This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1891 Excerpt: ...Asiatic disposition to have their music performed for them by hired subordinates; and as for the first argument, it also falls to the ground, since historic research has in the meantime shown numerous references to the cultivation of music by the Magyars and their ancestors, the Huns, in one case a thousand years before they came into contact with the gipsies. (See Mendel X pp. 392-3.) But what tells still more strongly against Liszt is that, by his own admission, the gipsies in other countries, where they have become more or less acclimated, do not play the same music as in Hungary, but take that of their adopted country, playing Andalusian music in Spain with guitar and mandolin, Russian music in Russia, etc. Taken in connection with the fact that the gipsies in all their habits and traits are as immutable as eggs, wherever they may happen to live, this fact seems conclusive against Liszt. Another strong argument against Liszt has never been advanced heretofore, so far as I am aware. The gipsies being of Indian origin, would naturally be expected to play melodies written in 6-8, 3-4 or 3-8 time, such as are most prevalent in India; but as a matter of fact 3-4 or 6-8 time was unknown in Hungarian music until very recently. This striking fact leads us to infer that the melody and rhythm of Hungarian music are not of gipsy, but of Magyar origin; and this inference is strengthened by the fact that there are many resemblances between the music of the Maygars and that of the Turks, to whom they are related. On the other hand it seems probable that the rank embellishments with which the gipsies adorn Magyar music are their own additions; for in Indian music similar ornaments are in use. These gipsy embroideries are no doubt quaint and fascinating at first, but t...