Snippets on origins of music

Darwin’s theory of music origins

Darwin’s theories of musical origin rests in his observations of the gibbon-ape’s use of musical cadence as a part of the mating ritual to attract the opposite sex. Darwin concluded that early man, therefore, must have first used music for the same purpose.

Primeval man, or rather some early progenitor of man, probably first used his voice in producing true musical cadences, that is in singing, as do some of the gibbon-apes at the present day; and we may conclude, from a wide-spread analogy, that this power would have been especially exerted during the courtship between sexes, – would have expressed various emotions, such as love, jealousy, triumph, – and would have served as a challenge to rivals. (Darwin, 1871, pp.56-57)

As neither the enjoyment nor the capacity of producing musical notes are faculties of the least direct use to man in reference to his ordinary habits of life, they must be ranked amongst the most mysterious with which he is endowed. They are present, though in a very rude and as it appears almost latent condition, in men of all races, even the most savage. . . . Whether or not the half-human progenitors of man possessed, like the before-mentioned gibbon, the capacity of producing, and no doubt of appreciating, musical notes, we have every reason to believe that man possessed these faculties at a very remote period, for singing and music are extremely ancient arts. (Darwin, 1871, pp. 333-334)

Edward MacDowell’s criticism of Darwin’s theory of music origins

Edward MacDowell, internationally trained composer, author, and the Chair of Music at Columbia University, considered Darwin’s theory as “inadequate and untenable.” In a speech given at Columbia, later published in 1912, MacDowell found more plausibility in the theory of Theophrastus, the successor of Aristotle, in which the origin of music is attributed to the whole range of human emotion.

When an animal utters a cry of joy or pain it expresses its emotions in more or less definite tones; and at some remote period of the earth’s history all primeval mankind must have expressed its emotions in much the same manner. When this inarticulate speech developed into the use of certain sounds as symbols for emotions—emotions that otherwise would have been expressed by the natural sounds occasioned by them—then we have the beginnings of speech as distinguished from music, which is still the universal language. In other words, intellectual development begins with articulate speech, leaving music for the expression of the emotions. (MacDowell & BALTZELL, 1912)

Curt Sachs asserts all scientific and historical attempts to discover origins of music are all wrong

In 1948, the German musicologist, Curt Sachs, declared that all mythological, scientific, and historical attempts to discover the origins of music are all wrong! He blasted the many theories then presented on a more or less scientific basis, which Sachs referred to as “speculative hypothesis.”

He dismissed, for example, the theories that “man has imitated the warbling of birds, that he wanted to please the opposite sex, that his singing derived from drawn-out signaling shouts, [and] that he arrived at music via some coordinated, rhythmical teamwork.” If these theories were true, he asserts, “some of the most primitive survivors of early mankind would have preserved a warbling style of song, or love songs, or signal-like melodies.”

Science, Sachs admits, would prefer “the more substantial, indeed irrefutable proofs of prehistorians, who excavate the tombs and dwelling places of races bygone. But not even the earliest civilizations that have left their traces in the depths of the earth are old enough to betray the secret of the origins of music.” While the archeological views of Sachs may ultimately prove true, the quest to unearth the origins of music continues.

Mythology is wrong. Music is not the merciful gift of benevolent gods or heroes. Wrong is the banal desire to see all slow, imperceptible germination emerge readymade from the head of a single inventor; music is not the clever exploit of some ingenious man. And wrong, so far, are the many theories presented on a more or less scientific basis—the theories that man has imitated the warbling of birds, that he wanted to please the opposite sex, that his singing derived from drawn-out signaling shouts, that he arrived at music via some coordinated, rhythmical teamwork, and other speculative hypotheses. 

Were they true, some of the most primitive survivors of early mankind would have preserved a warbling style of song, or love songs, or signal-like melodies, or rhythmical teamwork with rhythmical worksongs. Which they hardly have. To call living primitives to the witness stand will at first sight bewilder those who are not familiar with modern methods of settling questions of origin. They probably would prefer the more substantial, indeed irrefutable, proofs of prehistorians, who excavate the tombs and dwelling places of races bygone. But not even the earliest civilizations that have left their traces in the depths of the earth are old enough to betray the secret of the origins of music. (Sachs, 1954)

Ivan Turk discovers oldest musical instrument

In 1995, archeology researcher, Ivan Turk of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts, uncovered a flute, pierced by spaced holes, made from the femur bone of a young cave bear. Similar prehistoric bone flutes have been found at various sites around the world, but the Divje Babe bone flute, or Neanderthal Flute, as called by Turk, is approximately 43,100 years old, and is claimed to be the world’s oldest musical instrument.

Darwin, Charles. The Decent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. London: John Murray. 1871.

MacDowell, Edward, and Winton James BALTZELL. Critical and Historical Essays on Music. Lectures Delivered at Columbia University … Edited by W.J. Baltzell. Boston Mass., 1912.

Sachs, Curt. Our Musical Heritage: A Short History of Music. Prentice-Hall, 1954.

Wallin, Nils Lennart, et al. The Origins of Music. MIT Press, 2001.