|
|
Appendix Four:
THE STRUCTURE OF
THE BIBLICAL MELOS
|
|
|
A. The Musical & Verbal Syntaxes
Haïk-Vantoura has recently demonstrated how the musical syntax (the "tonality") interacts with the
verbal syntax to create the biblical melos.1 Generalizing her conclusions, we may define
five musical and five verbal factors which
interact with quasi-mathematical precision. Their interaction is rather like that of ten numerical variables multiplied
together to form a unity -- and we have so represented their interaction in Figure 5.2 Without further analysis from a mathematical standpoint,
we cannot say more at this time.3
The ambitus or range of the melody, in
both prosody and psalmody, is about that of the normal human voice (an octave and a third), thanks to the melismas.
The polarity of the melodic line at any
point depends on its relative pitch within the ambitus. This is equivalent to the vocal "inflection",
the dynamics (loud and soft, high and low) of normal speech.
The axiality of the basic degrees is more
difficult to explain to the non-musician (or even to the musician unfamiliar with biblical music). It is in fact
indicated by the forms used by the sublinear signs. Axiality is not dependant on the "consonance" or
"dissonance" of the interval between any degree and the tonic, but on something more subtle: the cadential power of each degree, its ability to indicate
a melodic pause or linkage in various melodic contexts.
Haïk-Vantoura has described the axiality of the sublinear signs most commonly found (in prosody) at cadences.
We can generalize her conclusions to include all the sublinear signs in both systems, wherever they are found (Figure 6). "Axiality" means the direction of a point
from a center -- which makes us think (in mathematics) of Cartesian coordinates, as measured from a point of origin.
It so happens the te`amim are transcriptions
of gestures of the hand or fingers. Could these gestures tell us something, not only of the origins of the corresponding
written forms, but (in the case of the sublinear signs) the axialities of the scale degrees they represent?
After extensive experimentation (comparing the results with the verbal and melodic syntaxes in the Bible and the
graphic forms of the sub- and superlinear signs), I was able to determine the original hand-gestures representing
the sub- and superlinear degrees, made respectively by the left and right hand. The left-handed signs are made
by various combinations of rotations (to the left or right), transformations (forward or backward) and translations
(up or down) of the forms made by the hand. Plotted on a three-dimensional Cartesian graph, a systematic "axiality"
emerges, explaining visually the interrelationships of the sublinear graphic forms and the tonal relationships
between them.
In Figure
7, we use the written forms of the te`amim (as they appear in manuscripts) rather than the reconstructed original hand-gestures. For
both written and chironomic signs, the graphic forms of the signs and their symbolic interrelationships reflect
their "axiality". Notice that the most basic, "pivotal" degrees are all on the x-y plane, and either at the origin or on the x and y axes; all the others have more distant, indirect relationships with these and with each other.
For example, mehuppakh (axiality: "tension-attention")
is directly above darga (axiality: "gravity-foundation")
and at the opposite corner from tevir
(axiality: "relaxation-evasion").
Haïk-Vantoura describes the melodic texture
as the "diffused" effect of the axiality, given by a sequence of degrees leading to a cadence. Just as
the axiality of the degrees used at the major cadences indicate the major punctuation points (equivalent to periods,
commas, and semicolons), so the "texture" indicates (in both systems of te`amim) the equivalent of the minor points (question marks, exclamation points, colons, parentheses,
ellipses, quotation marks).
In fact, the texture indicates the verbal state:
its action-through-time, where not indicated by the words alone. This not only encompasses (in translation) the
minor punctuation points, but the definitions of the words, the "tense" of the verbal action, and the
hierarchy of poetic and choral structures. Really, the melodic line itself (especially through its texture) indicates
the four determinants of verbal meaning:
space, time, substance (or content) and causality.4
The ornamentation of the biblical melos is very specific too. Each melisma, taken as such,
has no axiality (though it does contribute to the polarity and texture), but it has an invariable effect wherever
it is found (Figure
8). For that matter, melodic "ornamentation" is not limited
to the melismatic signs as Haïk-Vantoura thinks; it includes the rhythmic combinations of all the signs in principle, includings groupings of sublinear
signs on one syllable (very common in psalmody). Here we limit ourselves only to the specific effects of the superlinear
(melismatic) signs.
Once again, we may generalize Haïk-Vantoura's analysis (self-limited to the superlinear signs) to encompass
the rhythmic and melodic syncopation of the entire melodic line, equivalent to the verbal accentuation (where not
otherwise apparent). In prosody (with the exception of the Song of Songs and -- to a lesser extent -- Isaiah 11:1-9,
among very few others), the rhythm of the melos
is "speech-rhythm"; in psalmody (and the prosodic texts mentioned above), "syllabic rhythm"
(one beat per syllable).
Haïk-Vantoura's analysis treats the modality
as the distance between the sublinear degrees in particular. In fact the "alterations" in the modality
are usually linked to both the sub- and superlinear cadential signs. Generalizing once again, the modality defines
the rhetorical emphasis of the words (where
not otherwise indicated). The distance of the various intervals between the degrees, and their relative "consonance"
or "dissonance", indicate the subtle ethos
or "moral force" of the melos
(e.g., the ability of the melody and words combined to influence character or behavior in the listener, or to enable
him to perceive the emotion and attitude of the biblical poet-composers).
B. A Musical "Sign-Language"
The "Tiberian" notation of te`amim
is actually a written "shorthand" of a series of gestures of the hands or fingers: a specific chironomy. Haïk-Vantoura devotes considerable space
in her book to its use in antiquity, in Egypt, Greece, Rome, Mesopotamia, in parts of Asia and in the Temple at
Jerusalem itself.5
While the ancient synagogues use various sorts of hand-signs to punctuate their oral readings, none have any direct
connection with the "Tiberian" notation. However, two of the early Masoretic treatises (in particular,
the one translated into French as the "Manuel du Lecteur") mention some of the original gestures (corresponding to a number of superlinear signs).
These gestures, like those known from the Talmud and ancient synagogue practice, were to be done with the right hand. (In the synagogue of Old Cairo in Egypt, however,
both hands may be used, together or in alternation, to mark the te`amim and the synagogue melodies they supposedly represent.)6
In biblical times, chironomy generally used both hands
in cooperation. Haïk-Vantoura wrote it would be "child's play" to reconstruct a working, two-handed
chironomy for the biblical notation.7
Those gestures actually preserved by the early treastises show exact correlations with the written form of the "Tiberian" signs, the etymology of their ancient names
and their original musical meanings. This is not true for any synagogal gestural systems known to us.
Given this information, I have reconstructed the entire original chironomy
behind the "Tiberian" notation.8
It is fully capable of representing the biblical melodies (if anything, more precisely than the written notation
itself).9 The left hand represents
the sublinear signs (by "fixed" gestures); the right hand, the superlinear signs (by "moveable"
gestures). Both sets of hand-signs derive from a clenched fist with the thumb on top. Such a fist represents a
"fixed tonic" (equivalent to siLouk,
the "origin" or "center of attraction" of the tonality) in the left hand, and a "movable"
or "floating tonic" (indicating the relative value of the melismas) in the right. The position of a superlinear
sign relative to a word is indicated by the "time of entry" of the appropriate hand-sign. The same applies
in essence to the position of a sublinear sign relative to a word (which may be "pre-positive", i.e.,
before the first syllable, in some cases). The reconstructed chironomy even takes into account a necessary correction
in the decipherment of one rare ta`am
in prosody,10 and also a specialized
problem in graphic form and terminology regarding a common psalmodic ta`am as it is found in manuscripts.11
Murals in Egypt show how ensembles of harps, flutes and other instruments (as well as singers) were conducted using
simple gestures of the hand. Since the Song of Songs (as in Haïk-Vantoura's arrangement) was likely accompanied
by harp and flute, one surmises its performance would have had some similarities to its Egyptian parallels (at
least in appearance). But how much different a Chinese orchestra playing Chinese music, led by a modern conductor,
sounds from a Western orchestra playing Western music -- even if the orchestras use the same instruments! So while
the Song of Songs was evidently based on technical norms similar to the royal love songs of Egypt, the similarities
in spirit especially likely ended there.
Indications both from Jewish history and tradition and parallel practices in ancient Babylonian and early Christian
liturgy suggest ancient liturgical music was preserved in writing and taught orally (via chironomy). In most cases,
neither the oral nor the written music has survived. Even the original biblical cantillation seems to have survived
underground (perhaps even literally, in a cave). How blessed we are that the right person at the right time, with
the right gifts and training, using the right "virtual bilingual" and starting from the right starting
premise, has brought it once again to light! |
|
|
|
FOOTNOTES
1. Haïk-Vantoura, Message biblique intègral dans son chant rétrouvée
(Paris: Fondation Roi David, 1992).
2. Set theory (especially as pertaining
to linguistics) would probably be more effective (and more accurate) in describing the relationships between the
musical and verbal syntaxes.
3. The quasi-mathematical model we present here is to be judged according to its inevitable limitations.
We cannot yet propose a model that is truly
mathematical in all respects, like that derived by computer analysis of the te`amim under the Masoretic paradigm.
4. We find these determinants --
the very ones which define our physical "space-time continuum" -- in Genesis 1:1 (melody and words),
the "origin" of the biblical melos.
This reminds us of several biblical statements: God created the Universe by His Word.
5. Cf. Haïk-Vantoura, The Music of the Bible Revealed, Part One, Chapter III.
6. Professor Saul Levin produced
a film showing such gestures (The Traditional Chironomy of Hebrew Scripture, 1966). However, they do not correlate with the original gestures recorded (in part) in the
early treatises on the notation. While the gestures documented from the Old Cairo community use both hands, they
obviously imitate the forms of the te`amim
in printed texts and do not distinguish between sublinear and superlinear signs.
7. Haïk-Vantoura, op. cit., pp. 87-88, 103.
8. Haïk-Vantoura, on examining
the gestures, described them as "ingenious and judicious".
9. It states, in effect, much of what the highly abbreviated written notation implies.
10. Haïk-Vantoura understood
this sign (we believe, incorrectly) as the 2nd sublinear degree followed by an appogiatura to the 3rd sublinear degree. In effect, she defined the sign as if it were a contraction of
two te`amim: the sublinear merkha followed by the superlinear pashta on the same syllable [F(#)-G(#)]. (Cf. her English book, pp. 277-278.) Yet this combination
of te`amim is never found in any musical-verbal
contexts parallel to those in which merkha kefulah
is found. Moreover, Haïk-Vantoura's assumption makes the underlying chironomic gesture difficult to reconstruct,
and even more difficult to justify. We owe to Dr. James D. Price this clarification: merkha
kefulah (musically and syntactically) is a contraction of tevir and merkha on one syllable [D(#)-F(#)]. It thus gives a powerful sense of "contraction" or
"focusing", even if the melody is in fact a "double prolonging"; its placement on one syllable
is responsible for the apparent paradox.
11. This sign is defined as one
ta`am with one name by Haïk-Vantoura,
and as two (named tsiNor and tsiNorit) by
the medieval treatises. In fact, though the basic meaning of the signs remains the same (demonstrating it is but
one ta`am), its musical functions and
resolutions (and therefore its precise original gestural form) vary somewhat according to its position (as is consistent
with the slightly different written forms used to mark it in manuscripts). The name tsiNor is given by the treatises when it is found at the end of a word; tsiNorit, when it is found on the beginning or middle of a word.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Updated December 27, 2011 |
|
|
