|
|
|
|
|
Please have patience while this page is loading; the content is
worth the wait!
|
|
|
| N.B.: A WinZip
(.zip) archive (17.9 MB) containing a PowerPoint Presentation (.ppt) and
sound files (.mp3) summarizing the historical and musical background to Suzanne
Haïk-Vantoura's work may be downloaded via
this link. |
|
|
|
|
This page contains the first complete publication of my reconstruction of the
chironomy ("the hands of" David and the other
Psalmists as well as of the biblical authors generally) behind the written te`amim of the Masoretic
Text. In the past, I have put working versions of the system on video (no longer available to the public), and
have demonstrated the gestures to academic and popular audiences alike. Never before, however, have I been able
to photograph all the gestures of the system and illustrate their motions as modern digital technology allows me
to do. (The photographs of the gestures themselves were taken by Everett Oakley, using a digital camera. My apologies
to any Jewish readers; the tallit or prayer shawl is merely "for glory and for beauty," and for illustration
purposes...)
Before we begin, we need to remind ourselves that the Talmuds and other early Jewish sources speak of "te`amim",
as marked by gestures, such as were used in the synagogue service. Were these gestures really the same as those
that lie behind our Masoretic notation? |
|
|
|
|
If the "te`amim" of the early synagogues and the te`amim of the Temple were
the same in principle (as nearly everyone since the days of the Talmudists have alleged), then we should expect
at least some uniformity in what gestures are used in the synagogues today, and in how they correspond to the written
signs in the Masoretic Text.
Such conformity is the last thing we actually find. Like the synagogue melodies themselves, the chironomic signs
used to accompany them differ from community to community. On the left we have an illustration taken from "Masoretic
Accents (Melodic Rendition)" in Encyclopedia Judaica
(column 1099). The original source is an article by Israel Adler, "Histoire de la musique religieuse juive,"
in J. Porte (ed.), Encyclopédie des musiques sacrées (Vol. 1, 1968, pp. 472-473). As the Encyclopedia Judaica puts it, these are "[hand] movements indicating the accents and their melody, used as
memory aids and prompting signs for the reader. Shown here are the movements still practiced in Rome. Several other
communities preserve relics of a similar practice, although the movements are not identical" (ibid.). Notice that not only are a number of te`amim not
given a gesture, but the same gesture apparently serves for several written signs. Moreover, only the middle gesture
seems to have any correspondence with the form of one of the written signs it allegedly represents (zarqa).
The film The Traditional Chironomy of Hebrew Scripture
by Saul Levin (filmed in Israel in 1966 and sent to me by Prof. Levin as a video in 1993) shows the chironomies
used by three different Jewish communities. None of the chironomies are alike, though a very few gestures are the
same as or similar to those documented in medieval sources (see below). Two of the chironomies use only one hand
(in keeping with the Talmudic indications), though that used by the community of Old Cairo uses both hands. In that chironomy, however, the hands simply
alternate, drawing or placing figures
against the back of the cantor. In none of these chironomies is any distinction made between the sublinear and
superlinear signs, nor any account taken of the nuanced
positions of certain written signs relative to the words or syllables.
Obviously, the knowledge as to what gestures were used in the Temple has been lost and/or corrupted by the synagogue
communities. This means that the chironomy behind the "Tiberian" notation must be reconstructed, just
as the melodic meaning of that notation had to be reconstructed. But how? |
|
|
|
|
Mine is not the first attempt to reconstruct the gestures that the "Tiberian"
te`amim transcribe. In a pamphlet called The Roots of Biblical Chant by Richard Neumann (Board of Jewish Education of Greater New York, 1982), we find the following
gestures, the Hebrew or Aramaic names given by cantors to the written signs that the gestures allegedly represent,
and the melodic motives attached to the written signs by the modern Ashkenazic form of Torah cantillation. (The
sign silluq is often called sof pasuq, a name more properly applied to the two dots found at the end of every verse
in the Masoretic Text. Likewise, atnah
is sometimes called by the Aramaic name etnahta.)
Neumann tells us: "The Torah is chanted in a traditional melody which originates from the melodies chanted
by the Levites in the Second Temple." He cites the Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot
62c (which refers to Nehemiah 8:8), as proof of this. (We have already addressed the alleged relationship between the cantillation
of the Temple and those of the synagogue communities.) He goes on: "One of the functions of the Levites was
to teach the worshipers [sic] the weekly portion of the Torah on Mondays and Thursdays, in preparation for the
chanting on the following Shabbat. Their method was to use hand-signs. (See Rashi's
Commentary to B. Berakhot 62a.) Each hand-sign signified a specific musical
melody (or motif) for the correct accentuation and chanting of single words or groups of words. Gradually, the
people became familiar with these hand-signs, very much the way people with impaired hearing learn to understand
a hand-sign language" (op. cit.,
p. 1).
"This booklet" (we are asked to believe) "contains samples of a few actual hand-signs and their
development into the te`amim found in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) today" (p. 2). Nowhere does Neumann give the
slightest evidence for this assertion -- nor even for their connection with any chironomy used by the synagogues!
Moreover, he claims that in the days of the Second Temple, "there was no musical script known to the peoples
of the Middle East," a claim which we now know to be false. Going on: "Therefore, we can safely say that
the Levitic [sic] hand-signs are the only surviving equivalent of musical notations from ancient times in those parts
of the world. This is the source of our modern Torah chanting. The melodic motifs, of course, changed with the
musical evolution of our tonality (or scale), in different eras and various geographical areas" (p. 2).
In the light of what we now know about the history of tonality, chironomy, written notation, and synagogue chant,
it is simply amazing that such claims can still be made. Given the evidence (or rather the total lack of it) given
for the historical validity of even a single hand-sign given above, Neumann's table can be dismissed as being without
foundation. The hand-signs he proposes have the same post hoc (and often vague) relationship to the forms and names of the written signs that the Ashkenazic
melodic motifs do. Once again, the sublinear and superlinear positions of the written signs are not accounted for,
nor are the nuanced positions of the written
signs relative to the words or syllables.
|
|
|
|
|
"It would really be child's play," wrote Haïk-Vantoura, "to reconstitute
a workable chironomy as the basis for the Tiberian notation. But who would ever dream of doing it?" (op. cit., p. 87). Naturally, I took this statement as
a challenge -- and upon examining the available evidence, I concluded that the original chironomy could be reconstructed
with the same precision as the musical meaning of the notation that transcribes it (see my footnote to the above
reference, p. 93).
The photograph of myself on the left illustrates the "rest positions" of the hands of the cantor-chironomist,
as they are held at the end of every verse and (by default) at the beginning of every verse where no written sign
is indicated in the text. The left (lower)
hand makes gestures corresponding to the sublinear
written signs; the right (upper) hand
makes gestures corresponding to the superlinear
written signs.
We have actual descriptions in medieval Hebrew (in the Diqduqê ha-Te`amim by Aharon ben Asher, ca. 930 A.D., and in the 12th-century
Manuel
du Lecteur or "Reader's Manual" (translated into French by Jules
Derenbourg), for the gestures corresponding to many of the superlinear written signs. (The sole description that
I recall is given by the Diqduqê ha-Te`amim
concerns the gesture represented by the superlinear sign shalshelet; unfortunately, I do not yet have a copy of
the Hebrew text or of an exact translation of it, so I cannot verify
or refute my memory here.) Following is a table of the descriptions given in the Manuel du Lecteur for a number of the gestures represented
by specific superlinear signs, and of one
gesture for a category of written signs
(Jules Derenbourg, "Manuel du Lecteur", in Journal Asiatique, Oct.-Nov.-Dec. 1870, pp. 416, 492-493). Note that the Manuel
du Lecteur sometimes gives Aramaic forms of the names of the te`amim where
other treatises give Hebrew forms, or give abbreviated or even alternative names in Hebrew (like
qarnê farah,
"horns of a bullock", as inspired by the mere form of pazer gadol). |
|
|
|
Names of each
ta`am
|
Hebrew description of gesture behind
the written sign
|
Translation by John Wheeler
|
|
tsinnori*
(zarqa)
|
|
snatching it [the word] with a single finger
|
|
segolah*
(segolta)
|
|
fanning out with three fingers in front of him
|
|
shofar*
(several te`amim)**
|
|
making two of his fingers to sway to and fro with a short swing
|
|
pazer*
(pazer qaton)
|
|
a large swing with two of his fingers
|
|
qarnê farah*
(pazer gadol)
|
|
fanning out with two of his fingers upward
|
|
talshah*
(telisha gedolah)
|
|
snatched with the finger(s?)
|
|
zaqef qaton*
(zaqef qaton)
|
|
with the finger(s?) from above to beneath
|
|
teres*
(geresh)
|
|
seizing the word to the rear
|
|
talshah*
(telisha qetannah)
|
|
drawing out the word to the rear
|
| *The first name is that found in the Manuel du Lecteur. The second name is that found in "standard"
grammatical tables (such as that of Yeivin, op. cit.),
as well as in Haïk-Vantoura's key. The sole exception is pazer gadol, which Haïk-Vantoura did not take as a single ta`am. Thanks to the form of the grapheme in the Letteris Edition and most other printed editions,
she took pazer gadol as simply
a combination of telisha qetannah
and telisha gedolah. From all evidences,
however, pazer gadol does seem
to be such a musical combination. |
| **The "shofar" accents
in prosody include munah, mehuppakh
and the so-called "yetiv" (which is simply mehuppakh in another place under Haik-Vantoura's key). |
|
|
It appears from these descriptions, the forms of the written signs and the melodic meanings
given to them by Haïk-Vantoura's "key" that the written superlinear signs represent the forms of
the gestures made by the right hand as the cantor-chironomist, not the audience,
would see them. As another general principle, one
finger (or, as we will see, one joint
of a finger) indicates one note.
The only indication the Manuel gives us
for the gestures behind the sublinear te`amim concern the so-called "shofar"
te`amim, so-called because
of their shapes as found in manuscripts. These include the various "types" of
munah, mehuppakh, and the so-called "yetiv", as defined in the Masoretic paradigm via
their different grammatical positions. (Presumably, the Manuel is concerned here only with the gestures allegedly corresponding to these signs in prosody,
not with that corresponding to the superlinear sign `illuy in psalmody.) With these "shofar" signs, we
are told simply to trace with two fingers the shape of whatever written sign is involved. But such a gesture would
be consistent with the sublinear signs representing groups of notes, not sustained notes
as in Haïk-Vantoura's "key". A sustained note would more reasonably be represented by a sustained gesture, such as we see documented in Egyptian, Mesopotamian and other ancient forms of chironomy.
It appears therefore that the Manuel reflects
on this point a loss or corruption of
information (as one typically finds in the synagogue traditions) -- all the more in that one
gesture or genre of gesture is uniquely made to stand for
more than one ta`am (even as defined by the Masoretic paradigm).
Let us consider next the literal meaning of the name tifha
("handbreath, span of four fingers"), one of the most common of the sublinear signs. The name (in its
most basic sense) refers to a hand held flat, with the palm facing down. In Haïk-Vantoura's "key", the sign called
tifha represents the third degree above the tonic. It is reasonable to infer that this sign's name
reflects the sustained gesture that it
actually represents. It is also reasonable, therefore, to infer that all the other sublinear signs represents gestures
of a similar nature, and that the forms of the written signs relate in some way to those of the gestures (in principle,
as the cantor-chironomist, not the audience, would see them). Moreover, one would expect the forms of the gestures to be as simple yet as evocative as
possible; even the movement of muscle against bone as the hand and fingers turn can be symbolically suggestive
to a sensitive individual.
The descriptions of the gestures for telisha gedolah and zaqef qaton pose their own special problems. The word
b'tsb` used in the original Hebrew of these descriptions is singular; yet Derenbourg translated the word as plural ("de doigts", "of the fingers": p. 492). Nevertheless, where the Manuel describes a gesture that requires an exact number of fingers (one, two or three), it generally
says so specifically (see above); and Derenbourg translated the descriptions accordingly.
It appears (if we may take Derenbourg's translation at face value) that we are dealing with a medieval
Hebrew idiom, where the singular form may stand for the plural form if the
number is not specified. In such cases, how many fingers are involved must be reconstructed from an examination
of the written signs. Now Derenbourg's translation of the gesture for
telisha gedolah is inexact ("agitation de doigts" or "agitation of the fingers",
rather than the more literal "snatched with the fingers"); and a few of his other translations (such
as that of the description of the gesture for zarqa) are likewise over-generalized. Nevertheless, both the original
Hebrew text and Derenbourg's French translation of it provided me with valuable clues as to the reconstruction
of the original chironomy.
Leaving telisha gedolah aside for now, let us compare next the written sign
zaqef qaton with the gesture it is
said to transcribe. The written sign has two dots,
one above the other, corresponding to two notes
in Haïk-Vantoura's "key". One would therefore expect (in the original gesture) a downward motion
of two fingers -- not of one finger.
Segolta has such an exact correspondence:
three dots equal three fingers equal three notes.
If the superlinear sign preceding segolta is munah
(B), then the motif represented by segolta is A-B-A. The two lower dots (or the two lower fingers in the corresponding
gesture) correspond to the two A's, each of which are one degree below B. The upper dot (or finger) in
segolta
(or its corresponding gesture) thus corresponds to a return to B: the very degree represented by
munah (or its gesture).
The symbolism of segolta thus sheds light on the symbolism of
zaqef qaton. "Certainly this sign of double
dots [as Haïk-Vantoura explains] would symbolize the transient digression to the lower
neighboring second [with reference to the sustained degree of the melody]"
(op. cit., p. 240) -- just as
segolta
with its three dots symbolizes two such digressions with a return to the sustained degree inserted between them. The lower dot in
zaqef qaton therefore represents
the degree below the sustained degree to which the melody goes, and the upper dot the sustained degree to which
the melody returns. Why then should there not have been consistency in the original system
of gestures -- so that
two dots represented two fingers (the index and second fingers, most likely),
which represented two notes?
Again, in the related ta`am called pazer gadol we have a vertical line, which shows that the motion of the curved line that feeds into it (and therefore of the gesture represented by the curved line) is eventually
downward. The curved line rejoins the
vertical line in the middle, as if what it represents makes it "halfway to its melodic destination" before
it resolves into the sustained degree. As it happens, the original gesture involves a swing of two fingers upward, then downward again. According to Haïk-Vantoura's key, the written sign represents a leap of two degrees upward from the sustained degree, and then
a return downward of one
degree. This melodic movement is aptly represented by the original gesture
behind the written sign. Meanwhile, zaqef gadol (which combines a vertical
line with two dots)
symbolizes a descent of two degrees from
the sustained degree before the return to the sustained degree. Should this not therefore be represented by a gesture
of two fingers representing two notes,
followed by a short descent by that gesture?
Finally, there is the matter of the "rest positions" of both hands. Whether the gestures are in the left
or the right hand, they need to start from and end up somewhere. Since the tonic ends every verse in principle, and is the default degree beginning every
verse (unless another degree is present), it is natural that the gesture indicating the tonic degree should also
be the "rest position" of the left hand. But what of the "rest position" of the right hand? The gestures it makes (as consistent with
Haïk-Vantoura's "key" for the written signs) are always relative in pitch to that pitch represented
by whatever gesture is being made by the left hand at the time. Moreover, the right-handed gestures represent musical
values that last for one syllable only, or even for part of a syllable only; when the next syllable comes, something must be done with the right hand to "keep
it out of the way". |
|
|
In reconstructing the complete system
of gestures, I had to take all these factors and more
into account. Like Mme. Haïk-Vantoura, I had to propose numerous hypotheses as to the meaning of one or another
sign, and test those hypotheses against the indications of the written text. Sometimes the form of a written sign
in manuscripts differs slightly from its form in any printed edition; this often gave valuable clues to the nature
of the gesture behind the written sign. Different sequences of signs in the text, translated into gestures, posed
different tests for the validity of a given hypothesis: Did one gesture move smoothly into another? What did the
"muscle sense" of the movement evoke? Did the form of a proposed gesture correlate with the form of the
corresponding written sign and with the graphical logic of the written system as a whole? Did the form of the gesture,
or of an ensemble of gestures, suggest to the eye what the melody deciphered by the written signs indicated to
the ear?
Far from being "child's play", the reconstruction of the biblical chironomy proved rather daunting. It
took me four years of work, on and off, before I was certain I had it worked out correctly in all essentials. Exodus
20 (with its complex combination of sublinear and superlinear signs) was a crucial test; but so were many other
portions of Scripture. What finally convinced me, oddly enough, that I had "gotten it right" was one
of the musically simplest, yet most haunting of biblical passages: Psalm 67 ("May God be gracious to us and bless us..."), as found on the Volume 3 CD (see
Recordings). There, the gracefulness and ease of the movements of the left hand especially matched perfectly
with the like character of the melody on which the movements were "mapped".
In effect, the "rest positions" of the left and right hands represent a fixed
"do" and a moveable "do", respectively. The left hand's "rest position" represents the fixed
degree against which all the pitches of the scale are measured, while the
right hand's "rest position" represents the mutable degree against which the pitches of all the ornamentations are measured. With one rare exception,
the gestures made by the left hand are sustained
gestures (the one exception being simply a combination of two other sustained gestures, produced one after the
other on one syllable). The gestures made by the right hand, by contrast, are in principle moving gestures. For both sublinear and superlinear written signs, one
dot in a written sign represents one digit (thumb or finger) present in the hand gesture.
The following texts and tables summarize the reconstruction of the
biblical chironomy. First, this page gives two vertical tables
indicating the sublinear written signs and their corresponding gestures
in the prose and poetic systems, respectively. (One uncommon sublinear sign,
merkha kefulah, is discussed along with merkha.) In these
tables, I have put the gestures in descending order, and as viewed by the audience
rather than by the cantor-chironomist. The scales represented by these gestures
are likewise given in descending order, and assume the use of the fundamental modes of the two accent systems.
Immediately following these tables is a brief discussion of the ambitus (range) of the biblical melodies and their accompaniment. After
this are two more vertical tables detailing the superlinear written
signs and their corresponding gestures in both the prose and poetic
systems. A discussion of the geometric relationships between certain sublinear written signs and certain superlinear
written signs with analogous forms, and what those relationships imply about their corresponding gestures, then
follows. Finally, there is a brief MPEG clip showing how the two hands cooperate to conduct psalmody, followed
by a few closing comments. |
|
|
| Immediately following are the reconstructed gestures corresponding to the common
sublinear te`amim in both the prosodic
and psalmodic systems. Click on a thumbnail photograph to get a pop-up window with an enlarged photo of the gesture
and a descriptive written text. (The fundamental mode for each system is assumed in the solfege.) Medium blue is
used to represent the sublinear written signs. |
|
|
|
The Sublinear Signs and Corresponding
Gestures
|
|
Prosodic System
|
Psalmodic System
|
|
Mehuppakh (C')
|
|
Mehuppakh (C') |
|
|
Munah (B)
|
|
Munah (B)
|
|
|
Atnah (A)
|
|
Atnah (A)
|
|
|
Tifha (G)
|
|
Tifha (G)
|
|
|
Merkha (F)*
|
|
Merkha (F#)
|
|
|
Silluq (E)
|
|
Silluq (E)
|
|
|
Tevir (D)
|
|
Galgal (D#)**
|
|
|
Darga (C)
|
|
|
|
* See this window for a photograph
and description of the uncommon ta`am
called merkha kefulah ("double
merkha").
|
|
** Galgal is also found uncommonly in the prosodic system, always with the uncommon superlinear ta`am called pazer gadol.
|
|
|
|
|
The ambitus
or range of the biblical melodies (whether in prose or in psalmody)
is eleven degrees
(the seven or eight degrees defined by the sublinear signs plus
those added by the superlinear signs). Just as the string band of
the Celtic harp (left) defines the degrees of
a diatonic or diatonic-chromatic scale without indicating its
modality to the eye directly,
so do the written signs in the biblical text and their corresponding
gestures. (The biblical ambitus, as mapped onto the string band of the Celtic
harp, is indicated by the light blue dots.)
Assuming a tonic note of E above middle C (where the fourth finger
of the hand is placed in the photo on the left) and the basic mode
of prosody, the ambitus is from the red string two strings below the
fourth finger (middle C) to the dark blue string five strings above
the thumb (F'). In the mode of prosody, then, the ambitus of the
vocal melody would be as follows:
C-D-E-F-G-A-B-C'-D'-E'-F' (E = tonic degree) |
|
|
|
|
On a ten-stringed lyre, tuned to a
non-gapped diatonic or diatonic-chromatic scale, it seems most
likely to me that the ambitus would not be merely that of the
biblical vocal melody with one degree missing, but would allow for
the creation of the "root position" chords that the accompaniment of
psalmody especially seems to demand. (See The Biblical Musical Instruments
for more on this.) In the photo on the left, the hand spans the
entire instrumental ambitus (bounded by the light blue dots)
proposed for a ten-stringed lyre (kinnor)
normally used to accompany the biblical chant. Once again, the basic
mode of prosody is assumed:
a-b-C-D-E-F-G-A-B-C' (E = tonic degree) |
|
|
| Immediately following are the reconstructed gestures corresponding to the superlinear
te`amim (common and rare) used in
prose
and psalmody. Click on a thumbnail photograph to get a pop-up window with an enlarged photo of the gesture and
a descriptive written text. Light blue is used to represent the superlinear written signs. White arrows are used
to show the motion(s) of the hand, finger(s) or thumb. |
|
|
|
The Superlinear Signs and Corresponding
Gestures
|
|
Prosodic System
|
Psalmodic System
|
|
Pashta
|
|
Pashta
|
|
|
Geresh
|
|
Geresh
|
|
|
Gershayim
|
|
|
|
Pazer Qaton
|
|
Pazer Qaton
|
|
|
Pazer Gadol
|
|
|
|
Zaqef Qaton
|
|
|
|
Zaqef Gadol
|
|
|
|
Revia
|
|
Revia Qaton
|
|
|
Segolta
|
|
|
|
Zarqa
|
|
Tsinnor
|
|
|
Telisha Qetannah
|
|
|
|
Telisha Gedolah
|
|
|
| |
`Illuy
|
|
| |
`Oleh Veyored
|
|
|
Shalshelet
|
|
Shalshelet
|
|
|
|
|
The analogous superlinear signs (intervals upward)
|
|
Pashta (2nd)
|
Geresh (3rd)
|
`Illuy (5th)
|
`Oleh veyored (4th)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merkha (2nd)
|
Tifha (3rd)
|
Munah (5th)
|
Mehuppakh (6th)
|
|
The analogous sublinear signs (degrees of the mode)
|
|
The attentive reader will have noticed that some sublinear signs have forms and (generally)
meanings analogous to those of some superlinear signs. There is also the matter of analogy
of orientation to consider. In two cases (as between
merkha and pashta, tifha and
geresh), the analogy of orientation is that of
a "mirror image" (reflection), or else of reversal
of direction. The analogy of orientation between
mehuppakh and `oleh veyored
cannot be that of reversal, though it
might be that of reflection. But what
of the analogy of orientation between munah
and `illuy, which is neither that of reversal nor of reflection? They (and quite possibly
mehuppakh and `oleh veyored
as well) seem simply to have an analogy of translation
-- as if the sublinear written signs were simply moved
from below the words to above the words. What do these nuances signify? |
While Haïk-Vantoura did discuss the analogies of form between the various written signs at considerable length in her book, she never addressed
fully the analogies of orientation. To
claim reasonable certainty in my reconstruction of the original chironomy (and for that matter, to make sure the
decipherment of the written notation was truly complete), I believed these nuances of orientation had to be accounted
for. Correspondence on my part with the author and her translator did not bring a satisfactory resolution to the
problem. I was left to draw my own conclusions.
I noted that in various forms of ancient chironomy (the Etruscan, the Sumerian,
and even the Egyptian), the precise
orientation of one hand to the other was not the overriding factor in the symbolism of the gestures. What was the overriding factor was the orientation of the geometric
figures that the gestures represented. In the Etruscan chironomy in particular, both the husband and the wife are
making the same gestures, yet only the wife has one hand directly above the other. The husband does hold one hand
in a higher position than the other, but not one directly above the other. The geometric relationship between the
gestures, however, remains unchanged. Likewise, it appears that in the biblical chironomy, the turning of one hand
in the opposite direction from the other (as in the photographs on this page) is not the deciding factor in the
symbolism of the gestures. Rather, the hands may be turned in whatever direction is comfortable or convenient,
without affecting the geometry of the figures which their gestures represent.
In effect, the geometric relationships between the above written signs, sublinear
and superlinear, reflects those between the gestures that the written signs transcribe.
First, we observe that the gestures for merkha and tifha
both use hands horizontally extended,
the one turned palm-upward and the other
palm-downward; and the same is true of
the gestures for pashta and geresh. Next, the gestures for
munah and `illuy both use hands vertically extended, as do the gestures for mehuppakh and `oleh veyored. Finally, while the analogous hand-gestures made by the left and right hands are mirror-images of each other, the same is not always true
of the geometric figures which these hand-gestures
describe. The gesture represented by merkha describes a figure (a palm with the thumb on the left) which is a reflection
of the figure described by the gesture represented by pashta (a palm with the thumb on the right). Meanwhile, the gesture represented by tifha describes a figure (a palm with the thumb on the right) which is a reflection
of the figure described by the gesture represented by pashta (a palm with the thumb on the left). Whereas the gesture represented by munah describes a figure which is identical to the figure represented by the gesture for `illuy (both have the thumb on the top); and the same is true for the gestures represented
by mehuppakh and `oleh veyored (both have the thumb on the bottom). Again, this is so because the geometric figures described by the gestures are horizontal (in the case of the gestures represented by
merkha and pashta, tifha and
geresh) or
vertical (in the case of the gestures
represented by munah and
`illuy, mehuppakh
and `oleh veyored).
Thus by simple, elegant turns of the corresponding written signs, the geometric relationships between the original
chironomic gestures were preserved. These physical features of the notation, among others, make one think that
the notation was intentionally designed
to allow the accurate preservation and (if need be) reconstruction of the chironomic and tonal systems that lie
behind it. This should be no surprise, as early and medieval musicians who read from gestures or written
neumes
were habitually expected to reconstruct the melodic lines and modalities without direct indications of either.
These factors were indicated by the relationship of the gestural or notational syntax to that of the verbal text,
and were often self-evident (as was the
case much later in the Renaissance, regarding the proper application of musica
ficta). |
|
|
|
|
How would the biblical chironomy work in practice? Thanks to modern digital technology,
I can present to you an MPEG movie clip (about twelve seconds long) demonstrating how a highly characteristic series
of te`amim in psalmody would have appeared in gestural form. I chose Psalm
98:9a ("Before the LORD, for he comes to judge the earth..."), not
only for its melodic beauty, but because when it is conducted by means of chironomy, the cooperation of both hands
is readily apparent. (The movie was taken by Everett Oakley with the same digital camera that produced the photos
of the biblical gestures.)
I hope you will forgive the vocal quality (or lack thereof); I am not a professional singer, and my voice was not
fully warmed up! NOTE: If you cannot play this file on your computer using
the plug-in to the left, you may download the file via this link. |
|
|
|
|
Thus, a genuine "art music" could have been conducted via a simple series of
two-handed gestures. A simple vocal and/or instrumental "harmony" (heterophony) could also have been conducted by the same means, through the use of different gestures by
different chironomists.
With the Web publication of this gestural system (which Haïk-Vantoura herself, in a letter to me, called "ingenious
and judicious"), I can now "die happy". It may be a long time before I can put it in some commercially
available form (such as an instructional video or book). But if something should happen to me henceforth (and one
never knows), the reconstructed chironomy behind the te`amim need not be irretrievably lost, so long as this Web site is up and running.
(N.B.: The complete system of signs has
now been published as part of
The
Biblical Chant Library.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
