Hymn to Creation, dated before 800 B.C., which is the oldest notated music
extant.
Egyptian musical culture existed by the 4th millennium B.C., and music was
prominent in the social and religious life of the Old Kingdom. Egyptian
instruments changed significantly as the New Kingdom era (1700-1500 B.C.)
began. The change, which may have reflected foreign influence, was from
delicate timbre instruments to louder ones and was surely followed by
similar changes in singing tone for, over time, a culture's instrumental
timbres and vocal tone always tend to match. There are many drawings extant
showing that large choruses and orchestras existed in the New Kingdom.
Guitar-like instruments have existed since ancient times (see the Guitar
Museum), but the first written mention of the guitar proper is from the 14th
century. In its earliest form it had three double courses (pairs) of strings
plus a single string (the highest). The guitar probably originated in Spain,
where by the 16th century it was the counterpart among the middle and lower
classes of the aristocracy's vihuela, an instrument of similar shape and
ancestry with six double courses.
The guitar became popular in other European countries in the 16th and 17th
centuries, and by the late 17th century a fifth course of strings had been
added below the other four.
Check out : http://www.guitarsite.com/history.htm and
http://www.lawrence.edu/fac/koopmajo/brief.html
Computer Geek Sheli:)
"Dorgan" <dor...@fltg.net> wrote in message
news:100ouhd...@corp.supernews.com...
Sleepy Fingers Jones
<she...@optonline.net> wrote:
>I couldn't stand not knowing so I read up on some stuff...I pasted as
>follows...
>
> The human voice is really the foundation of all music; and whatever the
>development of the musical art, however bold the composer's combinations,
>however brilliant the virtuoso's execution, in the end they must always
>return to the standard set by vocal music ---Richard Wagner
>
Well, Wagner would say that, wouldn't he...
>It is not known when or where art music--as distinct from folk music--began,
>but there is evidence the various Mesopotamian cultures that thrived from
>3500 to 500 B.C. already considered music an art, and their writings mention
>both professional musicians and liturgical music. It is a song, the Sumerian
>Hymn to Creation, dated before 800 B.C., which is the oldest notated music
>extant.
Mesopotamia...isn't that...er....Iraq?
Nighty night,
Pete
Ed Edelenbos
Bob Alman wrote:
> Dorgan <dor...@fltg.net> wrote:
>>Grinnin' came first.
>>Dorgan
>
>
> Scratchin' before that.
Of course... it was scratchin' in just the right place that brought
about the grinnin'.
Ed
A Nengineer
news:4TZOb.245229$Vu5.18...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> date in the past, say the time at which wooden stringed instruments played
> with fingers or a plectrum came into popular usage, were they utilized
> primarily as accompaniment to the human voice, or as an instrument alone?
Just a guess here:
As far as Western music is concerned, it all starts with the vox humana.
J. Mark Lane
Sleepy Fingers Jones wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:54:05 GMT, "guitarprincess"
><she...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>>I couldn't stand not knowing so I read up on some stuff...I pasted as
>>follows...
>>
>> The human voice is really the foundation of all music; and whatever the
>>development of the musical art, however bold the composer's combinations,
>>however brilliant the virtuoso's execution, in the end they must always
>>return to the standard set by vocal music ---Richard Wagner
>>
>
>Well, Wagner would say that, wouldn't he...
LOL. Yeah, along with a few other... uh... uh... well, let's just leave it
alone. (Haven't we been there recently?)
>>It is not known when or where art music--as distinct from folk
music--began,
>>but there is evidence the various Mesopotamian cultures that thrived from
>>3500 to 500 B.C. already considered music an art, and their writings
mention
>>both professional musicians and liturgical music. It is a song, the
Sumerian
>>Hymn to Creation, dated before 800 B.C., which is the oldest notated music
>>extant.
>
>Mesopotamia...isn't that...er....Iraq?
Oh, boy. Out of the frying pan and into the fire.... <g>.
I am no expert (did I say that?). But I believe that stringed instruments
were used for instrumental work long before they were used for vocal
accompaniment. I'm sure there is lots of scholarly work related to the
question. (When I was a "young" anthropolgy major at UNC there was
considerable work on art and anthropology, and although my studies at the
time focused on visual arts and architecture, I believe there was already
plenty on music, too.)
The ud, predecessor of the lute, was indeed developed in ancient Muslim
cultures, and dates back... a very long time. Even the lute, which
originated in the medieval period in Europe (8th-9th c), was used for
instrumental work, and I think some of the earliest "notation" consisted of
"tablature" for lute pieces. I am less familiar with art history in the
Asian cultures, but I suspect that the several stringed instruments known
today in Japan, China and other Asian countries are very old indeed, and
were used for their instrumental qualities in the beginning (as they often
are now).
It seems to me that the use of a musical instrument for vocal accompaniment
actually presents, culturally and historically, an "advance" in the
development of music. It requires harmony, for one thing. And it must have
coincided more with the development of a concept of "history" and of
"stories" that were embodied in the vocal work, whereas the "merely musical"
use of any kind of "instrument" requires only an appreciation of ... sound
accompanied by rhythm? I strongly suspect that the more visceral appeal of
a "musical sound" created by a simple stringed instrument, plucked (ud,
lute, etc.) or bowed (psaltry?), came first.
I could be wrong <g>. (I was, once.) I'm not sure it is possible to really
know the answer with certainty. I do know this: I am not very fond of Herr
Wagner.
Mark
Wayne Harrison
"J. Mark Lane" <mist...@worldnet.att.net> wrote
(snip)
> I am no expert (did I say that?). But I believe that stringed instruments
> were used for instrumental work long before they were used for vocal
> accompaniment. I'm sure there is lots of scholarly work related to the
> question. (When I was a "young" anthropolgy major at UNC there was
> considerable work on art and anthropology, and although my studies at the
> time focused on visual arts and architecture, I believe there was already
> plenty on music, too.)
(snip)
now *that's* the kind of response i had hoped to inspire.
wayne harrison (go tar heels!)
madgamer
pretty pair of...eeerrr ...uuuhhh never mind.....great post.
Larry
Ken Cashion
Go back for enough, it would have been for the instrument
alone. The voice was used first but I would think the instrument, as
we think of it, would stand by itself.
Cheers -- Ken
Jeff Carter
Here! Here! And Panthers, too!
--Jeff C
J. Mark Lane
as sheep, I guess.
Mark
foldedpath
news:0NkPb.1607$J72....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
> Jeez, I thought it was a really interesting subject.... Not as
> compelling as sheep, I guess.
>
> Mark
I think it's a great subject too.
But too much of the history is unknowable, since both musical instruments
and singing were around a LONG time before the first written records or
oral histories that have survived. So we're all just guessing.
One thing I'd like to know, is whether percussion instruments pre-date
flutes or plucked instruments. Since percussion can be anything that you
bang together to make a sound, that means we may never be able to
distinguish the very first percussion instruments from your average rock or
stick of bone (i.e. that guy in the ape suit in the "2001" movie slamming a
bone onto the ground).
Rhythm instruments might pre-date melody, or even singing. We all respond
in a very hind-brain way to rhythm grooves. It's physical, in our bodies.
But I'm an ex-drummer, and I'm prejudiced in favor of the groove being the
root of all music. ;)
--
Mike Barrs
mcdonald
> But too much of the history is unknowable, since both musical instruments
> and singing were around a LONG time before the first written records or
> oral histories that have survived. So we're all just guessing.
>
> One thing I'd like to know, is whether percussion instruments pre-date
> flutes or plucked instruments. Since percussion can be anything that you
> bang together to make a sound, that means we may never be able to
> distinguish the very first percussion instruments from your average rock or
> stick of bone (i.e. that guy in the ape suit in the "2001" movie slamming a
> bone onto the ground).
>
> Rhythm instruments might pre-date melody, or even singing. We all respond
> in a very hind-brain way to rhythm grooves. It's physical, in our bodies.
>
> But I'm an ex-drummer, and I'm prejudiced in favor of the groove being the
> root of all music. ;)
Primitive peoples had to come up with a means for signaling each other over
distances, much as elephants and whales and birds and coyotes do. They had to
have different signals to indicate different events, such as water, food,
invaders, etc. These signals would have provided a basic set of elements for
later experimentation.
Shouting and whistling would have come naturally, and it would have been a
small step to begin using "tools" to do the signaling. Rocks or sticks or
animal bones clacked together, animal horns and bones and shells blown
through, animal hides stretched over a hollowed piece of wood or bone and
beaten with a stick or bone, etc.
Hunters and gatherers probably had little time for something as superfluous
as music, but with the development of agriculture came leisure time (and
bureaucracies). The different signals and the communication devices could be
used along with voices to develop something more interesting than just "herd
of bison here" or "assholes on the way".
I don't see any reason to believe that musical ontogenesis was the same
everywhere, it would have depended on the relative availability of materials
(e,g, conch shells, hollow logs, large bones, etc.). Plucked instruments
don't seem like they would have been among the first to occur, although I'm
sure someone noticed early on that when animal sinew was stretched it could
make a twangy sound. Probably primitive peoples in the western and southern
states, come to think of it.
All speculation of course. As Mark Twain said, "There is something
fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture of
such a trifling investment of fact."
mcd
--
If an infinite number of rednecks riding around in an infinite number of
pickup trucks fire an infinite number of shotgun rounds at an infinite number
of highway signs, they will eventually produce all the world's great literary
works in Braille.
mcdonald
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:54:05 GMT, "guitarprincess"
> <she...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> I couldn't stand not knowing so I read up on some stuff...I pasted as
>> follows...
>>
>> The human voice is really the foundation of all music; and whatever the
>> development of the musical art, however bold the composer's combinations,
>> however brilliant the virtuoso's execution, in the end they must always
>> return to the standard set by vocal music ---Richard Wagner
>>
>
> Well, Wagner would say that, wouldn't he...
"Wagner's music is better than it sounds."
Mark Twain
mcd
--
In comparison to tequila, mezcal tastes like homemade firewater. And the
agave worm included in some bottles hardly improves the flavor. However, if
you want a taste of the history of Old Mexico, to dream of riding with Pancho
Villa, and to hearken back to the untamed, lawless badlands of the Sonora
desert, buy a bottle of mezcal and ask your buddy to hit you over the head
with it.
Chef Rick
J. Mark Lane
first "musical instrument" was actually the banjo.
The banjo was apparently developed in Neanderthal times, approximately 40
thousand years ago. It's design, and the way it is played, according to
most authorities, has not changed since then. Most historians agree that
for the first 39,856 years, singing did not accompany the playing of the
banjo, speculating that the players lacked "the cerebral capacity to do two
things at once." Others, however, have disputed this theory, and have
argued that there may well have been singing all along, but nobody could
hear it.
One anthropologist has linked the origin of the banjo in Neanderthal times
to early development of social ostracism, and even the origins of capital
punishment. It was suggested that early banjo players from tribes across
the Asian and African continents were either decapitated (which sometimes
apparently made little difference), or simply ... asked to leave.
At least one group of banjoistas made their way onto sailing ships and ended
up in North America. There is some evidence that the majority of these were
immediately killed by the otherwise peaceful indiginous tribespeople
(recently discovered ancient rock paintings in Rhode Island appear to show
natives ripping out their own hair in horrid displays of self-mutilation,
while in the background there appear to be people playing instruments much
like the banjo). Certain of these early immigrants, however, cleverly
escaped (leaving their banjos behind in a rare display of intelligence), and
formed what became New Jersey. The present-day social ostracism of people
from New Jersey is thus thought to be historically indirectly related to the
general rejection society has shown to banjo players all over the world for
the last 40 thousand years. In other words, completely justified.
The biggest (and perhaps only)* development in the history of the banjo came
in the 20th Century, with the origin of amplification. With amplification,
and a sufficiently brain-dead audience, the human voice (and real musical
instruments) could actually be heard while a banjoist was thrashing his
device. Thus, with the increased stupification of modern society (see W. H.
Rehnquist, passim), there actually appeared a social base for
banjo-inclusive "entertainment." This base continues today, in Eastern
Tennessee. A recent anthropological study in that region interviewed one
local native regarding the presence of the banjo in a form of "ensemble"
that strangely appeared to think it was "making music." The local is quoted
as explaining, "Dis shear tang ain't fer shit. At dare boy's fum Jawja. Ay
say he's momma won't rat." Linguists have been attempting to decipher this
and other explanations, but so far have been unsuccessful.
* Some historians have pointed to the development of a fifth string as
another major change in the banjo. Others, however, have downplayed the
significance of this variation, arguing that no one seems to know what to do
with it, other than bang it occasionally, and that in fact it was originally
placed on the banjo only by accident, because the owners could not count.
Current historians and anthropologists marvel over the unique situation of a
truly "cave man instrument" continuing to exist today. Indeed, although the
so-called Neanderthals are often thought to have become extinct, due to
their own limited capacity for understanding anything at all, the presence
of the banjo, and its proponents, in contemporary society suggests that this
theory may not be entirely accurate. At any rate, much like in prehistoric
times, the "instrument" continues to have dire consequences, as illustrated
by the recent death of a Harvard anthropology student who invited a "banjo
player" in for his doctoral reading. The three members of his committee,
who instantly killed not only the student but also his "guest," were
acquitted after fifteen minutes of deliberation in the trial that followed.
One juror explained, "Well, we did have to take a few minutes to go to the
bathroom."
Yours,
J. Mark Lane
Dr.
foldedpath
> Actually, I have been doing some research, and it appears that the
> very first "musical instrument" was actually the banjo.
>
> The banjo was apparently developed in Neanderthal times, approximately
> 40 thousand years ago.
<snippage>
Well, if nothing else, it's a great theory for explaining why the Cro-
Magnons wiped out the Neanderthals.
--
Mike Barrs
foldedpath
news:0001HW.BC334039...@news.comcast.giganews.com:
> Hunters and gatherers probably had little time for something as
> superfluous as music, but with the development of agriculture came
> leisure time (and bureaucracies). The different signals and the
> communication devices could be used along with voices to develop
> something more interesting than just "herd of bison here" or "assholes
> on the way".
Okay, I'm too lazy to do the research, so someone else answer this...
Do the earliest recognizable musical instruments (probably bone flutes, I'm
guessing) pre-date the earliest known records of agriculture?
My intuitive guess, with no scientific background whatever... is that
music-making as a separate cultural activity was alive and well in hunting
and gathering days. And it came before fixed settlements and agriculture.
And it probably started with percussion... yeah! ;)
--
Mike Barrs
Ed Edelenbos
Ed
foldedpath
<everybody duck!>
I seem to remember something in Levi-Strauss or one of those guys, about how
hunter-gatherers in benign, supportive environments have MUCH more leisure
time for cultural activities than developed agricultural societies.
I've spent personal time with friends in South American/Amazonian
"primitive" hunting and gathering social groups, where there was a highly
developed culture, with plenty of time for music.
I don't think you need stone walls and a highly developed culture to make
music.
--
Mike Barrs
foldedpath
news:Xns9476D1359F67Bmb...@216.168.3.44:
> I don't think you need stone walls and a highly developed culture to
> make music.
Correction... that should read:
> I don't think you need stone walls and a highly developed bureaucracy
mcdonald
> Do the earliest recognizable musical instruments (probably bone flutes, I'm
> guessing) pre-date the earliest known records of agriculture?
>
> My intuitive guess, with no scientific background whatever... is that
> music-making as a separate cultural activity was alive and well in hunting
> and gathering days. And it came before fixed settlements and agriculture.
>
> And it probably started with percussion... yeah! ;)
I should clarify. Hunters and gatherers did have leisure time. But in a
hunter/gatherer society everyone basically had the same job, i.e. hunting and
gathering. And there was a limit to the size of the population, since
available plants and game could support only a limited density of humans. And
of course they were regularly (at least seasonally) on the move.
With agriculture came the ability to support much larger societies, and to
stay in one place, and with that came the development of a leisure class
(i.e. the bureaucracies and the aristocrats), and that's when some members of
the society had the luxury of being appointed to sit around and devote
serious time to music.
First evidence of agriculture is usually put at about 15,000 years ago, first
musical instrument, a bone flute, was about 18,000 years ago. Of course that
may be simply because the bone is likely to outlast an animal skin stretched
over a wooden or clay bowl. These dates will continue to change, and may flip
flop many times.
If you're looking for a definitive answer to the question of whether music
came before agriculture, or whether a percussion instrument came before a
wind instrument, you're probably going to be disappointed.
mcd
--
If Roger Rowdy wrecks his car every week, and each week he breaks twice as
many bones as before, how long will it be before he breaks every bone in his
body? How long will it be before they cut off his insurance? Where does he
get a new car every week?
Sleepy Fingers Jones
<quetza...@mad.scientist.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 18:17:21 -0700, Sleepy Fingers Jones wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 00:54:05 GMT, "guitarprincess"
>> <she...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I couldn't stand not knowing so I read up on some stuff...I pasted as
>>> follows...
>>>
>>> The human voice is really the foundation of all music; and whatever the
>>> development of the musical art, however bold the composer's combinations,
>>> however brilliant the virtuoso's execution, in the end they must always
>>> return to the standard set by vocal music ---Richard Wagner
>>>
>>
>> Well, Wagner would say that, wouldn't he...
>
>"Wagner's music is better than it sounds."
>
> Mark Twain
>
>
>mcd
The staff at the Royal Opera used to call the Wagner audience 'carpet
chewers'.
I love his operas, but I daren't even look at his philosophies
seriously.
Pete
Bob Alman
> First evidence of agriculture is usually put at about 15,000 years ago, first
> musical instrument, a bone flute, was about 18,000 years ago. Of course that
> may be simply because the bone is likely to outlast an animal skin stretched
> over a wooden or clay bowl. These dates will continue to change, and may flip
> flop many times.
> If you're looking for a definitive answer to the question of whether music
> came before agriculture, or whether a percussion instrument came before a
> wind instrument, you're probably going to be disappointed.
There's pretty strong evidence that the first agriculture sprang up
for the purpose of making beer. If this is true, then it logically
follows that singing would have spontaneously occurred after beer was
produced. Furthermore, not coincidentally, the first song would
have been: "A hundred bottles of beer on the wall.."
...or, alternatively, space aliens descended to earth bringing beer,
pickin', grinin', and singin' to the primitive earthlings. Oh, they
brought the pyramids with them too.
--
Bob Alman
misifus
No, but it helps if you'd like to live past 35. That's the
trade-off in the culture vs free-time exchange.
-Raf
--
Misifus-
Rafael Seibert
mailto:rsei...@cox-internet.com
http://www.ralphandsue.com