No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 March 2011
In spite of the hoary belief in the conservatism of the Chinese we find that exotic music and instruments of music found favour in “Far Cathay” from quite an early period, long before the Mughal régime. Thanks to the researches of M. Maurice Courant and others, we are able to appreciate with considerable definiteness the influence of the Middle East on the Far East in these matters. On the other hand, the Rev. A. C. Moule is of opinion that “the musical systems of Persia and Arabia seem to have had but little effect on Chinese music, and the use of only a few instruments can at all probably be traced to the great intercourse which existed between those countries and China in the middle ages”.
page 327 note 1 Courant, “Essai historique sur la musique classique des Chinois”: In Lavignac's, Encyctopédie de la musique, iGoogle Scholar.
page 327 note 2 Moule, , “A List of Musical and other Sound-Producing Instruments of the Chinese”: In the Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, xxxixGoogle Scholar.
page 328 note 1 Chavannes, , “Des rapports de la musique Greoque avec la musique Chinoise”: In Memoires Historiques, iii, Append, iiGoogle Scholar. See also Moule, A. E., The Chinese People, 110–12Google Scholar.
page 328 note 2 Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.), vi, 194.
page 328 note 3 Stein, , Ancient Khotan, ii, pls. xliii, xlviGoogle Scholar.
page 328 note 4 The transliteration used here is that generally adopted and it is used by Van Aalst, Moule, and other English writers on Chinese music. The name in parentheses ia that given by Courant. It is included here because the latter's system of transliteration may be better known to musicians.
page 328 note 5 Huth, , Die Musikinstrumente Ost-Turkistans bis zum 11. Jahrhundert n. Chr. (1928), 33, 38Google Scholar.
page 328 note 6 Courant, 177. Moule, 113.
page 328 note 7 Cf. the seven traditional modes of Persia mentioned by Al-Mas'ūdī, (Prairies d'or, viii, 90, 417)Google Scholar and SirJones, William (Asiatick Researches, 1807 ed., iii, 63)Google Scholar. See my article on “The Old Persian Musical Modes” in the JRAS., Jan., 1926.
page 329 note 1 Courant, 96.
page 329 note 2 Courant, 192.
page 329 note 3 Courant, 193–4.
page 329 note 4 Courant, 191–2, 195.
page 329 note 5 Courant, 181. Cf. Moule, 3.
page 329 note 6 Stein, , Ancient Khotan (1907)Google Scholar, Sand buried ruins of Khotan (1903), Serindia (1921), Ancient Buddhist Paintings from the Caves of the Thousand Buddhas (1921).
page 329 note 7 Les Grottes de Touen-Houang (1922–4).
page 329 note 8 Chotscho (1913), Die Buddhistiche Spätantike in Mittelasien (1922–6).
page 329 note 9 Bericht über archäologische Arbeiten in Idykutschari und Umgebung im Winter 1902–03 (Abhdlg. d. kgl. bayr. Akad. d. Wiss., 1906), Altbuddhistische Kultstätten in Chinesisch-Turkistan (1912), Alt-Kutscha (1920).
page 330 note 1 Huth, 33–4, 38.
page 330 note 2 Courant, 192—3. For examples of this instrument in China and Chinese Turkestān see T. Richard, A Paper on Chinese Music, and Stein, Serindia, pl. iii (yo 0066).
page 330 note 3 See Moule, 3.
page 330 note 4 Courant, 159. Moule, 84, 151.
page 330 note 5 Courant, 155. Moule, 80, 151–2.
page 330 note 6 Courant, 146, 151. Moule, 146.
page 330 note 7 Farmer, , Studies in Oriental Musical Instruments, 99 seqGoogle Scholar.
page 331 note 1 Moule, 149.
page 331 note 2 Moule, (A. E.), The Chinese People, 119Google Scholar.
page 331 note 3 Courant, 84.
page 331 note 4 Moule, 135. Van Aalst, 15–16.
page 331 note 5 In the JRAS. for 1926 (pp. 193–211) the Rev. A. C. Moule and Canon F. W. Galpin gave a description of this instrument, with the Chinese texts and translations. Although the former thought otherwise (p. 193), attention had already been directed to this instrument by Courant (op. cit., 161). See also Farmer, , “The Organ of the Muslim Kingdoms” (in JRAS., 1926, p. 495)Google Scholar; Studies in Oriental Musical Instruments, 30–35; and The Organ of the Ancients, from Eastern Sources, 76, 138, 176.
page 332 note 1 See Encyclopædia of Islām, i, 846.
page 332 note 2 He called them “Saracens”.
page 332 note 3 These are all mentioned in the Statutes of the Ch'ing dynasty (Ta Ch'ing hui tien, etc.).
page 332 note 4 ha 
is also pronounced kah, ga, in some parts. Courant writes ngo. Hamil, once the capital of a Turkic state, is called both Hamil and Khamil in China.
page 332 note 5 Not qālūn (kaloun) as Courant writes.
page 332 note 6 The Rev. A. C. Moule, in a communication anent this article, gives so-na in preference to su-êrh-nai. Courant reverses this preference.
page 332 note 7 Courant says “comparez turk bālābān, grosse caisse?” Curt Sachs (Reallex. der Musikinstrumente) says that it is a “pauke”, but the balabān of Ibn Ghaibī (d. 1435) is a reed-pipe as is also the balāban of Evliyā Chelebī (d. c. 1679). To-day, the bālābān of Turkey and the balabān of Turkestān are reed-pipes. My authorities aro Ra'ūf Yekta Bey (personal communication), Fitrat (op. oit., 48), and Belaiev, (Muzïkalnïe instrumentï uzbekistana, 40)Google Scholar.
page 333 note 1 Courant, 203–4.
page 333 note 2 Huth, op. cit., 35, 38.
page 333 note 3 For works on the music of Western Turkestān see Uspensky, , Sovietsky Uzbekistan (Tashkent, 1927)Google Scholar; Uspensky, and Belaiev, , Turkmenskaia muzïka (Moscow, 1928)Google Scholar; Belaiev, , Rukovodstvo dlia obmera narodnïkh muzïkalnïkh instrnmentov (Moscow, 1931)Google Scholar, Muzïkalnïe instrumentï uzbekistana (Moscow, 1933)Google Scholar; Mironov, , Pesni ferganï bukharï i khivï (Tashkent, 1931)Google Scholar, Obzor muzïkalnïkh kultur uzbekov i drugikh narodov vostoka (Samarqand, 1931)Google Scholar, all in Russian; and Fitrat, , Uzbīk qilāssiq mūsiqāsī (Tashkent, 1927)Google Scholar, in Turkī.
page 333 note 4 Aghānī, Sāsī ed., v, 83.
page 334 note 1 Cairo MS. Kitāb al-malāhī (Fine Arts, 533), pp. 21–2. This manuscript, which I hope to issue in facsimile shortly, together with a translation, is in the hand of the noted penman and geographer Yāqūt (d. 1229) whose fame as a calligraphist is, perhaps, only eclipsed by Ibn Muqla.
page 334 note 2 Liber mafātīh al-olūm, ed. Van Vloten, , 237Google Scholar.
page 334 note 3 Encyclopædia of Islām, iii, 541.
page 334 note 4 But cf. 
in the Qāmūs of Al-Fīrūzābādī (d. 1414), where a mustaqa is denned as “an implement [a reed or piece of wood] with which the ṣanj (harp, dulcimer, psaltery) and the like are beaten”.
page 334 note 5 India Office MS., Al-Shifā' (No. 1811), fol. 173.
page 334 note 6 British Museum MS., Kitāb al-kāfī (Or. 2361), fol. 235 v.
page 334 note 7 The instrument is called the ṣanj al-ṣīnī (
) only by Ibn Zaila. In the various copies of the Shifā' of Ibn Sīnā it is called the 
(var. 
). See my Studies in Oriental Musical Instruments, 7.
page 334 note 8 Courant, 180; but Moule says (118) that it is “very much like the Persian sanṭīr, a fact which, added to the name, makes it probable that it was introduced from Persia”.
page 334 note 9 Courant, 180. See Moule, 150, for instruments played with beating rods.
page 335 note 1 Marteau-Vever, Miniatures persanes esposées au Musée des Arts Décoratifs, fig. 212.
page 335 note 2 Martin, The Miniature Painting and Painters of Persia, India and Turkey from the 8th to the 18th century, pl. xciv.
page 335 note 3 Notices et Extraits, tome xiv.
page 335 note 4 Text, 312. Trans., 392.
page 337 note 1 Text, 321. Trans., 402.
page 337 note 2 Text, 321. Trans., 403.
page 337 note 3 Text, 328. Trans., 410–11.
page 337 note 4 Marco Polo calls the great kettledrum of the Tatar khān the “great naccara” (= naqqāra), but, as Yule very correctly observes, the proper name for this instrument was qūrqah (= kūrka) and this is the instrument (a pair) delineated by him (i, 304), although he calls it a nakkāra. See my article s.v. in the Encyclopædia of Islām.
page 337 note 5 Ā'īn-i akbarī, ed. , Blochmann, i, 50–2Google Scholar, pl. viii.
page 337 note 6 Notices et Extraits, xiv, 129. See also JA., Fev.-Mars, 1852, p. 261.
page 338 note 1 History of Timur-Bec (1723), ii, 418Google Scholar.
page 338 note 2 Baṭṭūṭa, Ibn, Voyages, ed. Defrémery, and Sanguinetti, , ii, 128Google Scholar.
page 338 note 3 Chelebī, Evliyā, Travels, i, ii, 226Google Scholar.
page 338 note 4 Mahillon, , Catalogue descriptif . . ., i, 106Google Scholar.
page 338 note 5 Moule, 58, pl. vii.
page 338 note 6 Courant, 150. Cf. Van Aalst, 79.
page 338 note 7 Advielle, , La musique chez les Persans (1885), 15 and plGoogle Scholar.
page 338 note 8 Cf. Kaempfer, , Amoenitatum exoticarum . . . (1712), 740–1Google Scholar.
page 338 note 9 Courant, 149. Van Aalst, 76. Moule, 56.
page 338 note 10 Kaempfer, 741–2. Here it is written dunbak.
page 338 note 11 Advielle, 15.
page 339 note 1 Courant, 148. Moule, 53.
page 339 note 2 Courant, 146.
page 339 note 3 Courant, 147.
page 339 note 4 Courant, 146. Van Aalst, 48. Moule, 30.
page 339 note 5 Courant, 152–3. Van Aalst, 70–1. Moule, 74. In his communication on this article the latter asks “Why not the ti?” It is true that the latter is given greater prominence in the palace ceremonies than the ch'ih (although sometimes four of each were employed), yet the Persian chronicler does not mention the ornamentation and other adornments that are usual with the ti, a fact that he would probably have commented upon. Further, whilst the ch'ih approximated to the ordinary transverse flute, the ti had a distinctive feature in a membrane covered hole.
page 339 note 6 Courant, 152. Van Aalst, 70–1. Moule, 62–3.
page 340 note 1 Day, , The Music and Musical Instruments of Southern India and the Deccan, 109–110Google Scholar.
page 340 note 2 Courant, 181–2. Van Aalst, 67. Moule, 121–131.
page 340 note 3 I have given his biography in the Encyclopædia of Islām (Suppl.).
page 340 note 4 Bodleian MS., Marsh 282.
page 340 note 5 Bodleian MS., Ouseley 264.
page 340 note 6 Marsh 282, fol. 80.
page 341 note 1 Moule, in the communication already quoted, says that my mention of the chu “must be a slip”. “The chu,” he says, “is a wooden instrument of percussion, not a stringed instrument at all like the chêng” He suggests that the word intended is shê, an instrument “very much like the chêng”.
It is quite true that the chu 
is “a wooden instrument of percussion”, but there is also another chu 
which is “a stringed instrument”— a psaltery with a neck. It is to this latter instrument that I refer. As for the shê, Giles says that it is “a kind of guitar or lute, resembling the ch'in”. This is not quite correct. The shê, like the ch'in, chêng, and chu, is a psaltery.
page 341 note 2 Courant, 176–7. Van Aalst, 64–6. Moule, 113–16.
page 341 note 3 Curt Sachs, Reallexikon der Musikinstrumente, s.v., has an instrument of Eastern Turkestān called the shidūrghūr. Marco Polo refers to the Tatars playing “a certain two-stringed instrument” (book ii, chap. iv). This was evidently a pandore of the type of the dūtār of Western Turkestān. It may have been the rūd of Eastern Turkestān. The two-stringed pandore of China is the êrh-hsien, a name also given to a two-stringed viol.
page 342 note 1 Moule, in his communication, writes as follows: “Ch'ao alone is more correct and usual, but shêng alone is what is needed here.” As Courant points out, the word shêng is a generic one for all the species of the mouth-blown organ, the several species being generally distinguished by the number of pipes such as the ch'ao and ho of 19 and 13 pipes respectively. I have used the name ch'ao-shêng because it equates phonetically with the name chubchīq which Ibn Ghaibī gives it. Further, the name ch'ao-shêng was used during the Mughal period. See Courant, 161.