acknowleged; and the orchestras are indebted to him for some of the most striking improvements in the art of accompaniment. Rousseau, however, was not a professed musician; he was endued with exquisite sensibility, which fitted him for a critic on the performance of music, but which gave him no title to instruct in the composition of it.-Among the French Encyclopedists, indeed, music was a favourite subject; and D'Alembert has also left a treatise on it, which, like all his other works, abounds with genius and acuteness. To the student who is designed for the profession of music, this want of a literature is perhaps of little importance: but to the amateur, whose views go no farther than the prosecution of his amusement or the indulgence of his taste, the want is severe. Such a person cannot be expected to toil through dry and uninteresting treatises, in which the terms of art are left with unintelligible explanations to perplex him. The cause of this defect has been the sort of trade-level, to which the profession of music has been reduced. A boy is apprenticed to it, as he would be to a grocer; he learns to chant by rote; he is told that such and such conclusions are rules; he adopts them, and teaches them when he has the opportunity:- but he seldom gives himself the trouble to examine the principles from which these rules are the results. In this respect, music is nearly in the same state among us as painting was when Sir Joshua Reynolds began to induce the noble revolution, for which that art is indebted to his luminous Discourses. The road, then, appears to be quite open to the learned author now before us; and it remains to be seen whether he will accomplish for music in his country that which Reynolds has effected for painting. The treatise under review is for the most part merely elementary: but it is well known that the Doctor has already given to the world three volumes of Specimens of different kinds of music, with observations; a work which is frequently quoted in the present, and which in fact forms a necessary companion to it, as exemplifying many of its remarks. The author has moreover illustrated his opinions by several public lectures.-On this occasion, he has not treated of taste farther than by cautioning against the use, in one species of composition, of passages which he considers as peculiarly appropriated to others; and in those cases the above Specimens are constantly cited. Dr. Crotch has divided his volume into nine chapters. In the first, he treats of the Gammut generally, or of Notes, Intervals, Scales, and Keys: this part therefore contains the rudiments of Melody, which, as usually defined, is a regulated succession of different sounds. The second chapter relates to Concords, Concords, and the third to Discords: these therefore contain the Elements of Harmony, which, generally defined, is the regulated succession of two or more notes sounding at the same time. Chapter iv. treats expressly of Melody, according to its technical meaning, or the art of combining sounds in succession. The fifth comprizes music in parts, or the art of producing Harmony, as it is technically understood, consisting in the agreeable combination of Concord, Discord, and Succession. The sixth is on the subject of Modulation, the next stage of composition, or the art of varying the mode or key; the seventh is allotted to Canon, Fugue, and Imitation; the eighth explains the principal points of difference between vocal and instrumental Music; and, lastly, the ninth contains an account of the subjects of Temperament and Tuning. In the The first chapter is quite elementary; and it was certainly necessary to a complete view of the subject: but few, we think, will apply to a treatise on composition until they are well acquainted with this part of the science. Yet even here the hand of a master is apparent; and we would by all means recommend this chapter to young beginners, as supplying the necessary information in the most perspicuous manner. chapters on Harmony, the author has simplified the subject very considerably. Instead of the long set of rules contained in former treatises, he has reduced the whole of this part of the science to two principal rules, seven that are subordinate, and the necessary rules for the resolution of discords. The two rules are; 1st, to avoid consecutive perfect fifths; and, 2dly, to avoid consecutive octaves. The first of these appears, in fact, to be the only arbitrary rule in the science; (on the second we shall presently make an observation;) and consecutive perfect fifths seem to be the only succession which the ear will not tolerate. Dr. Crotch has not explained the grounds on which he considers the first rule to be founded. That such a succession is generally unpleasant cannot be denied: but the same may be said of many discords which may nevertheless, when used with skill, produce the most pleasing effect; and we know that some masters have designedly disregarded even this rule. On a former occasion, we ventured to suggest (but we must not be understood to speak positively) that the ground of this rule may be that, in a repeated succession of notes differing from each other by the interval of a perfect fifth, the modulation is violently changed. The effect against which the rule is directed will easily be conceived by those who are little conversant with the art, but who have watched the tuning of a fiddle or violencello, or have heard the open strings only played, those strings being tuned in fifths to each other; and and few persons would be found who would deem this an agreeable effect. As to the second rule, (that of avoiding consecutive octaves,) it is liable to many exceptions, and seems to be objectionable as not being any composition, rather than as being bad composition; because octaves in harmony may in general be considered as repetitions of the same note.-The seven subordinate rules are of more or less importance, and must be frequently violated when the object is to produce any particular effect. The resolution of discords is treated in the only way in which it is possible to make that subject intelligible; namely, by taking each discord separately, and explaining the different modes in which it may with propriety be resolved. These parts of the subject exhaust the whole of the Elements of Composition; since, when the composer knows what notes and chords may follow each other, without violating rules, all that remains is the work of genius and taste. It appears to us that the grand point to be inculcated on the subject is, that these rules are not merely artificial, but that they result from the observation of pleasing and unpleasing effects produced on the ear, and that this organ of sense is in every instance to be regarded as the criterion of merit in musical composition. This is, in fact, the same grand principle of producing natural effect which forms the basis of the modern improvements in the art of painting; a principle which every research, in every branch of human science, tends to make more clear and more sacred. The greatest composer, then, and the greatest painter, will be those whose works are the most generally interesting; and, however necessary it may be that the established rules of art should not be disregarded, it will be in vain to urge that they have been observed with the utmost strictness, if the composition be dull and spiritless, or a crabbed and barren exhibition of art and skill. Dr. Crotch's observations in chapters iv. v. vi. vii. and viii. appear to us to have this effect for their principle; combined with another which he frequently inculcates, that of keeping different styles of music distinct. For this purpose, he distinguishes modern music from that of the 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries, which he styles antient music; and church-music from that of the theatre or the chamber. In referring these distinctions to particular successions of chords, we cannot doubt that their origin is correctly pointed out; though, in some instances, the author appears to have carried this research too far; and we apprehend that some of his observations should be taken with the qualification that it is the habitual or frequent occurrence of any particular succession, and not its occasional intro duction, that will give the character of the particular style of music to which he considers it to belong. The state of musical composition among us, at the present day, is a subject on which much misunderstanding has prevailed. Nothing is more common than to hear people very loud in dispraising all modern, and extolling all antient, music, who would be utterly unable to relish, or even to tolerate, a piece in the real antient style. Solidity is certainly not the characteristic of modern music: but is it more that of modern literature? Or can we wonder that, when the demand for novelty is so great, the efforts to answer that demand should be so numerous; or that, when novelty alone is so sure, as it now is, of creating an interest, we find it most frequently unaccompanied by any quality of more sterling value? Besides, when we compare the modern with the antient music, we are apt to take the one in the mass, while we possess the other in a state of great refinement. We forget the rheams of former days which have long been devoted to oblivion, and think only of the selection which the taste of succeeding years has deemed worthy of being handed down to us. Unfair as this may appear, such is the sort of comparison generally made: but, in truth, this art never flourished more than in the days which have not yet passed away. Whatever may be the merits of Corelli and Handel, (and we are disposed to admit them to be very transcendant,) we can scarcely consent to place those masters higher than many of the great composers who have lived, or who still live, in our own days. Haydn, Mozart, Storace, Cook, and Arnold, are but lately gone; and Beethoven, Winter, Atwood, and (though last not least) the author whose work has given occasion to these remarks, yet remain to prove that musical science and taste are far from extinct*. In mentioning these names, we must not be understood as making any comparison injurious to others. The list might be largely increased: but we are willing to take those only whose works may be said to pretend to a higher character. The oratorio of the Mount of Olives, the work of Beethoven, recently produced in this country, appears to us to combine more excellences of different kinds than any other piece of the same nature which we ever heard performed. The subject of it, indeed, violates some of the sober feelings commonly entertained by us: but, in spite of that objection, the richness and variety of the music will always place it among the * We do not forget that Callcot is also a living composer; and we would willingly bestow our mite of praise on his truly original and delightful works:-but it is painful to reflect on his excellencies, in the melancholy state of eclipse in which they are understood now to be placed. most most admired specimens in the highest branch of the art. Dr. Crotch, too, has been scarcely less successful in his noble oratorio of Palestine.-Music, indeed, has of late run into a great variety of styles. The operas and the oratorios of Handel were very similar to each other; so much that, we believe, several of the pieces were occasionally interchanged by him; and, in particular, the fine air of "Lord! remember David," is well known to have been originally adapted to the profane words of a song in an Italian opera. That great master was certainly no very accurate distinguisher of styles: a character of uniformity pervades all his works; and it is related of him that he was in the habit of keeping pieces ready made, and adapting and introducing them as occasion required. In the lighter styles of music, suited to the theatre and the chamber, we cannot doubt the superiority of the modern school. Not, indeed, that we can much compliment the modern English school in these particular departments. Our theatres are obliged perpetually to recur to the works of Arne* and his contemporaries; and our concerts are largely indebted to Purcell, Pepusch, Harrington, &c.: but it is chiefly to the Italian school that we are to look for excellence of these kinds. There, indeed, a style of music has grown up which, in our opinion, is superior to any thing of which the antient school can boast. The operas of Mozart, Cimarosa, Winter, Paër, Guglielmi, and Ferrari, carry the art and science of music to its greatest possible height, and exhibit it with its greatest possible varieties. In their works, every thing seems so naturally conceived, that we are apt to imagine some real connection between the music and the sense, till the existence of any such connection is disproved by their using the same airs for different words, and producing the same natural effect in all. In the composition of music for the chamber, the Cramers, Clementi, Asioli, Shield, Webbe, Danby, and Callcot, (most of them English artists,) with several of those foreigners who have been previously named, are pre-eminent. The revolutions which have taken place in the progress of this art are worthy of attention. In the earliest age of composition, we find it strict in science, and simple but not very interesting in style; of this age we have little to quote but the chants of the Christian churches. The art, like most others, was entirely in the hands of the monks. In the next stage, we find conceits of various descriptions prevailing in music; this was the age of Madrigals, Rounds, Canons, &c.; and it was also that of Acrostics, and those other conceits for which the Italian * Arne was the entire composer of Artaxerxes, Comus, &c. and the principal composer of the Maid of the Mill, Love in a Village, &c. school |