The Annual of the British School at Athens

http://journals.cambridge.org/ATH

Additional services for The Annual of the British School at Athens:

Email alerts: Click here

Subscriptions: Click here
Commercial reprints: Click here
Terms of use : Click here

The Brauron aulos

J. G. Landels

The Annual of the British School at Athens / Volume 58 / November 1963, pp 116 - 119
DOI: 10.1017/S0068245400013824, Published online: 04 October 2013

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0068245400013824

How to cite this article:

J. G. Landels (1963). The Brauron aulos. The Annual of the British School at Athens, 58, pp 116-119
doi:10.1017/S0068245400013824

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/ATH, IP address: 130.60.206.75 on 06 May 2015

 THE BRAURON AULOS
THIS ancient instrument, which is, for the student of Greek music, one of the most significant
finds of recent years, came to light during excavations at Brauron, on the east coast of Attica,
in August 1961. These excavations, under the direction of Dr. I. Papadimitriou (Director-
General of the Greek Archaeological Service), are still in progress, and a full report has not
yet been published:1 so far as this item is concerned, it was found in a sacred spring near the
north-west corner of the ancient temple, along with a number of objects which are dated by
Dr. Papadimitriou to the late sixth or early fifth century B.C. They were perhaps in situ, buried
or hidden, when the Persians sacked the site during the Salamis campaign.
The find (item 1059 in the catalogue) comprises the two lower sections of an aulos: there is
no apparent reason to doubt that they belong together. The central joint is of the usual type
spigot and socketand at one end (A in the diagram) there is another socket for the attachment
of the next section. At the other end (C in the diagram) there is no spigot or socket: as Hole V
is manifestly a vent-hole (see below) this must have been the lower end of the instrument.
The condition of both pieces is surprisingly good. They are made of bone, and even retain
a fair degree of polish on the outside. The spigot and socket at B are both damaged (as is usual
with aulos fragments, the material being thinnest and most vulnerable at those points); there is
some splitting, particularly at A, but the original measurements can be assessed with reasonable
certainty.

A B C

O O O O
IV
FIG. 1

FIG. 2

Dimensions (all expressed in metres)

A-B o-i2i B-C 0-108 A-C 0-229
Inside diameter 0-0095 throughout except for the socket at A; this extends inwards 0-016
from A. The inside diameter at A is 0-013 (approx.) and there is a slight reduction towards the
inner end: but owing to splitting exact measurement is not possible. On the other end of this
1
I am deeply grateful to Dr. Papadimitriou for having and for allowing me to examine the aulos in detail, and pub-
personally shown my wife and myself over the Brauron site, lish my findings. He also supplied the photograph (FIG. 2).
 THE BRAURON AULOS 117

section (A-B) there is a spigot, outside diameter o-on at B. It has been badly damaged, but
it is safe to assume that it was the same length as the socket on the lower section, and that it
tapered down from B to the tip. As the wall of the spigot is only about 1 mm. in thickness, it
is hardly surprising to find it damaged. This spigot fits into a socket on the lower section which
extends o-oio in from B, and reaches a maximum inside diameter of 0-013 (approx.) at B.
It likewise tapers down from B, but the amount cannot be measured with accuracy because of
splitting. It is not possible to say with certainty whether the discrepancy (1-5 mm.) between
the diameters of spigot and socket is due to (a) shrinkage of the spigot, (b) opening up of the
split on the lower section, or (c) the fact that the spigot was originally lapped with thread. As
can be seen from the photograph (FIG. 2) a small piece is missing from the socket. There is no
indication of any type of joint at C.
The outside diameter is irregular: whereas the bore has been drilled out to a uniform
diameter, the outside surface retains the natural shape of the bone from which it was made.
(Most later fragments have the outside surface turned on a lathe.) It is oval in cross-section,
and its dimensions vary from end to end, reaching a minimum just below Hole V: between
Hole T and Hole II it is approximately 0-014X0-016. Both sections were probably made from
the tibia bone of a deer or other animal of comparable size: each has a very noticeable groove.2
On A-B there is a long tapering groove on the under side, extending from B to a point opposite
Hole I. On the lower section (B-C) the groove is shorter but deeper, extending from C to a
point opposite Hole V. Presumably the holes have been bored so that these grooves lie on the
under side and are kept inconspicuous: but the groove on A-B cuts right across the thumb-hole
T, which is surprising.
The finger-holes are all exactly circular, and have apparently been bored with the same drill,
0-008 in diameter. Hole I is slightly larger when measured crosswise, but this is probably due
to the splitting. All except T can be adjusted to lie in a straight line; Tis, of course, on the under
side, and not visible in the photograph. The distances measured from A to the upper (i.e. the
nearer) edge of each hole are as follows:
A-I 0-020 A-T 0-049 A-II 0-077 A-III 0-105 A-IV 0-139 A-V 0-1815
and the distances between the holes:
IV
I-T 0-029 T-II 0-028 II-III 0-028 III-IV 0-034 - V 0-0425
It will be seen at once that the first four holes come very near to the equidistant arrangement
which forms the basis of a theory of ancient scales propounded by K. Schlesinger.3 Holes IV
and V, however, do not conform to this pattern.
Each of the holes, except V, has been recessed: the outer rim has been smoothed out to make
it easier for the player to seal it with the fingers. Hole V has not been recessed at all, which
proves beyond doubt that it was a vent-hole. The amount of recessing varies, from a very little
on Hole II to a 'deep depression' on T, which is necessary to eliminate leakage at the points
where it is intersected by the groove.
It is clear from the number of holes that this is one pipe of a pair; and since the method of
playing two pipes at once is one of the most baffling problems of musical history, it is deeply to
be regretted that the other pipe of the pair has not been preserved. What is more, I do not
think it is possible to say with certainty whether these sections belong to the left-hand pipe of
the pair or to the right; there are two indications. The thumbhole T is not exactly opposite
2
A doctor friend tells me that the grooves are caused by to develop along the bone, leaving a groove between
the attachment of the principal muscles along two paral- them,
3
lei strips; tension of the muscles causes two raised ridges The Greek Autos (London, 1939).
Il8 J. G. LANDELS

the others diametrically, but is displaced slightly in a clockwise direction from the player's
point of view. I have argued elsewhere that this indicates a righthand pipe.4 The recessing on
Holes IV and V is not circular, but elliptical, the ellipse being slanted so as to lie in line (approxi-
mately) with the fourth and little fingers of the left hand. Thus there are two contradictory items
of evidence, neither of which can be regarded as conclusive.
The instrument is incomplete: we should like, of course, to discover the scale of notes it was
designed to play. In order to do this, it is necessary to draw some inferences from contemporary
illustrations of auloi as to the missing parts, and to carry out a series of experiments with a
facsimile. My experiments are as yet incomplete, but in view of the singular importance of this
object, I thought it desirable to publish the description and measurements without delay.
What follows is in the nature of an interim report on the results so far.
The lost portions of the instrument can be partly inferred from a number of vase-paintings.
Above the body there were normally two bulbs (oApoi); the distance from A to Hole I is 2 cm.,
and though a few illustrations show the player's index finger at about that distance from
the base of the oAuoi,5 the majority suggest a much larger gap. There may or may not have been
a length of straight tube, with no holes, between the top of the surviving portion (A) and the
oAuoi. From the evidence of surviving oAuoi it appears that their inside bore did not expand or
contract, the outside curvature being purely ornamental; but it must be admitted that their
function is not yet fully understood.6 However, in order to determine the scale of notes for which
this pipe was bored, only one dimension needs to be foundthe total distance from A to the
tip of the mouthpiece; this is the principal factor determining the pitch of the notes and the
intervals between them.
If this length were the only unknown quantity, the task would be an easy one: but unfor-
tunately there is another imponderable. The aulos had a reed mouthpiece which fitted into
the top end of the oAuoi.7 Needless to say, the mouthpiece of this instrument has been lost, and
there is considerable disagreement as to the type of reed used in the ancient instrument: it is
a large and complicated question, and cannot be dealt with here. For the purposes of my
experiments I have left it entirely open, admitting the possibility that it might have been any
of the types used in more recent instruments, or perhaps (a depressing thought) a type which has
no exact modern counterpart. The difficulty arises from the fact that any type of mouthpiece
influences the pitch of the various notes. Under ideal conditions the resonance of the pipe controls
the opening and closure of the reed; but these never obtain in practice. What one gets is a
compromise between the resonance pitch and the 'natural frequency' of the reed: the latter
depends on a number of factors, including the size of the reed-tongue or tongues, the amount
of opening, the breath pressure and embouchure. Amid this uncertainty, however, there is one
guiding principle. It may be assumed that the ancient mouthpiece, whatever its form, must
have been suited to the resonatoracoustically matched to it, with a good response over the
required range of pitch. A measure of this suitability is the degree to which the performance
of the mouthpiece and resonator together approximates to the theoretical resonance pitch of
the pipe alone. If one type of reed approaches this norm more closely than another, it probably
resembles the ancient mouthpiece more closely.8
4
In an article on 'Fragments of musical instruments politan Museum, plate 11.
6
found in the Agora', to appear in a future volume of In particular, some of them have a very small lateral
Hesperia. The question is complicated by the fact that in hole, for which no convincing explanation has been given,
7
many illustrations the player holds his wrists very low: The term 'flute', hallowed by long tradition, is strictly
the finger-holes must have been turned outwards, and the speaking a misnomer. The least erroneous translation is
thumb-holes inwards from the vertical. 'reed pipe'.
5 8
e.g. Richter, Red-figured Athenian Vases in the Metro- I have so far experimented with four types of reed,
 THE BRAURON AULOS 119

The procedure adopted for my experiments was as follows. A facsimile of the surviving sec-
tions was made in brass: increments were also made of the same diameter, their lengths being
chosen so that any desired number of centimetres could be built up between the top of the
facsimile and the mouthpiece, up to 28. The pitch of the note from each hole, with the mouth-
piece attached directly to the facsimile, was first measured: then a small increment was in-
serted, and the pitches measured again, and so on until the maximum increment was reached.
The results were plotted on a graph. The aim, of course, was to discover a size of increment
which would cause the notes to form an intelligible pattern, preferably one which can be
related to ancient musical theory.
Unfortunately, it has become clear that the results so far obtained must be treated as tenta-
tive, and that no very firm conclusions can be drawn from them. The pitch of all the notes is
unstable, and can be varied at will over a considerable range. The next step, therefore, will be
to enlist the help of an expert reed-maker, to manufacture single and double reeds specially
to suit the pipe. The bassoon reed I have been using, though its performance is tolerably good,
is designed for a much larger instrument with a conical bore, and cannot be expected to give
more than a rough idea of the original scale. Even so, there are a few observations which can
be made at this stage.
(a) If the dating mentioned above is correct, this is one of the oldest surviving auloi; it dates
from before the modifications attributed to Pronomus,9 and presumably played one of the old
aulos scales.
(b) The intervals of the scale appear remarkably alike in size: there is no easily discernible
difference as between 'tones' and 'semitones' in a scale of the diatonic type. Small intervals
between the notes can be obtained by partial obturation of the holes or by overblowing, but
their pitch is very unstable. The possibility must not be ignored that some intervening notes
were played on the other pipe of the pair.
(c) In overall size, and in the positioning of its holes, this pipe is roughly, but not exactly,
similar to the Elgin auloi in the British Museum.10
(d) The scale appears to divide at the centre; this suggests that the original scale was not an
octave. At an increment of 6 cm. (total mouthpiece extrusion 13 cm.) the pipe can be made to
sound a fourth between Hole I and Hole II, and between Hole II and Hole V. The note
from Hole T appears to be about half-way between I and II, while the intervals of the lower
tetrachord approximate to the ouccAov division denned by Ptolemy.11 The pattern is:
I T II III IV V
Ratio I 8.7 I 7.6 I 12.11 [ 11.10 I 1 0 . 9 I
I 4-3 ! 4-3 I
The tetrachords expressed in logarithmic cents are:
231+267 151 + 165+182
It must be strongly emphasized, however, that this is only one of the possible patterns of notes;
one cannot be at all certain at this stage whether it is the original one for which the aulos was
designed.12 J. G. L A N D E L S
:I
three of which proved unsuitable for various reasons. The Harm. i. 17 (ed. During, p. 38): the order of the inter-
best results were obtained with a bassoon reed. A type which vals is inverted. See Winnington-Ingram,' Aristoxenus and
should be tried, but which I have not been able to obtain, the intervals of Greek Music', CQ.xxvi (1932) 195-208.
Iz
is a miniature 'beak' mouthpiece of the clarinet type. I wish to thank Professor Winnington-Ingram for
9
Cf. Pausanias ix. 12. 5-6; Athenaeus xiv. 631 E. reading this article in proof and making a number of helpful
10
Cf. Schlesinger, op. cit. 411-20. suggestions.