The Classification of Musical Instruments Reconsidered
Tetsuo Sakurai · 国立民族学博物館研究報告 = Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology · 1982
Until now the Hornbostel-Sachs (HS) system has been the standard one used for the classification of musical instruments [HORNBOSTEL and SACHS 1961: 3-29]. Various criticisms of this system have been offered, the most important of which, in my opinion, is the need to reconsider the main classes used. For example, there is some question about classifying the Jew's harp as an IDIOPHONE [LEDANG 1972: 102], or of classifying reed instruments as AEROPHONES [YAMAGUCHI 1969: 190-191]. The other problem of major importance is that there is no uniform standard for establishing lower order categories. A number of ways of classifying musical instruments have been proposed in order to modify, improve, or replace the HS system. Of these, one noteworthy method is that introduced by Montagu and Burton [1971]. Their system seems to be theoretically complete and should be regarded as one of the best attempts at classification ever made2). However, when applied to use in museums it inevitably becomes unduly complicated. For practical purposes, a classification system should be simple as well as systematic and sound theoretically. In this regard the system proposed in this p aper is intermediate between scientific accuracy and practical utility. Moreover, I find in both the HS and the Montagu-Burton system a problem of nomenclature, since a large percentage of the terminology used, such as Zithers, Harps, Lyres, or Lutes, is derived mainly from European cultures or those circumferential to Europe. This is certainly somewhat ethnocentric, and as a non-European I am unwilling to accept such terminology. Culture in general is considered to have two fundamental dimensions; material culture and mental culture. Musical instruments, which are regarded as one of many cultural variables, are classified in this paper with reference to these two aspects of culture. Since musical instruments, in their broader meaning, are tools of some sort and physical objects, it seems natural to give special emphasis to the material aspect of culture in classifying them. The criterion used here for the purpose of classification is the method by * The 5th Research Department, National Museum of Ethnology. 1) This short paper is based on an oral presentation given at the 26th Conference of the International Folk Music Council (August 1981, Seoul). 2) But recently Dr. Montagu, one of the authors of that paper, wrote to me saying that he had abandoned that idea for the reasons given in Picken's book [1975: 558-570]. I acknowledge with gratitude Dr. Montagu's most useful suggestion.