In setting out the scales of the several keys it will be unnecessary to give more than the standing notes ([Greek: phthongoi hestôtes]), which are nearly all represented by original or unmodified letters--the moveable notes being represented by the modified forms described above. The following list includes the standing notes, viz. Proslambanomenos, Hypatê Hypatôn, Hypatê Mesôn, Mesê, Paramesê, Nêtê Diezeugmenôn and Nêtê Hyperbolaiôn in the seven oldest keys: the two lowest are marked as doubtful:-- TABLE LEGEND: Column A = Prosl. Column B = Hyp. Hypatôn. Column C = Hyp. Mesôn. Column D = Mesê. Column E = Par. Column F = Nêtê Diez. Column G = Nêtê Hyperb. A B C D E F G Mixo-lydian [Symbols] 4 id D > N \ = _e[Symbol: b] - e[Symbol: b]_ Lydian [Symbols] I- r c < c m = _d - d_ Phrygian [Symbols] E I- F 11 < Z = _c - c_ Dorian [Symbols] R E I' D ri N \ = _b[Symbol: b] - b[Symbol: b]_ Hypo-lydian [Symbols] H h r C I< c M = _a - a_ [Hypo-phrygian [Symbols] H I- F C < Z = _g - g_ [Hypo-dorian [Symbols] E /4 F 11 N = _f - f_ It will be evident that this scheme of notation tallies fairly well with what we know of the compass of Greek instruments about the end of the fifth century, and also with the account which Aristoxenus gives of the keys in use up to his time. We need only refer to what has been said above on p. 17 and p. 37. It would be beyond the scope of this essay to discuss the date of the Greek musical notation. A few remarks, however, may be made, especially with reference to the high antiquity assigned to it by Westphal. The alphabet from which it was derived was certainly an archaic one. It contained several characters, in particular [Symbols: F] for digamma, [Symbols: LI] for iota, and [Symbols: I-] for lambda, which belong to the period before the introduction of the Ionian alphabet. Indeed if we were to judge from these letters alone we should be led to assign the instrumental notation (as Westphal does) to the time of Solon. The three-stroke iota ([Symbols: I]), in particular, does not occur in any alphabet later than the sixth century B.C. On the other hand, when we find that the notation implies the use of a musical System in advance of any scale recognised in Aristotle, or even in Aristoxenus, such a date becomes incredible. We can only suppose either (1) that the use of [Symbols: Li] in the fifth century was confined to localities of which we have no complete epigraphic record, or (2) that [Symbols: i] as a form of iota was still known--as archaic forms must have been--from the older public inscriptions, and was adopted by the inventor of the notation as being better suited to his purpose than [Symbols: 1].