Orfeo

Continuity, Change and Invention in ancient
music's material record: some case studies in the
evolution of sound-related behaviours.

[Read at Durham University, June 2007]

The evolution of music and related sound-use behaviours has long
been a source of fascination to philosophers and scholars,
especially music historians and anthropologists; but it was only in
the 20th century that hard evidence from archaeology began to add
substance to their speculation about music's origins. From this
substance, since the 1960s, have emerged the modern, scientific
archaeologies of music and sound-use known today as
'music-archaeology' and 'archaeoacoustics'.

Recently neuro-science and cognitive studies have offered
welcome new perspectives on how and when such acoustic
behaviours may first have evolved, and how they may have
impacted upon the emergence and evolution of our species. But if
to 'music archaeologists' such studies have seemed to have a
weakness it has been in the curious way they have sometimes
engaged - or not engaged - with the ancient evidence. Their
direction has often seemed partial: shaped too tightly by biological
and ethnographical considerations of present-day human and
animal populations. Too often they have seemed to choose as their
target date the point at which evidence first appears in the
archaeological record, ignoring the music-rich archaeology of the
succeeding millenia. In trying to model the void before that first
evidence, they often neglect to consider how archaeology itself
might test their theories. Thus the premature excitement - and
inevitable disappointment - arising from the recent bear-bone find
from Slovenia: the so-called 'Neanderthal flute' of Divje babe I. It
seems the quest for origin has too often sidestepped the question
of evolution.

This paper argues that an understanding of the modern human
mind and a knowledge of some prehistoric sound-use behaviours
does not excuse us from the need to understand the processes,
as they appear in the wider archaeological record. Whilst music
archaeologists today feel increasingly equipped to contemplate the
'origins of music' they also embrace the need to address broader
evolutionary questions: of the nature of continuity and change, of
tradition and originality and invention, in the development of musics
through long - sometimes very long - periods of time.

Epistemology and Imagination: reconciling music-
archaeological scholarship and ancient music
performance today

[Read at Berlin, September 2008]

Time and again, historians have held their heads in disbelief at the
liberties taken by journalists and by film and television producers.
Music-archaeology is no exception. Music archaeologists are often
embarrassed to see, and hear, how their discoveries and their work
are misrepresented, whether through misunderstanding or
carelessness or oversight. It highlights two important questions:
how essential is it to bring music-archaeological ideas and
conclusions - especially recreations of ancient music - before the
general public? And how can music archaeologists turn media
interest to the advantage of their subject without compromising its
and their integrity?

The paper acknowledges some of the challenges which face
scholars and performers as they attempt to translate data and
opinion into musical forms appropriate to film, television and theatre.
It proposes that the essential requirement is clarity, and that clarity
requires agreement on relevant terminologies. In the 1970s music
archaeologists such as Cajsa Lund began to demand clearer
distinctions between kinds of technological experiment,
distinguishing scientifically accurate facsimiles and replicas of
instruments from interpretive reconstructions and working models.
Since then we have begun also to recognize the need for
discrimination in performance, devising genres which enable us to
distinguish between, at one extreme, attempts at 'authentic'
recreative performance of notated texts and, at the other, improvised
demonstrations and imaginative explorations which seek to exploit
the capabilities - and reveal some of the latent beauty - of
instruments of pre-literate cultures. The paper seeks to initiate a new
dialogue in the nomenclature of music-archaeological performance.

Whilst we blur such definitions at our peril, with proper clarity and
transparency all manner of creative and recreative endeavours
become not only possible but worthwhile. Absences of written music
need be no barrier to musical exploration of finds. Indeed there is no
reason to limit our imaginations in any way - so long as we and our
audiences are clear about what it is that we are doing.

UPDATE IN PROGRESS