the level of the work group (Lomax 1968),and this is described by the
universal ethnomusicological principal of functionality or context speci-
ficity in musical performance.Music making is done for the group,and
the contexts of musical performance,the contents of musical works,and
the performance ensembles of musical genres overwhelmingly reflect
a role in group function.The straightforward evolutionary implication
is that human musical capacity evolved because groups of musical
hominids outsurvived groups of nonmusical hominids due to a host of
factors related to group-level cooperation and coordination.
Finally,as a tie-in to our discussion of the musilanguage model and the
divergence process leading to music’s outgrowth from the musilanguage
precursor,music has two distinct design features that reflect an intrinsic
role in group cooperation.These two features account for a large part
of what music is at the structural level:pitch blending and isometric
rhythms.Whereas speech proceeds obligatorily by an alternation of
parts,music is highly effective at promoting simultaneity of different
parts through its intrinsic capacity for pitch blending;music’s vertical
dimension must be seen as a design feature for promoting coopera-
tive group performance and interpersonal harmonization.In addition,
musical meter is perhaps the quintessential device for group coordina-
tion,one which functions to promote interpersonal entrainment,coop-
erative movement,and teamwork.Pitch blending and metric rhythms are
central to any evolutionary account of the melodic and rhythmic dimen-
sions of music.Theories ofindividual selection must explain how these
essentially group-cooperative musical devices evolved in the service of
within-group competition.I doubt that such models will be able to
account for them,and I suggest instead that multilevel selection models
involving group selection (Sober and Wilson 1998) and/or cultural group
selection (Boyd and Richerson 1990) offer great promise in elucidating
the cooperative and group nature of music (Brown in press).Again,
music making is not only about within-group cooperation,coordination,
and cohesion,but it is principally about these things.How this may relate
to the vocalization capacities,group structures,and social behaviors of
our hominid ancestors is a matter of central importance for future
research and theory in evolutionary musicology.Acknowledgments
I thank several colleagues who have been generous with their advice and
time:Gerhard Schlosser (University of Bremen) for reading the paper
and for many stimulating discussions about the nature of homology;
Tomas Riad (Stockholm University) not only for his insightful comments297 The “Musilanguage”Model of Music