Where Did Music Come From?

Have you ever asked yourself where music came from? Is it possible that it is such an integral part of our lives that it is hard to imagine that it could not exist and that our ancestors could live without it? Or is it impossible? Perhaps music came first, and later humans appeared? Perhaps it is not humans who created it? These questions have troubled philosophers for years, who have sought the origins of music in biology, physiology, and ultimately in society. However, exploring this topic is not easy, because unlike other fields of art, not much evidence of music has survived. Any songs or pieces were passed down orally, and discovered paintings or reliefs depicting musical instruments or people playing them do not provide us with knowledge about the music itself. They also say nothing about earlier stages when culture was at a lower level of development and of which no drawings have survived.

There are many theories regarding the origin of music. Here I will present the most important ones.

Herbert Spencer

According to Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), the emergence of music is related to the expression of emotions. Every feeling, whether positive or negative, stimulates our muscles to act, and consequently causes movement. Most of us lick our lips after tasting a delicacy, and when we hear music, we tap our feet to the rhythm. In the case of negative experiences like pain, we clench our jaws or bite our lips. Such examples can be multiplied. However, the question arises as to what connection Herbert Spencer saw between emotions, muscles, and the emergence of music. As has already been established by most ethnomusicologists, music originally had a vocal character. Of course, each of us is aware that we speak thanks to the work of individual muscles. Both those responsible for producing sounds and the other muscles of our body are stimulated by pleasant or painful sensations. This means that our emotions can manifest not only through movement but also through sound. And this does not only apply to humans. A happy dog that knows it is going for a walk barks and jumps, while a content cat purrs and raises its tail. Thus, according to this theory, known as physiological, various tones of voice, produced under the influence of emotions over time, allowed humans to distinguish from speech a melodic line, from which music subsequently emerged. Herbert Spencer therefore assumed that the basis for the emergence of music was speech, whose tone and volume change under the influence of emotions.

Charles Darwin

It should not be surprising that the theory proposed by Charles Darwin (1809-1882) sought a sexual basis in primitive music. The scholar believed that, just as in the case of birds, humans used song to find or also to attract a partner. He completely disagreed with Herbert Spencer, as he believed that the music of our ancestors emerged earlier than speech. Any sounds produced during a more emotional statement he interpreted as being associated with strong feelings that accompanied the emergence of speech.

Richard Wallaschek

Another theory is presented by Richard Wallaschek (1860-1918), who refutes both the observations of Spencer, Darwin, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, according to whom music is the result of imitating the songs of birds and the cries of animals. Wallaschek himself emphasizes that sounds produced by animals cannot be called music. He believes that the rhythmic nature of primitive music has its roots in the general fondness for movement by humans, which allowed them to use notes in specific musical forms. According to the scholar, music does not derive from language, nor does language derive from music. In his opinion, both phenomena emerged at the same time and based on common elements, and therefore are interconnected.

Wallaschek's theory is one of the social theories that speak about the origins of music, which sees them in manifestations of social life. To this type of theory, we can also add the observations of Karl Stumpf (1848-1936), who believed that music arose from the cries produced by humans to call each other. Listening to individual cries allowed primitive people to distinguish sounds of different pitches, and then consciously transform them into melody. Meanwhile, Jules Combarieu (1859-1916) saw the origins of music in the cries produced during various types of rituals or magical spells. According to Karl Groos (1861-1946), music could have originated from the instinct to play.

However, the most widespread theory of this type is Karl Bühler's (1847-1930) theory, which points to a connection between music and work. Work was associated with a certain rhythm, which primitive humans soon became aware of, and by adding primitive lyrics to it, and later sounds of different pitches, they helped themselves in its execution.

Whatever its origin, it is a fact that music developed more or less at the same stages in different cultures and in each of them gained immense significance. It is a part of the heritage of every society, and its ubiquitous presence during both everyday and the most important events in human life confirms its immense importance.

Here is an interesting video about the origin of music according to the mythology of the Mixtecs.

And I will add, just completely from myself, that I agree with this theory and believe that the source of human inspiration to create music for their needs must have been something that was closest to them. They observed what was happening in nature, at first felt the rhythm that awakened the spirit of play within them, and over time added melody to it. It seems to me that thanks to music, they felt freedom.