rT | aHE HISTORIOGRAPHY of jazz might well be described as one of selective discrimination. The jazz historian, in discussing style development and the oral traditions associated with the dissemination of ideas, incorporates into his jazz writings only such elements as suit his purpose. A positive example of this discrimination is the way Louis Armstrong's development has been treated. Jazz historians have traced the influence on Armstrong to such early trumpet masters of New Orleans as Freddie Keppard, Willie Bunk Johnson, Charles Buddy Bolden, and Joseph King Oliver, Armstrong's mentor. While there are few extant recordings to prove this influence, this concept is accepted as fact in the jazz community. Selective discrimination, however, can have its negative aspect. These same jazz histories that handle the Armstrong story so carefully show less concern for documentation in other instances. It is generally held, for example, that the double bass as a solo instrument had no development phase, that it sprang without precedent, fully formed, from Jimmy Blanton's fingers in 1939. In this paper, I will present data which reveal how the instrument developed to the time of Blanton, and establish criteria by which we may determine whether Blanton's title, Father of the Modern Bass, is appropriate. The fact that so many jazz historians have emphasized the preeminence of Jimmy Blanton to the neglect of other bassists may be the primary reason why at least fifteen years are missing from the history of solo double-bass playing. While it is difficult to determine who originated the idea that Jimmy Blanton was the creator of the jazz bass solo, by 1942 Hugues Panassie was already convinced that: