III 398 E—399 B. Plato enumerates in all six scales in three groups. The
first group is
θρηνῶδες, and includes Mixo-Lydian,
Syntono-Lydian, and such like; the second is
μαλακόν,
and embraces Chalaro-Ionian and Chalaro-Lydian; to the third, which occupies a middle
position between the other two, belong Dorian and Phrygian. Chalaro-Ionian seems further
to imply the existence of Syntono-Ionian, and we read of both in Pratinas
Fr. 5 Bergk,
μήτε
σύντονον δίωκε μήτε τὰν ἀνειμέναν Ἰαστὶ μοῦσαν, |
ἀλλὰ τὰν μέσαν...νεῶν ἄρουραν αἰόλιζε τῷ
μέλει, if Westphal's interpretation is (as I believe) right
(
Harmonik p. 186. See also Monro
Modes of Greek Music
pp. 5, 6). It has been supposed that Plato's
μιξολυδιστί is only
συντονοιαστί under
another name; but the name Mixo-Lydian seems rather to point to a compromise between two
distinct modes, one of which was the Lydian. Possibly the
συντονοιαστί is included under
τοιαῦταί
τινες, as von Jan holds
Fl. Jahrb. 1867 p. 823.
According to Westphal (l.c. pp. 215 ff.), whose theory is partly based upon what must,
I fear, be regarded as a speculative deduction from Aristides Quintil. I pp. 21, 22 ed.
Meibom, Plato's
ἁρμονίαι were as follows:—
(1) Mixo-Lydian
(2) Syntono-Lydian
(3) Chalaro-Ionian
(4) Chalaro-Lydian
(5) Dorian
(6) Phrygian
It will be observed that Westphal's scales are all of them
ἁρμονίαι in the strict sense of the term, i.e. they differ in the order
of their intervals; and that the Syntono-Lydian begins a major third higher than the
Chalaro-Lydian.
An entirely different theory has been propounded by von Jan (
Fl. Jahrb.
1867 pp. 815 ff.), who gives the following series of scales:—
(1) Mixo-Lydian
(2) Syntono-Lydian
(3) Chalaro-Ionian
(4) Chalaro-Lydian
(5) Dorian
(6) Phrygian
According to this view, the Syntono-Lydian and the Chalaro-Lydian are in reality the
same mode, differing from one another only in pitch. Plato's language appears to me to
point to such a conclusion (see on 398 C, E), but it is not altogether easy for us to
believe that the difference of a semitone in pitch could have converted
τὸ θρηνῶδες into
τὸ
συμποτικόν. It will further be remarked that if we take the Dorian as the
original and fundamental
ἁρμονία (
Lach. 188 D), the
θρηνώδεις ἁρμονίαι, according to von Jan's theory, can be made from it
by tuning different strings a semitone higher, and the
χαλαραί by tuning different strings a semitone lower.
Von Jan's hypothesis is severely censured by Westphal (l.c. pp. 209— 215),
and strong arguments can be urged against it from the standpoint of modern music. I have
quoted it in this Appendix because of its symmetry, and also because, so far as it goes,
it seems to me to be more in harmony with the scanty indications furnished by Plato's
language than the theory of Westphal. It is true, as Westphal urges, that Plato applies
the term
ἁρμονία to Syntono-Lydian and Chalaro-Lydian
as well as to Dorian, Phrygian etc.; but I do not think it follows that SyntonoLydian
and Chalaro-Lydian differed in the arrangement of intervals: for
σύντονος and
χαλαρά ought to refer to
pitch alone: and
συντονολυδιστί or
χαλαραλυδιστί may have been called a
ἁρμονία not
qua
σύντονος or
χαλαρά,
but
qua
λυδιστί. The references to Plato's
ἁρμονίαι in Arist.
Pol.
Θ 5. 1340^{a} 40 ff. may be explained in the same way.
Wherever Aristotle speaks of
ἀνειμέναι and
σύντονοι ἁρμονίαι, he is referring, as the editors hold, to
Chalaro-Lydian, Chalaro-Ionian, and Syntono-Lydian, Syntono-Ionian; and these are
properly called
ἁρμονίαι as being varieties of
λυδιστί and
ἰαστί.
See my article in
Cl. Rev. X pp. 378 f. The passage on the modes or (as
he calls them)
τρόποι in Bacchius'
Isagoge § 46 ff. seems—as far as concerns the relative
pitch of the scales—to point to a solution with which neither Westphal nor von
Jan agrees, but Bacchius gives us no information about the order of intervals in Plato's
ἁρμονίαι.
