What Happened To Indian Music Theory Indo Occidentalism NA Jairazbhoy 2008
What Happened To Indian Music Theory Indo Occidentalism NA Jairazbhoy 2008
What Happened To Indian Music Theory Indo Occidentalism NA Jairazbhoy 2008
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Illinois Press and Society for Ethnomusicology are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Ethnomusicology.
http://www.jstor.org
illiterate (ibid.:3), and blamed the decadence of Hindu music squarely on the
Mohammedan conquest of India (ibid.:28).
There is no doubt that these earlyWestern scholars were fascinated by
the Indian 22 srutis and promoted this ancient Indian systemwith such zeal
that notions of objective scholarship were generally ignored and, as a result,
inmost of the twentieth century the term "sruti" and the underlying concept
pervaded all scholarly considerations of Indian music. Both the views they
endorsed?that the octave was of twenty-two microtones, and
composed
thatMuslim musicians had taken Indian music to the depths of depravity?
resonated through much of early twentieth century Indian musicology.
The 22 sruti division of the octave was endorsed mainly by the English
language writings of bothWestern and Indian scholars, including such promi
nent Western scholar/musicologists as Fox Strangways (1914:112-13,117,
127,132-33) and Clements ([1913] 1966:7-8,1-14,53,100-102), the latter
going into considerable detail in explicating the precise placement of these
microtones in the octave. We might wonder why Indian scholars/musicians
did not nip this srutibusiness in the bud and set them right about the 12 semi
tonal basis of contemporary Indian music, but they actually reinforced their
view. On the one hand, veneration of old Sanskritic traditions had spilt over
into the sphere ofmusic and brought with itwaves of patriotic nostalgia that
swamped what reallywas with what they felt should be. On the other, some
Indianmusicologists toadied toWesterners and even out-srutied them?I refer
to individuals likeTagore ([1885] 1979), Deval (1910), and Pingle ([1894]
1962:28-31)?leaving behind legacies of sruti number manipulations that
were only topped by the numerical escapades ofAbraham Pandither ([1917]
1984) andAlain Danielou (1980:27-47). An exception could be made forD.R.
Bhandarkar (1912), who meticulously criticized sruti interpretations of earlier
writers, including Jones ([1793] 1965),Willard ([1834] 1965),Tagore ([1882]
1965) and others, as well as the interpretations of Bharata's system of srutis
by later Sanskrit writers "who have introduced difficulties unnecessarily"
(Bhandarkar 1912:164).Finally, he gives his own interpretation,which though
thoroughly rational in some ways, leads him to the dubious conclusion that
the three tones were equivalent to those of just intonation (ibid.:262).
The joint support given to srutis by both Indians andWesterners resulted
in a synergistic effect that reverberated through the scholarly community,
generating and regenerating theoretical notions and stimulating interpreta
tions and re-interpretations of srutis, thus substantially increasing their sup
posed relevance to contemporary practice?a phenomenon that I refer to
as Indo-Occidentalism.4
The penchant fornumber-strology provided the fillip that stretched even
the hallowed sruti number of 22 to 53 and even 66 in thewritings ofAlain
Danielou (1980:28-39) in the 1950s,when he posited a gamut of 66 srutis from
which he drew the precise positions of the notes used in the r?gs current in
his time. Danielou's theories, as incontrovertible facts, were refuted
expressed
be flatter,a phenomenon parallel to the "blue notes"7 in jazz and blues whose
intonation deviates from the norm by less than a semitone but are, neverthe
less, not seen as denying the 12 semitone basis ofWestern music.
With all the scurrilous attacks on Muslim musicians by Captain Willard and
others, both foreign and Hindu, it is not surprising thatWestern students of
North Indian music particularly in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s chose to study
with Hindu musicians and musicologists, especially those in Benares Hindu
University, the stronghold of Hinduism and traditional Sanskrit studies. There
theywere instructed by the excellent Sanskrit scholar, Dr. Prem Lata Sharma,
and the renowned vocalist and musicologist, Pandit OmkarnathThakur, who
held court overWestern and Indian students enthralled by their vision. The
troublewas that their vision was locked into the textual Hindu past of Indian
music, as communicated in theN?tya Sastra when srutis,gramas (parent
scales), m?rcchan?s (7-note sequences) and j?tis (modes) prevailed over all
other types ofmusic in India. Powers (1992:19) writes ofThakur's "growing
conviction that Hindusthani classical music must reflect, though in its own
way, the oldest sources of theory, and that today's sastr?ya sang?ta [music of
the treatises] and sang?ta sastra [musical treatises] of ancient India have their
fundamentals in common." Similarly,Sharma wrote,"There is hardly a serious
student ofmusical theory in theNorth now who will not be inclined to agree
that the ancient sastra embodies eternal truths and principles profound and
comprehensive enough to regulate musical forms and practices of Indian
classical music of all time" (1963:83-84). Thus both believed in the continuity
ofmusic from the oldest Hindu sources, certainly through the period of the
Sanskrit treatises to that of the present. They therefore presumed that the
music of drama (n?tyd),v?it\\ its large ensembles (kutap?) as described in the
N?tya Sastra, was the ancestor of our present day solo/small ensemble-based
classical music. There is, however, no evidence to support this no
virtually
tion since there is no vestige of thatmusical system to be found anywhere in
India now?no gr?mas, or m?rcchan?s. The element of continuity
j?tis, only
that remains is in the names of the seven notes, but the names of the gr?mas,
j?tis, and those of the fourteen (or twenty-one) m?rcchan?s as well as the
twenty-two srutis are no longer in use.
Harmonium
The case against the twelve semitone basis of North Indian music was
exemplified by the attack on the use of the harmonium as accompaniment
to vocal music. The objections to this instrument came from several sources,
probably initiated by western scholars including Fox Strangways (1914:16)
and even my mentor, Arnold Bake (1965:211, 225). Other famous Indians
(including Rabindranath Tagore [1961:4]), aesthetes and even political per
sonalities, (e.g., Jawaharlal Nehru8) decried its use on the grounds that its
tempered twelve semitone intervals were compromising Indian musicians'
inherent instinct forprecise intonation purely for the sake of convenience, an
echo of the criticisms levied against theWestern equal temperament system
two centuries earlier. The resistance to the harmonium's supposed equal
temperament was evidently much more powerful in India than ithad been
in theWest, and resulted in the complete ban of the instrument from the
government-run All India Radio in the 1950s and 1960s, despite the fact that
many famous classical singers had been using it since at least the twenties,
and continue to do so in concerts to this day. Itwas only after seminars on
the subject of the harmonium were held in 1970 that the ban was partially
lifted, although the instrument continued to be banned in some contexts
into the nineties.9
Bhatkhande's Challenge
It is in the context of these two constraints that Pandit Vishnu Narayan
Bhatkhande, a Brahmin Sanskrit scholar, lawyer, and musicologist, developed
his musical ideas in the first three decades of the twentieth century. In the
process he challenged both Indo-Occidentalist ideas as well as those of tradi
doubtedly knew that these notions would offend traditional Sanskrit scholars
who revered thewritings of Bharata and S?rrigadeva, especially as he could
not find any Sanskrit treatisewhich fully confirmed his theories. So being an
astute lawyer,he wrote his own Sanskrit treatise, Srimal Laksya Sa?gttam
(Bhatkhande 1910), in an archaic style, initially claiming that he had found
this rare and ancient manuscript fromwhich he had derived his theories. Even
the name he gave as that of the author, Catura Pandita (clever scholar, i.e.,
himself) did not give the game away for several years. In themeanwhile he
was writing his four volume magnum opus inMarathi, entitled Sa?g?t Sastra
(MusicTreatise) (Bhatkhande 1957), that elaborated on the ideas expressed in
the allegedly discovered Sanskritwork. It also contains detailed descriptions
of r?gs,with extensive notations and discussions of their recent history, not
tomention numerous
Sanskrit quotations, especially from his own Srimal
Laksya Sang?tam but also frommany other treatises.
Bhatkhande also challenged the allegiance to a single teacher concept by
interviewing numerous Hindu and Muslim musicians from different ghar?n?s
and transcribed hundreds of their traditional compositions in different r?gs,
which he published between 1920 and 1937 inhis 6 volume Kramik Pustak
M?lik?. Attempting to break down the exclusivity of the ghar?n?s, he was
also the principal organizer of fiveAll India Music Conferences from 1916 to
1926,which brought togethermusicians of different ghar?n?s and religions11
with scholars, royalty, and administrators, in an attempt to standardize the
practice of Indian music. Whether or not thiswas a desirable goal is irrelevant
here; but by facilitating dialog between musicians and scholars of different re
ligious, social and economic backgrounds, these conferences mitigated some
of the tensions between Hindu and Muslim musicians, between ghar?ned?r
(family-trained) and independent musicians, as well as between performers
and scholars.
Student is still likely to describe the interval between the sa (C) and itsfifth
pa (G) as consisting of 13 srutis using the ancient obsolete standard ofmea
sure, not 7 ardhasvars; an octave as consisting of 22 srutis, not 12 ardhasvars;
and the intervals between notes in the octave as 4324432, harking back
to sruti intervals expressed in theN?tya Sastra 2,000 years ago, not as 2 1
2 2 2 1 2 as theywould be in ardhasvars or semitones. In the old j?ti system,
which was similar to the ecclesiastical modes, itwas not necessary to develop
terminology formusical intervals since they could be expressed in sruti
numbers and were also implicit in the name of the modes. For instance, if
one referred to the j?ti Sadj?, the equivalent of the D mode, one would know
that it had 2 flats, i.e., a minor third and a minor seventh. The j?tis began
on the successive notes of the diatonic scale, each one having a different
intervallic configuration. At some point inhistory themodes were evidently
transposed to a common tonic and intervalswere then expressed in terms of
scales, such as melas (scale types) or th?ts; thus K?fi"That indicates a scale
similar to the j?ti Sadj?. However, we did not develop Indian terminology for
expressing major and minor intervals in the abstract, e.g.,"major third,"
which
could refer to the distance between sa and ga, ma and dha or pa and ni.15
Of primary importance in consideration of scales is the anomaly of the
tritone.This interval is inherent in all diatonic scales, and in early ecclesiastical
music was referred to as diabolus inm?sica (the devil inmusic). Itsmelodic
use was forbidden (Scholes 1956:1046) because of the extreme dissonance
of this interval of 3whole tones, falling halfway between a consonant fourth
of 2 whole tones and a semitone, and a consonant fifth of 3 whole tones
and a semitone. In the Church modes this tritone is especially evident in
the Locrian or B mode inwhich this dissonance occurs between the B, the
ground note or tonic of themode and itsfifth,the F. Thus this Locrian mode
was seldom used: "The mode on the Locrian ... is rarely found in music
b,
and bhay?naka (terror). This j?tiwas the counterpart of the Locrian mode,
with a diminished fifthbetween its tonic/ground note, the dha, and itsfifth,
the ga, an interval of 11 srutis?the counterpart of a tritone?instead of a
perfect fifth of 13 srutis. This is seen in the following chart, showing the
Locrian B mode in semitones and the ancient j?tiDhaivat? (based on the note
dha) with its sruti intervals:
Locrian B Mode
BC D EF G A B
semitones 12 2 12 2 2
I_II_I
6 semitones tritone 6 semitones tritone
Dhaivat? J?ti
dha ni sa ri ga ma pa dha
srutis 2 4 3 2 4 4 3
I_Il_I
11 srutis 11 srutis tritone
Can there be any other reason why thismode had such negative associations
while all the other j?tis had agreeable implications?
particular ten th?ts should have been more significant than other possible
scales, and how they came into being, were not addressed by Bhatkhande or
other scholars. The fact that six of these th?ts are diatonic (i.e., consisting of
onlywhole tones and semitones) and similar to six of the seven ancient j?tis
(provided both 3 and 4 sruti tones are regarded as whole tones) suggests
continuity with the j?tis of the past. Even the absence of the seventh j?ti, the
terrifyingand"horripilating"15 j?tiDhaivat?, equivalent to the B mode, is quite
understandable in terms of the modern context, for although moments of
horror in a concert might be forgivable or even exciting, it ishard to imagine
being obliged to sit through a lengthy elaboration of a "horrific" rag.
The remaining four th?ts?Bhairav, Purv?,Tor?,and M?rv??are intriguing
since are non-diatonic, i.e., involve one or two scale steps of aug
they they
mented seconds consisting of three semitones (e.g., r? to ga [D!>to E], or ga\>
Where does this interval come from?There isno evidence
tomal [E to FJ]).16
Rag Families
In contemporary North Indian music a number of families of r?gs are
recognized. Justhow these families have developed is uncertain but inmost
cases r?gs in a family share melodic features and have common "fam
specific
or second names, e.g.,Yaman Kaly?n, Suddh Kaly?n, and Sy?m Kaly?n.
ily"
Sometimes the firstname is that of a particular real or legendary person who
presumably devised that version of the basic r?g-type or family (e.g., M?ya
k?Malh?r, R?md?s-ki Malh?r, Mir?bai-ki Malh?r) but even that is by no means
certain as it isnot uncommon for inventions to be ascribed to revered schol
ars/personalities of the past. Thus, it is not possible to establish dates for the
origins of either the parents or theirprogeny. Because these families evidently
SB G Mi P D N S
(?U E Fjt G A Be)
semitones 13 2 2112
Ton That
SB a m$ p a n s
(C n 0 F| G At Be)
semitones 12 3 3111
Again, the name Tor? suggests thatM?ya- k?Tor? evolved from the earlier
diatonic Tor?. To add further support for this view, two fairlyprominent r?gs
of the North Indian Tor? family,Bil?skhan?Tor? and Bh?p?lTori, not tomen
tion lesser-known r?gs such as Lacar?Tor?, Laksm?Tor?, and Anjan? Tor?, have
not evolved in terms of scale and are still in Bhairv? That.
Powers' brilliant melodic analyses of the various Tod? and other r?gas
including their Southern versions leads him to the observation that "r?gas
with the same name may differ in scale-type not only from North to South
but also from the seventeenth century to the twentieth century. At the same
time, certain features in emphasis, contour, and register may be constant
He adds, "evidence for the development ofTodi raags and other raags seems
to corroborate a of raag based on tetrachordal
theory change symmetry"
(ibid.:28), a hypothesis originally proposed by myself (Jairazbhoy [1971]
1995:179). He also corroborates the evolution of the seventeenth century
Tor? of Locana to our modern Tor? through intermediate scale change stages
j> M SB a m pa M s
(At Bt C Dt Et F G At Bt C)
?emitones 2 21222122
I_I I_I
The drone notes usually on sa (C) andpa (g), produce two symmetrical
disjunct tetrachords, sa (C) toma (F), and pa (G) to sa (C). But two symmetri
cal disjunct tetrachords are also found from dha?> (At) to re\>(D\>)and gal> (Et)
to dhc?> (At) as seen below the notation. This dual interplay is characteristic
of thisTor?,with the base notes of the two tetrachords dhc?> and ga?> being
the prominent notes of the r?ga.
When the North Indian version of this ragwent through a scale change,
as Manuel (1981:15-30) and I have hypothesized (Jairazbhoy 1971:97-98),
this structural pattern was disrupted and the two tetrachords dha\> (At) to
re\>(Dt) and ga\> (Et) to dhc? (At)were no longer symmetrical, as seen below,
where X indicates the asymmetrical tetrachord:
a m> SB a m? p a
(At Bt C Dt Et n g At)
semitones 2 2 12 3 1 1
I_I l_
In this case therewould have been little justification for the continued
emphasis on dha\> and ga\>.However, accepting Powers' thesis of the persis
tence of melodic features, I can imagine a period when there would have
been and attempts to reconcile this anomaly in several ways,
adjustments
introducing accidentals, omitting one or more notes, introducing
by oblique
(vakra) motions, or even shakes and divergent intonation to counteract it.
The minimal evidence available suggests that these attempts failed and the
scale evidently evolved again to the scale of the present day North Indian
Tor?. Structurally this scale was compatible with the image of the original
Tor? once again having symmetrical tetrachords from dha\> (At) to r? (Dt) and
gc?> (Et) to dh?> (At):
D?> N s b a mi p a
C (At
B Dt
B Ff G Ai)
semitones 3 112 3 11
I_I I_I
and gal>, the base notes of the two symmetrical tetrachords; but is itbecause
of the perseverance ofmelodic features or exigencies of the new scale?
There is a furtherpoint that needs to be made. In discussing melodic fea
tures,Powers makes no mention of the fact that in themodern North Indian
Tori, sa (C) and pa (G) are periodically omitted in the course of phrases. In
themusical example of this rag given by Powers (1970:19), we find the fol
lowing phrases in the example taken from Bhatkhande's Sang?t Sastra.19
These phrases (and others) exhibit the omission of sa and pa. However,
in the South Indian Tor? example (Powers 1970:18) there is no evidence of
the omission of either of these two notes. I regard these omissions as being
ameaningful melodic feature, but evidently Powers did not, since he did not
mention it.The explanation of thismelodic difference between the two Toris
can only be attributed to the difference in the two scales, and particularly to
the fact that in the North Indian Tor?, the sa (C) is confronted with a tritone
from sa tomai (C to F#)>and thepa (G) with a diminished fifth frompa to
re\>(G to Dt)?strong incentives to omit the notes; in the South Indian ver
sion, however, the sa (C) is strongly supported by a consonant fourth,ma (F),
and ?fthpa (G). This evidence seems to show that some melodic features
do change through scale change of r?gs; however, this single instance is not
conclusive and further research needs to be done.
Powers (1970), Manuel (1981), teNijenhuis (1974:50-59) and I have all
shown that rag names often give a clue to the scalar evolution of the North
Indian system. Carrying further this notion of the family connectedness of
r?gs by name, one can also note that there are two r?gs inM?rv? That, P?riy?
and P?riy? Kaly?n, which suggest the beginnings of a P?riy? rag family.A
thirdmember of this family,P?riy? Dhan?sri, has a different scale, adding a flat
dha toM?rv? That, creating another of Bhatkhande's th?ts, called Purv?:
Purv? That
SB G Mi P a N S
(C Dt E F# G At Be)
semitones 1 3 2 311
1
that since the prominent Bhairav That did not fit into the proposed Circle of
Th?ts, the Circle is not representative of North Indian music.
A response to the first criticism is that the hypothetical that is the exact
equivalent of the B mode which was not often used in theWest but was
necessary as a conceptual or theoretical link to complete the system, as
pointed out earlier. It serves the same function in the Circle of Th?ts. Below
is the Circle in terms ofwhat can be called that signatures after theWestern
concept of key signatures to indicate scales in terms of flats and sharps:
In the hypothetical that, the B mode ismodified with thepa?> being re
Bil?val
No Sharps/Flats
Kaly?n
M$
CF?)
Purv? As?vn
M$BDl>
MOT
(FjjDtAt) (BtEtAt)
I Tori Bhairv?
? Nl>Gl>Di>RL
MtBDl>Gl>
(FftDtAtEt) (BtEtAtDt)
MargTor?
(Hypothetical that)
"B'mode
N\>G\>D\>R\>P\> (BtEtAtDtGt)
Enharmonic "B"mode
M#RI>Dl>Gl>Nl> (FjptAtEtBt)
placed by its enharmonic mai since the note pa may neither be flatted nor
sharped?an axiom in Indian music. It has been shown, however, that the
hypothetical that did have at least a brief existence in the beginning of the
nineteenth century under the name of r?ga MargTor? (Jairazbhoy [1971]
1995:97; Manuel 1981:26). Apart from that, it provides a conceptual link
between the diatonic th?ts and those with non-diatonic intervals.With this
hypothetical that in place, the systematic regularity of the Circle becomes
evident: th?ts opposite each other,e.g.,Bil?val and the Hypothetical,Kham?j
and Tor?, K?f? and Purv?, As?vri and M?rv?, Bhairv? and Kaly?n, have oppo
site flats and sharps. Note that nine of the ten th?ts arrived at empirically by
Bhatkhande fit perfectly into this theoretical construct.
The second criticism concerns Bhairav That not fitting into the Circle.
Wade wrote: "Inmy opinion the author's explanation forBhairav is the undo
ing of his theory of evolution" (1973:332). This can be answered by drawing
a parallel with Western music, inwhich scales such as thewhole tone scale,
theGypsy scale, and the chromatic scale are used by some composers though
they are not part of the Circle of Keys, but the use of these scales does not
negate the validity of the Circle of Keys. Similarly, the fact that Bhairav That
does not fit into the Circle of Th?ts should have no bearing on the validity
of the Circle or the theory of rag evolution.
Many scholars of Indianmusic are passionately opposed to scales and some,
e.g., Joep Bor (1999:4), have severely criticized Bhatkhande's notion of th?ts as
progenitors (janaka) of r?gs20 and even as broader categories under which
r?gs could be classified. Perhaps they are right for themost part, except that
inmodern times, South Indian scales such as Simhendra Madhyama(m) and
Carukes? have given rise toNorth Indian r?gs of the same names. Perhaps this
phenomenon was more common in earlier times, inwhich case the notion of
th?ts as progenitors of r?gs isnot so far-fetched.These criticisms of th?ts and
their inadequacies divert attention from the importance of scale as a factor
in the comprehension of the structure of r?gs and their evolution. Similarly,
presumably following Powers' lead (1970:46), van der Meer (1980:8) states:
"Unfortunately the scale isnot the only nor themost important aspect of r?ga,"21
and adds,"therefore such classifications are doomed to produce abnormalities."
This suggests that one of the fundamental features of mode, as we understand
Earlier we
noted that the tritone/diminished fifth diabolus inm?sica
phenomenon was very likely recognized in ancient Indian music, at least
when itwas in direct relation to the tonic/ground note, as in the case of the
j?ti (mode) Dhaivat?. I suggest that it is because of this tritone that the rasa
(mood/emotion) of thismode is ascribed as being bibhatsa and bhay?naka
(disgust and terror). There is a great deal of evidence to support the hypoth
esis that this interval, which I refer to as asur?ntar (asura-antar, "demon's
Bil?val That
Tritone
I-1
S R G M P D N S
(C D E F G A B C)
semitones 2 2 12 2 1 2
to criticize the that system. One of the contentious r?gs is Ked?r? (Ked?r)
which was ascribed to Kaly?n That by Bhatkhande and vigorously criticized
byThakur (Powers 1992:23,39) who felt that itwas more appropriate to re
gard it as being in Bil?val That. But whether it is regarded as being in Bil?val
or Kaly?n the note ma figures in a tritone. Above, we have shown its tritone
relationship with ni in Bil?val; in Kaly?n themat is in a tritone relationship
with sa:
Kaly?n That
Tritone
S R G Mi P D N S
(C D E Ft G A B C)
semitones 2 2 2 12
2 1
semitones 3 32 2
n R G Mi D N
D (B E n AB)
\
Mi D N R G M$
m AB D ? fio
semitones 3 32 2 2
Had there been a sa (C), themai (F0 would have been a regular tritone
that could have been resolved by a sat (Q) (if such a thingwere permissible).
But since there is no sa (C) in the phrase, the r? (Dl>) provides the enhar
monic consonance for thema# (FJ).The introduction of the r? (Dl>) in place
of re (D) provides the justification forM?rv? That whose origin is otherwise
not traceable to the ancient j?ti system and provides a crucial missing link
between the ancient diatonic and modern non-diatonic scales. To the best
ofmy knowledge, no systematic explanation has been offered for the emer
gence of an augmented second interval from diatonic intervals.
We have earlier argued the connection between Kaly?n and M?rv? Th?ts
on grounds of nomenclature, viz.Yaman Kaly?n and P?riy? Kaly?n, the former
being in Kaly?n That and the latter inM?rv?. Here we have attempted to
illustrate how this could have happened in systematic terms.
Our case for the importance of scale is further amplified by a consid
eration of M?rv? That. In the first place, it is curious that the that is named
after a hexatonic rag inwhich thepa (G)?normally regarded as a pillar note
in Indian music is omitted. Further, the sa (C) is also frequently omitted in
characteristic phrases, as spoken the late Ram the renowned
by Narayan,
Among the r?gs ofM?rv? That, the Rag M?rv? is not an isolated instance
inwhich the note pa is omitted. Of the four commonly heard r?gs inM?rv?
That (including Rag M?rv?), two, Sohn? and P?riy?, are also hexatonic and
both also omit the same note,pa (G). One would have thought that such a
strange set of repeating phenomena?surely not coincidental?would have
elicited some interest among scholars, but this does not seem to be the case.
Even in the fourth prominent Rag, P?riy? Kaly?n, of this that, thepa (G) and
even sa (C) are frequently omitted as inYaman Kaly?n.
This is another instance of a significant melodic feature being shared
by several r?gs in the same that.Again this feature can only be explained by
the idiosyncrasy of the scale, and especially the location of the asur?ntar, the
tritone. Looking atM?rv? That (not the rag) with sa (C) and pa (G) included,
three tritones emerge. The following diagram gives the notes ofM?rv? That,
with the lower line representing the fifth above to show the intervallic rela
tionships by brackets and arrows:
M?rv? That
Tritones
semitones 1 3 2 1 2 1 2
|
SB G Mi P D N S
\ / /
D P N S R\> PG
?li
semitones 2 2 11 2 1 3
From this diagram itwill be clear that sa (C) has no consonant fourth and
thepa (G) no consonant fifth, which apparently explains why thepa (G) is
completely omitted in the r?gs M?rv?, Purv?, and Sohn? and frequently so in
P?riy? Kaly?n. One can also see the tendency to omit the sa (C) in these r?gs,
but being the ground note of the system, and always present in the drone, it
can not be omitted completely.
There is another imperfect interval evident from the above diagram of
M?rv? That, the relationship between the r? (J%) and dha (A), an augmented
fifthof 8 semitones?with its complement dha (A) to r? (Dt>)being a dimin
ished fourth of 4 semitones. This irregularity,like the asur?ntar is apparently
also a dynamic factor in the musical system as evidenced by the evolution
of the Rag P?riy? Dhan?sri from the nascent P?riy? family inM?rv? That to
Purv? That inwhich the dha (A) isflatted to parallel the r? (I>). The following
diagram gives the notes of Purv? That, again with the lower line representing
the fifth above to show the intervallic relationships.
Purv? That
_Tritones_
semitones | 1 | 32 | 1 |1 1 3
SB G Mi P a N S
/ / \
P a N S Rl> PG
Mi
semitones 1 3 11 21 3
The tritones involving the sa (C) andpa (G) still remain and, as in P?riy?
Kaly?n, these two notes are frequently skipped over and used primarily to
close a series of phrases.
The P?riy? family apparently seems to end with the Rag P?riy? Dhan?sr?.
However, the melodic characteristics of P?riy? as exemplified by the com
plete omission of thepa (G) and the frequent elision of the sa (C) evidently
carry over to the hexatonic r?ga Gujr? (Gurjr?)Tor?which is not in Purv? that
but inTor? That. In this rag, too, thepa (G) is completely omitted and the
sa (C) frequently skipped as in the r?gs M?rv? and P?riy?. The following
diagram gives the notes ofTor? That, again with the lower line representing
the fifthabove to show the intervallic relationships.
Tor? That
_Tritones_
semitones 1 | 2 3 1 |1 1 3
SB a Mi P a N S
\ / /
pa N S & G\> &% p
semitones 1 3 112 3 1
InTor? That, as inM?rv? and Purv? Th?ts, the two tritones, sa tomat (C
to Ff) and r? topa (1> to G), are also prominent and the argument for the
omission of thepa (G) applies as in the other two th?ts. Even in the principal
rag of this that, the heptatonic M?ya- k?-Tor?,sa (C) andpa (G) ate frequently
omitted.26 This is surely a further example of the impact of the asur?ntar
and ifone is going to classify r?gas in terms of families according tomusical
characteristics, then Gujr?Tor? should belong in the P?riy? family.
In Tor? That, the augmented fifthnow occurs between gal (El>) and ni
(B). To follow the chain of actions, making the ni (B) consonant to the gah
(B>) creates the hypothetical that and completes the Circle of Th?ts.27
Many more examples could be presented to show the impact of the
asur?ntar, the tritone/dimished 5th, on the melodic shapes of r?gs, but we
trust that the examples given above will suffice to convince the reader of the
importance of scalar features in the shaping of r?gs, especially in the evolution
of scale-types and the use of accidentals, and often also in the omission of
notes. In many cases one can also relate other rag features, such as
important
notes (v?di-samv?di) and oblique (vakra) motion to the exigencies of scale
and the tritone (see Jairazbhoy 1972).
Conclusion
The primary intent in this paper is to argue the case of scales and their
musical intervals as being primary determinants of rag evolution as well as
being responsible for the emergence of numerous melodic features of r?gs.
believe that rational explanations can be found formost present day musical
phenomena. Through the application of the theoretical concepts and the
systematic evidence presented here, perhaps Indian music theorymay once
again be revived and the search for explanations be stimulated.
Acknowledgments
Iwould like to acknowledge Dr. Amy Catlin-Jairazbhoy's immeasurable help in the preparation
of this article.
Notes
1.Written in 1784, first published in 1793. See Jones 1965.
2. John Levy, the well-known collector and recordist of Indian music, exemplified this at
titude and invited me to his flat in London one evening ca. 1968, where he played several pieces
on his clavichord which he had himself tuned to just intonation. He was in good company as
the famous acoustician, Hermann Helmholtz, is said to have been "quite emphatic in asserting
the superiority of music played in just intonation" (Backus [1969] 1977:146).
3.A similar view was expressed by the Indian writer, Bulwant Trimbuk Sahasrabudhe,
Honorary Secretary of the Poona Gayan Samaj in 1887: "In the piano and the several keyed
English instruments the natural scale is dreadfully abused and distorted by the method ofwhat
is called 'equal temperament.'" (c. 1877:16).
4. Other phenomena towhich the term Indo-Occidentalism might be applied are yoga and
transcendental meditation, inwhich both Western and Indian re-interpretation of traditional
practices have had similar synergistic effects.
5.The National Centre for Performing Arts inMumbai sponsored computer-based research
on intonation carried out by Dutch scholars under the direction of Bernard Bel and Wim van
der Meer for a number of years, with no published conclusion either negating or confirming
the findings of Jairazbhoy and Levy. Their computer-based research still continues, now with
the aim of establishing a system of precise notation for Indian music.
6. In this paper the spelling r?ga is reserved for Sanskrit and South Indian references, while
the spelling rag is used in the modern Hindi/Urdu context.The adoption of "r?ga" inmodern
North Indian contexts is another example of Indo-Occidentalism.
7. Notes that are sung or played less than a semitone flatter for expressive purposes. It is
usually applied to the flattening of the third and seventh, but sometimes also to the fifth.
8. Nehru is said to have referred to the harmonium as a "bastard" instrument.
9. Papers from these seminars were printed in theJournal of the Sangeet NatakAkademi
20,1971. See Sambamoorthy et al. (1971).
lO.The late B.C. Deva, a highly regarded scholar of Indian music, referred to the instrument
as the bane of Indian music and called it "a keyboard and tempered instrument and hence, by
itsvery structural necessity, incapable of producing gamaka (ornaments) and srutis" (1981:81)
and, like Fox Strangways (1914:16), suggested that itwas ruining the "traditionally good pitch
sense" of Indian musicians.
11. Nayar (1989:340) states: "Through these conferences he put the Hindus and theMuslims
on one platform, thus elevating music above caste, creed and religion." But
according to Bakhle,
Bhatkhande was an elitist Brahman and prejudiced against Muslims and describes him as one of
"India's most contentious, arrogant,polemical, contradictory, troubled, and troubling characters."
(2005:99). This is a characterization which I find inaccurate and unnecessarily offensive.
12. In South Indian music too, these same ten scales appear to be among the most popular
judging from the number o?janya r?gas in these melas (Catlin 2005). As in North Indian Tori
that, however, Shubhapantuvar?li {m?la 45) has fewer janya r?gas than the others.
13.The terms komal (flat), ttvar (sharp) and suddh (natural), refer to the positions of
specific notes, e.g., ga komal, ma t?var etc., but ifone had to express the interval between, for
instance, ga and pa, one can hardly refer to this interval as being ga komal, and so itwill be
referred to as a "minor third" in this paper.
14. See Jairazbhoy (1971:46) who has shown that thirty-two scales fulfill Bhatkhande's
definition of that.
15. As my mentor, Arnold Bake, referred to it,meaning that the sound was so unpleasant,
so terrible as tomake one break out in sweat or chills.
16. In this paper we are using the Indian sargam (cf. solf?ge) syllables in the text, viz. sa re
ga ma pa dha and ni which represent the suddh (natural) intervals equivalent to those in the
Western major scale. I have also added Western notes transposed to C in parentheses. These
are semitonally raised and lowered by theWestern symbols for sharp #and flat k In figures the
sargam syllables are further reduced to their initial consonants and capitalized, but when they
exceed the octave, lower case is used, with a dot above indicating the upper octave and a dot
below, the lower.
17. Brihaspati (1969:10) states quite emphatically that these four th?ts "do not have their
origin in the tradition of Bharata and Sarngadeva" but in some Muslim tradition which he calls
Indraprastha-mata. To the best of my knowledge, however, scales such as M?rv? and Tor? do
not have counterparts in the Near and Middle East.
18. Sometimes also called P?rv? Kaly?n, although some regard the two r?gs as being dif
ferent.
19. Powers' transcriptions are all in the key of D, resulting in such strange key signatures
as Bl??? G#Q formodern North Indian rag Tor?. Presumably he has chosen this key to show
continuity with the ancient scale sadj? of the s?gr?ma which was comparable to the Dorian or
D mode. Te Nijenhuis (1974) also uses the key of D for her transcriptions.
20.This follows the South Indian melakarta system inwhich r?gas are regarded zsjanyas
(generated) of janaka(progenitor) melas, scale types similar to th?ts.
21.Virtually this same expression is also used byWiddess (1995:33).
22. Asuras were not initially regarded as demons but acquired this character in the later
part of the Vedic period.
23. Usually the mai occurs in ascent and the ma natural in descent, the rag Bih?g being a
prominent exception.
24. Like the mas, the higher ni (i.e. The ni natural) occurs in ascent and the nil> generally
in descent.
25. Needless to say, the "aesthetes" object to the tempered system because it blurs pitch
distinctions such as those between the sharp of a lower note and the flat of a higher one.
26. Rag Multan?, another prominent rag in this that, does not exhibit the same melodic
features, but still reveals the impact of the r?-pa tritone, as some musicians claim to give the r?>
special treatment and make itflatter than normal.
27. A whole chapter is devoted to the Circle of Th?ts in Jairazbhoy ([1971] 1995).
References
Arnold, Alison, ed. 2000. Garland Encyclopedia of World Music. Vol. 5: South Asia. New York:
Garland Publishers.
Backus, John. [1969] 1977. The Acoustical Foundations ofMusic. 2d ed. New York: W.W Nor
ton.
Bake, Arnold. 1965. "The Music of India." In The New Oxford History ofMusic, Vol. 1, edited by
Egon Wellesz, 195-227. London: Oxford University Press.
Bakhle, Janaki. 2005. Two Men and Music: Nationalism in theMaking of an Indian Classical
Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bhandarkar, Devadatta Ramakrishna. 1912. "Contributions to the Study ofAncient Hindu Music."
The Indian Antiquary: A Journal of Oriental Research 41:157-64,185-95,254-65. Repr.
Delhi: Swati Publications, 1985.
Bharata-Muni. [2nd c. A.D.] 1961. The N?tysastra. Authorship ascribed to Bharata-Muni. English
translation by Manmohan Ghosh. Calcutta: Asiatic Society.Vol. 2, Chapters 28-36.
Bhatkhande,Visnu Narayan. 1910. Srimal Laksya Sang?tam. Hathras, U.P: Sang?t K?ry?lay (re
print, n.d.).
-. 1920-37.Hindusth?nt Sang?ta Paddhati: Kramik Pustak M?lik?. 6 vols. Hindi transla
tion from Marathi by L.N. Garg. Hathras, ?.P.: Sang?t K?ryal?y
-. A Comparative
[1930-1931]. Study of Some of the Leading Music Systems of the 15th,
16th, 17th and 18th Centuries. Bombay?: Bhalchandra Sitaram Sukthankar. Undated
reprint (post-1940). [Originally published in Lucknow: Sangeef].
-. 1934. A Short Historical Survey of theMusic of Upper India. Bombay: B.S. Sukthankar.
First published in Baroda: Indian Musicological Society, 1917.
-. 1957. Sang?t Sastra. 4 vols. Hindi translation from Marathi by L.N. Garg. Hathras, U.P:
Sang?t K?ry?lay.
Bor, Joep, ed., with Suvarnalata Rao, Wim van der Meerjane Harvey, co-authors. 1999. The Raga
Guide: A Survey of 74 Hindusthani Ragas. Rotterdam: Nimbus Records and Rotterdam
Conservatory of Music.
Brihaspati, K. C D. 1969. "Muslim Influences on Venkatamakhi and His School." Sangeet Natak
(Journal of the Sangeet Natak Akademi) 13:5-26.
Brown, Katherine Butler. 2003-2004. "The That System of Seventeenth-Century North Indian
R?gas: Preliminary Report on the Treatises of K?milkh?m." Asian Music 35(l):l-l6.
Catlin, Amy. 2005. Lecture notes distributed for course, Classical Music of India, April 13. Depart
ment of Ethnomusicology, UCLA.
Clements, E. [1913]. 1966. Introduction to the Study of Indian Music. Allahabad: Kitab Ma
hal.
Danielou, Alain. 1980. The R?ga-s ofNorthern Indian Music. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
First Indian edition, revised fromNorthern Indian Music. London 1949-54.
DeLone, Richard, P. 197'1.Music-Patterns and Style. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company.
Deva,B.Chaitanya. 1981. The Music of India: A Scientific Study New Delhi: Munshiram Mano
harlal.
Deval, K.B. 1910. The Hindu Musical Scale and the 22 Shrutis. Pune: Aryabhushan Press.
Ellis, Alexander. 1885. "On the Musical Scales of Various Nations." Journal of the Royal Society
of Arts 33.
Fox Strangways, A.H. 1914. The Music ofHindost?n. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Isacoff, Stuart. 2001. Temperament: The Idea That Solved Music's Greatest Riddle. New York:
Knopf.
Iyer,Pico. 2003. Abandon: A Romance. New Delhi: Penguin Books.
Jairazbhoy, Nazir Ali. [1971] 1995. The R?gs ofNorth Indian Music: Their Structure and Evolu
tion. First revised Indian edition. Bombay: Popular Prakashan.
-. 1972. "Factors Underlying Important Notes in North Indian Music." Ethnomusicology
16(1):63-81.
-. 1990. "The Beginnings of Organology and Ethnomusicology in theWest: V. Manillon,
A.Ellis and S.M. Tagore." Selected Reports in Ethnomusicology, 67-80. Los Angeles: UCLA
Ethnomusicology Publications.
Jairazbhoy, Nazir Ali, and A.W Stone. 1963. "Intonation in Present-day North Indian Classical Music."
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 21(l):119-32.
Jones,William. [1793] 1965. "On the Musical Modes of the Hindus." InHindu Music from Vari
ous Authors. 3d ed. Compiled by Sourindro MohunTagore, 125-60. Chowkhamba Sanskrit
Studies,Vol. 49.Varanasi, India: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office.
Levy, Mark. 1982. Intonation inNorth Indian Music. New Delhi: Biblia Impex Private Ltd.
Manuel, Peter. 1981. "The Evolution of Todi Raag-s in Indian Music "Journal of the Indian Mu
musicology.
-. 1992."Reinterpretations of Tradition in Hindustani Music: Omkarnath Thakur contra
Vishna Narayan Bhatkhande." In The Traditional Indian Theory and Practice ofMusic
and Dance, edited by Jonathan Katz, 9-51. Leiden: Brill Academic Publications.
Raja, Deepak. 2005. Hindustani Music: A Tradition in Transition. New Delhi: D.K. Printworld.
Ramakrishna Kavi, ed. 1956-64. N?tys?stra of Bharatamuni. Sanskrit. 4 vols. Baroda: Oriental
Institute.
Ruckert, George, and Richard Widdess. 2000. "Hindustani Raga." In Garland Encyclopedia of
World Music, Vol. 5: South Asia, edited by Alison Arnold, 64-88. New York: Garland Pub
lishers.
Sahasrabudhe, BulwantTrimbuk. ca. 1877. Hindu Music and the Gayan Samaj. Poona.
Sambamoorthy, P. 1959. A Dictionary of South Indian Music and Musicians. Madras: Indian
Music Publishing House.
-. I960. History of Indian Music. Madras: Indian Music Publishing House.
Sambamoorthy, P., RV Subramaniam, S.N. Ratanjankar,V.H. Deshpande, Dipali Nag, Jnan Ghosh,
and Premlata Sharma. 1971."AIR's Seminar on the Harmonium." Sangeet Natak (Journal
of the Sangeet Natak Akademi) 20:5-29.
Scholes, Percy A. 1956. Oxford Companion toMusic. 9th ed. London: Oxford University Press.
Sharma, Prem Lata. 1963. "Traditional Indian Musical Aesthetics. "Journal of theMusic Academy,
Madras 34:83-98.
Tagore, Rabindranath. 1961."Reminiscences."In Rabindranath Tagore, 1861-1961, 2-12.New
Delhi: Sangeet Natak Akademi.
Tagore, Sourindro Mohun, comp. [1882] 1965. Hindu Music from Various Authors. 3d ed.
Chowkhamba Sanskrit Studies, Vol. 49. Varanasi, India: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Of
fice.
te Nijenhuis, Emmie. 1974. Indian Music: History and Structure. Leiden: Brill.
van der Meer, Wim. 1980.Hindusthani Music in the 20th Century. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers.
Vaughn, Kathryn. 1993. "The Influence of theTambura Drone on the Perception of Proximity
among Scale Types inNorth Indian Music." Contemporary Music Review 9(l-2):21-33.
Wade, Bonnie. 1973. Review of Jairazbhoy, Nazir, "The R?gs of North Indian Music." Ethnomu
sicology 17(2):331-33.
Widdess, Richard. 1995. The R?gas of Early Indian Music: Modes, Melodies, and Musical Nota
tions from the Gupta Period to c. 1250. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
-. 2001. "Theory and Practice of Classical Music: Raga in Hindustani Music." The New
Grove Dictionary ofMusic and Musicians, 2d ed. ,Vol. 12, edited by Stanley Sadie, 181 -84.
London: Macmillan Publishers.
Willard, N. Augustus. [1834] 1965. "ATreatise on the Music of Hindoostan." InHindu Music
from Various Authors, 3d ed., compiled by Sourindro Mohun Tagore, 1-122. Chowkhamba
Sanskrit Studies,Vol. 49.Varanasi, India: Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office.
Discography
Narayan, Ram. Inde du nord: ragas du matin et du soir. Chatur Lai, tabla; Ram Narayan, sarangi.
10-inch LP. Paris: Boite a Musique BAM LD 094.