vili]

PHYSIOLOGICAL T H E O R I E S OF

HEARING

143

dispel the mystery. The basis of explanation sought b y Helmholtz

for consonance and the like in the coincidence of upper partials was
the best one left open to him, and perfectly consistent with his theory
of the auditory elements. B u t it has been proved by Stumpf to be a
complete failure and is utterly useless as a primary source of consonance. A t most it can but add to, and amplify, consonance, once
that has been established. For it is really only a fragment, as it were,
of consonance b y coincidence of volumes and of their characteristic
points. The primary fault of Helmholtz's theory in this respect lies
not so much in his. failure to show how the coincidence of partials
comes to be noticed, but in his failure to show how the presence of
partials ever comes to be overlooked in a musical tone.
On m y theory the psychophysical development of hearing from
highest tones downwards (111, 339S.; 112, 218) is perfectly evident and
in accord with the greater biological probabilities. The whole line of
progress from a single vibrating hair to a perfect cochlea can then be
seen at a glance. For its realisation we need only invoke the aid of
well-known biological principlesthe 'chance' reduplication of organs
and the advantage resulting therefrom. With these two devices we
start a line of advance which will carry us over the whole journey.
For the cochlea is only a large number of vibrating hairs with all the
adjuncts that the advantage of each accidental accretion would serve
to bring about. Such a work as Gray's The Labyrinth of Animals
shows with the greatest possible clearness the chief stages of this development that have survived. And it is a short way therefrom to the
construction of the whole development in abstraction from the special
conditions of each animal's phylogenetic history.
The present standing of Helmholtz's theory m a y be well indicated
by a quotation from K. L. Schaefer (102, 5ff.): " I take m y stand
outright upon the ground of Helmholtz's theory. I t has indeed been
subjected in the last decades to sharp attacks, especially in a sphere
not completely exhausted b y Helmholtz himselfthat of the secondary
clang phenomena, whereby I understand beats, combination tones,
variation tones and interruption tones. But one m a y confidently
maintain that it has victoriously resisted these attacks and at present
stands faster than ever before. Besides, of the many other theories
of hearing that in the course of time have been published, none is
equal to it in respect of comprehensive and often most detailed agreement with the facts." That is true; but it does not remove the
difficulties of Helmholtz's theory to which I have referred.