Nevin Ancient Times
James Dodson
INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN ANCIENT TIMES.
The statement that “the song with its musical accompaniment, vocal and instrumental,” was “the only kind of service of praise known to the Old Testament Church,” even when this is toned down and modified so as to be in effect, that instruments were generally employed in the worship of God all through Old Testament times, is one that rests on a very slender foundation, indeed. Jubal “was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ”—Gen. iv. 21. It is not to be supposed that organ here means any such costly and complex piece of machinery as that which is known by the name in modern times. It was in all probability a wind instrument of very primitive construction—a Pandean pipe, or something resembling the modern bagpipe. The “harp,” moreover, in this instance (kinnôr) stands as representative of the whole class of stringed instruments; and the “organ” (ugab), of the whole class of wind instruments. What is of more importance, however, to note is, that there is not a syllable to indicate that any of these instruments was employed in the worship of God in the times of Jubal, or for many generations afterwards. Jubal was a direct descendant of Cain, whose race was certainly not remarkable for piety, if, indeed, they worshipped the one living and true God at all. Laban, when chiding Jacob at Gilead for his manner of leaving him, said, “Wherefore didst thou flee away secretly, and steal away from me; and didst not tell me, that I might have sent thee away with mirth, and with songs, with tabret, and with harp?”—Gen. xxxi. 27. Here, again, there is nothing to show that Laban had any idea of worship in connection with the use of these instruments.
The case of Miriam, after the passage of the Red Sea, seems more in point, and accordingly the most is made of it by the advocates of instruments—greatly more, indeed, than the facts warrant. Moses and the children of Israel sang a song of praise, which is recorded; then it is added, “And Miriam, the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.”—Exod. xv. 20. Professor Wallace says (p. 8), “It is quite evident from this narrative, that the Israelites had cultivated music, both vocal and instrumental, in Egypt, for no such service as this was possible without a high
[Page 10]
degree of musical skill, and even of science.” The “timbrel” which Miriam and the women of Israel employed was the toph (in some places rendered tabret) an instrument precisely similar to what is now commonly known as a tambourine. The claim of such a thing to be classed among instruments of music, though generally conceded, is certainly not very high; and to assert that the use of it was not so much as possible without a high degree of musical skill, and even of science, is certainly more comical than convincing. Science, in these our days, has been subjected to reproach enough, not by reason of her facts, but by reason of the unwarranted and absurd conclusions of some of the most eminent of her votaries, without this additional burlesque from the hand of a friend. Let the facts and circumstances be carefully noted. Moses and the men sang; but they did not exhibit their pre-eminent musical skill and science in handling the toph, that instrument so well calculated to test both skill and science, nor did they mingle in the dance. No, they left these to the women. The occasion was an extraordinary one, and the celebration was of a mixed character. It was a social and national, as well as a religious, celebration of a national deliverance. Other references to the manners and customs of the times and the people throw light upon the subject. When Jephthah returned from his victory over the Ammonites to his house in Mizpeh, “behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances.”—Jud. xi. 34. This was simply expressive of joy on account of the victory. Again, when David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, “the women came out of all cities of Israel, singing and dancing, to meet King Saul, with tabrets, with joy, and with instruments of music. And the women answered one another as they played, and said, Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands.”—1 Sam. xviii. 6, 7. There is no indication whatever of worship being rendered to God in these two latter instances. It was merely a social custom in the way of public rejoicing because of a national event of a joyous kind. When Moses and the men of Israel sang, the women also joining in the song, there was worship rendered to God in that, for the words of the song are recorded, and they are praise to Him. But when the women alone danced to an accompaniment, it is both easy and natural to discriminate here. That was in compliance with the social custom, and simply expressive of national joy. If we are not thus to discriminate, then what are we to make of the dancing? Is this to be construed as worship too? The use of the toph was simply to mark the time for the dance. It was thus subsidiary and subordinate. With what face of consistency can the toph be held up to us—as an example for imitation, shall we say?—while the major part of the performance, so far as the women were concerned, is thrust into the back-ground as far as possible, a thing not to be
[Page 11]
imitated at all? Because instruments are mentioned as having been used on some public and extraordinary occasions, in none of which is there any reason given to think that they were employed in the worship of God—unless we make this case of Miriam an exception, and we have seen how little ground there is for that—the inference is drawn that they were generally used in worship. Surely an opposite inference is far more natural, namely, that inasmuch as they are only expressly mentioned on these extraordinary occasions, where their use cannot be properly regarded as constituting a part of worship at all, therefore they were not generally or even at all employed in ordinary and stated worship. On the same page the Professor says, “We cannot doubt that music, vocal and instrumental,” [may we not add dancing, and with more reason?] “in the worship of God, was a familiar practice with godly Israelites in Egypt. Nor can we stop here.” No, for he proceeds to express his “unhesitating belief” that it was so “from the earliest ages”—say from the time of “Adam in Paradise.” This reminds us of Professor Huxley’s opening address, when he was president of the British Association. After discussing at length the subject of what used to be called, with no great propriety, spontaneous generation, now, by a more exact nomenclature, abiogenesis, and demonstrating that there is not a shadow of real evidence for such a thing, he wound up by expressing his belief that, in a time preceding that which is geologically recorded, it actually took place. For this he admitted he could assign no reason, nevertheless he had faith in it, “philosophic faith”—as if to believe without evidence had any, even the smallest, claim to the name either of faith or philosophy.