consulted for a proper understanding of the main body of the dissertation.

It should be explained that throughout this book the word "art" is used in contrast with the word "theory," as representing what is often called the "practical" side of music, that is, actual performance through instruments or the voice. This distinction must be clearly understood especially in reading the third and fourth chapters.

The Bibliography indicates the chief sources of historical, biographical and critical material. The text of Masson has been followed in quotations from the Poetical Works, and of the Bohn edition for the Prose Works.

Some of the material of this dissertation has already been published in an essay "On Milton's Knowledge of Music," appearing in a collection of "Haverford Essays," 1909, and an address "Milton and Music " delivered before the Convocation of Lutheran Church Musicians of America in 1908, and later published in the "Lutheran Church Review." The ideas contained in these earlier essays, however, have since been subject to revision and modification.

The author is indebted to all of those who have contributed to this book by their interest and helpful advice, but especially to Dr. Charles G. Osgood of Princeton University, who suggested the subject and supplied the chief inspiration for its development, and without whose untiring energy and faithful instruction the work could not possibly have been completed.

Sigmund Gottfried Spaeth.

New York, May 3, 1913.

I

ENGLISH MUSIC

IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

A great man cannot be studied apart from his natural surroundings. John Milton, as a poet, as a musician, or as a highly developed example of the alliance of both arts, fails to reveal his true significance except as he is regarded in the light of his environment and of the characteristics of his own time. Before attempting an exposition of Milton's knowledge of music, therefore, it becomes necessary to examine and interpret the general conditions of music which prevailed in his time, to analyze the popular taste, and to become acquainted with the representative composers and their style of work.

As far back as the reign of Henry VIII a golden age of English music had begun. At that time there was little real musical activity on the continent, and that little was sporadic and inconstant, without order or design. The Flemings, it is true, had displayed marked ability, particularly in the development of the madrigal form, but their efforts were so widely scattered, and their composers forced to cater to such a variety of tastes, that a really characteristic style was never developed. Germany produced only one or two good composers. Italy, preoccupied with her rediscovery of the ancient world, contributed nothing of her own to the world's music, but satisfied herself, as did most of the other continental nations, with the work of imported Flemish composers. In England alone was there a distinct native school. This was, of course, largely due to the encouragement and example of Henry VIII himself, who was a composer and

performer of ability. But aside from the efforts of individuals, there was a national spirit and a consistency of style in English music entirely lacking in that of other countries. The English people, as a whole, seem to have acquired a definite taste earlier than the other nations, and the means of gratifying this taste were not wanting. Composers and performers alike were plentiful, and, while no great individual reputations were made, a national school was established which preserved its characteristics and retained its distinctiveness for more than a century. The climax of this long sustained activity in music came, as may be supposed, in the time of Elizabeth, when English music and English literature alike reached their highest level.1

In vocal music, it is true, Italy had, by the end of the sixteenth century, taken the lead, through the work of Palestrina and his successors. But the English instru mental music was still supreme.2

Characteristic of the Elizabethan period was the madrigal form, which, while adapted from the Flemish and Italian schools, attained the widest popularity in England. Madrigals were originally vocal works, written in counterpoint, without accompaniment.3 The number of parts varied, but was commonly four or five. The words were of little importance, and frequently consisted of meaningless phrases repeated over and over. Such a

1 I make this statement with no thought of detracting in the least from the reputation of Purcell, who was beyond a doubt England's greatest musician. He was, however, an individual genius rather than the product of a school. The English music of his time was, on the whole, inferior to that which had gone before.

2 For the history of English music in the sixteenth century, see Hawkins, History of Music, vol. 3; Burney, History of Music, vol. 3; Henry Davey, History of English Music, chaps. 3, 4, 5. 3 See definition in Grove's Dictionary.

style of song, it may be imagined, differed little from instrumental music. In fact, the later polyphonic instrumental music was the direct outgrowth of the madrigal school. The same characteristics of counterpoint and of complex harmonies are to be found in the sacred music of the day. The compositions of Tallis and Tye served as models for succeeding generations. For it was the sacred music of the Elizabethans that proved most worthy of enduring fame. It must not be assumed, however, that any very distinct lines were drawn between the sacred and the secular, or even between the popular and the "skilled" music. music. All rested upon a common foundation, the famous ecclesiastical modes of Saint Gregory, which, in turn, corresponded to the Greek scales of the diatonic genus.

It will be seen that Elizabethan music was of the formal rather than of the emotional type. The mathematical formulas which had been handed down from ancient times still governed the structure of music. The test applied to a composition was not "Is it beautiful?" but rather "Is it correct?" and the critical conclusion usually took the form, "If it is correct, it must be beautiful," rather than "If it is beautiful, it must be correct." In spite of its apparent spontaneity Elizabethan music depended less upon natural instincts, than upon artificial laws and regulations. It would be wrong to assume, however, that this condition of affairs resulted in a musical aristocracy, composed only of the highly educated. As a matter of fact, the ordinary laws of composition were so simple as to be within the grasp of any one. Thus a formal style of music prevailed among all classes, the elements of which were the same for the popular ballad-writer, as for the severely correct composer of sacred music.1

1 Wooldridge, in his Preface to Chappell's Old English Popular Music (p. xii), particularly emphasizes the free use of the eccles

With a knowledge of music thus within the reach of all men, it is not surprising that, in the recognized composers of the day, versatility was of all things desirable. A typical genius of the time was William Byrd, a man who achieved astonishing success both as composer and performer on various instruments, and who could turn his hand to every style of sacred and secular music.1

Thomas Morley, author of A Plain and Easy Introduction to Practical Music, showed almost equal versatility. Not only did his great work remain the standard text-book of musical theory for generations, but his madrigals and other compositions attained a wide popularity.2

There were many other composers similar to these, and all were versatile, highly inventive, and prolific.

The seventeenth century, therefore, received a musical heritage of the highest value, and it was not slow in putting this capital to use. For music had now become not only the most popular art in England, but a recognized and universally respected science. Never had the interest in music been so general and spontaneous. It was not

iastical modes in the composition of all kinds of secular music until about the second decade of the seventeenth century. "The popular treatment of them differed in no essential respect from the ecclesiastical; and the nameless authors of the ballad tunes, for anything their work shows to the contrary, might well have been the very men whom we know and honor as composers for the church. Even in such a matter as the choice of scales to write in, there is no difference; the modes most used and those most neglected being in both kinds of music the same."

1 Henry Peacham in his Compleat Gentleman, p. 100, eulogizes particularly the sacred music of our Phoenix Mr. William Byrd, whom, in that kind, I know not whether any may equall, I am sure none excell, even by the judgement of France and Italy, who are very sparing in the commendation of strangers, in regard of that conceipt they hold of themselves.”

2 Grove's Dict. s. v. Morley.