The contributory reaction of Berlioz and Chopin upon modern music has been relatively less direct, if still apparent. It was exerted first in fertile suggestions to Wagner and Liszt at a susceptible and formative stage in their careers. Both have played some part in the awakening of Russian musical consciousness, Berlioz through his revolutionary orchestral style and programmistic audacity, Chopin through his insinuating pianistic idiom, which we find strongly reflected in the earlier works of Scriabine. Some heritage of Berlioz can undoubtedly be traced in the music of Gustav Mahler, although expressed in a speech quite alien to that of the French pioneer of realism. It may be remarked in passing that the influence of Brahms has been intensive rather than expansive. This statement is entirely compatible with a just appraisal of the worth and profundity of his music, nor can it in any way be interpreted as a detraction of his unassailable position. But in consideration of the absence of the coloristic and extreme subjective elements in Brahms' style, and in view of its conserving and reactionary force, the great symphonist cannot be regarded as specifically modernistic. Still, with his extraordinary cohesiveness of form and vital rhythmic progress, both in symphonic writing, chamber music and piano pieces, Brahms has affected Reger, Weingartner and Max Bruch in Germany, but also Glazounoff, Rachmaninoff, Medtner, Parry, and others outside of it. With the four symphonies of Brahms the long evolution of the classic form in Germany has apparently come to an end with an involuntary recognition that little more could be attained upon conventional lines. The symphonies of Bruckner emphasize this realization. Following in Wagner's orchestral footsteps, both their structure and their ideas are of unequal value, in which separate movements not infrequently rise to sublimity of expression and dramatic fervor. While opinion is still divided as to the merit of Mahler's ten symphonies, they represent isolated instances of powerfully conceived and tenaciously executed works whose orchestral eloquence is in singularly apt conformity with their substance. After a precocious and conservative symphony, composed at the age of nineteen, which pleased Brahms, Richard Strauss waited twenty years before attempting in the _Symphonia Domestica_ so elastic a form as almost to escape classification in this type. Despite much foolish controversy over the programmistic features of this work, its brilliant musical substance, its fundamental and logical coherence, and the remarkable plastic coördination of its themes constitute it a unique experiment in free symphonic structure. In France, the symphony has evolved a type somewhat apart from the Teutonic example, although an outcome of it, namely, the cyclical, in which its themes are derived from generative phrases. After three innocuous specimens (one unpublished) Saint-Saëns' third symphony shows many of the attributes