Under the circumstances, it is possible to form only a very general and vague idea of the character of Hebrew music. It was evidently of a strident and noisy character. The melody was apparently often reduplicated in octaves. Harmony in our sense of the term was almost certainly unknown, though it does not follow that the accompaniments were wholly unisonons. It is hardly possible to conceive of players on harps and lyres not adding something of the nature of achord. They coul not fail to discover that certain notes produced a pleasing effect when played together or in arpeggios. The psalms show by their construc- tion that they were intended to be sung anti- phonally,—in some cases (6.5. Ps 13. 20. 38 ete.) by two choirs, in others by a choir and the congre- gation, the part taken by the latter being limited to the singing of a simple constantly recurring phrase or refrain (6.9. Ps 136. 118"). The leaders would possess the tradition of the music, and would impart it to the general body of the chorus.
The psalms must have been chanted, but it is most unlikely that the chants bore any resem- blance to what we understand by the term. Our irrational and exceedingly artificial method of rushing over any number of syllables on a fixed note would hardly commend itself to a people to whom their sacred songs formed a living expres- sion of their deepest feelings. The elaborate
rovision made for instructing the chorus suggests
he existence of a system, which, along with a
certain uniformity, admitted of some flexibility in its cL gee We can quite well imagine a chant which would allow of a greater number ot
notes being used in the longer verses, and which would vary slightly in character with the changing sentiment of the text. In point of fact, however, this is wholly conjectural, and the vocal method of the Hebrews is a lost and unknown art.
iii. MusicaL INSTRUMENTS.—We know a little more about the instruments employed by the Hebrews. It is true that the ΟἽ, while it con- tains numerous references to them, gives us no definite information as to their form or construc tion, and that this defect is not supplied by the
458
MUSIC
MUSIC
existence on Jewish ground of any sculptures or pictures, such as have been found in Egypt or Assyria. It is also true that the inferences drawn from etymology, the translation of Heb. names in the Greek versions, the statements of the Church Fathers, and the records of ancient nations, fall very far short of affording us definite and ag information, and have given rise to an endless diversity of opinion on almost every detail. Yet in spite of this we can form a general idea of the nature of a Jewish orchestra, and of the construction of the instruments of which it was composed. We consider them under the usual division into String, Wind, and Per- cussion Instruments.
1. Stringed Instruments.—Of these the kinnér and the nebel (RV ‘harp’ and ‘psaltery’) are the most important, and may be descri as the favourite national instruments, The kinnor is indicated as having been the older, and is said to have been invented by Jubal, the second son of Lamech (Gn 4”), It is the only stringed instru- ment mentioned in the Hexateuch. The nebel first occurs in 1S 10°, where it is found among ane ΠΕΊΣΕΙΝ played by the prophets who met
aul,
There is now a general consensus of opinion that these were species of the lute or lyre and the harp, but there is no agreement as to which was which, and many scholars have given up the attempt to distinguish between them, content- ing themselves with describing the various instru- ments to which the names may have been applied. In any case, even if we attempt to reach greater precision, we must admit that we come very far short of certainty, and that a considerable pro- portion of our conclusions is more or less con- jJectural.
It is clear, however, that the kinnér and the nebel were not identical, and that the names were not used indifferently for the same instrument. They seem to be contused in one or two places in the LXX (ef. Ps 149%) ; but in the great majority of instances 733 is rendered by κιθάρα or κινύρα, and $31 by ψαλτήριον, νάβλη, or νάβλον. The few cases in which they are identified can be satisfactorily accounted for by supposing that the translators were not musical experts, or felt that in the particular passage the difference was trivial. But the great mass of evidence shows that they were different, and were known to be different.
Before trying to distinguish them, however, we may note certain common features. They were mainly, if not exclusively, used to accompany vocal music. They were par excellence the τῷ *>p (Am 6°). They are said tohare been the sole accom- panying instruments in the temple service, though this is doubtful. Their use was associated princi- pally with joyful and exultant strains (the captives
ung up their kinnors in their time of dejection, Ps 137°), but it is perhaps straining poetical lan- guage unduly to confine it exclusively to those.
In 2Ch 9" it is said that the nebel and kinnor under Solomon were constructed of almug or algum, a wood which it is impossible to identify with any certainty, but which was at all events very valuable and much sought after (see art. ALGUM TREES, and Cheyne and Hommel in Expos. Times, viii. 470, 525). According to Josephus (Ant. VII. iii. 8), the framework was fitted with electrum, i.e. either a mixed metal or amber, which in any case could have served only for decorating the body of the instrument. The strings (0.39) were originally made of twisted grass or plant-fibres, then of gut, and in later times of silk and metal.