Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-ftpnm Total loading time: 0.369 Render date: 2021-09-20T05:17:26.632Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Çargâh in Turkish classical music: history versus theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 December 2009

Extract

If there has been one dominant, quasi-official theory for Turkish classicalmusic in the second half of the twentieth century, it is that particularlyassociated with Ezgi and Arel. Their notational conventions have becomestandard, supplanting earlier norms, and the framework they developed is theone still employed in recent general accounts of the modal system, whether thesimplified introductory survey of Yilmaz (1983), for example, or the moredetailed and comprehensive coverage of Ozkan (1984). Both of these follow theanalytical models provided by their predecessors, and begin with an expositionofintervals and the various species of tetrachord and pentachord formed from them before moving on to describe the structure of the makams themselves. Thesequence interval, scale, mode, nevertheless forms a conceptual continuum: theintervals denned are restricted to those deemed to occur in Turkish classicalmusic, and the nomenclature of the various species, for all that they appear asabstract assemblages of intervals, identifies them with characteristic segments ofwell-known and important makams.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

al-Bāḳī, Abd. tedḳīiḳ ve taḥīḳ. Istanbul Üniversitesi KÜtÜphanesi MS T 5572.Google Scholar
Akinci, L. K 1963. Garpli gözÜyle tÜrk musikisi. Istanbul: Doǧan GÜneş Yayinlari.Google Scholar
Alaner, B. 1986: Osmanh imperatorluǧǧǧǧu 'ndan gÜnÜmÜze belgelerle mÜzik (nota) yayincthǧi(18761986)/Music publications from Ottoman Empire up today 18761986 [sic]. (Belgelerle tÜrk mÜzik tarihi dizisi, 1.) Ankara: Anadol Yayincihk.Google Scholar
Ufḳī, All. mecmÜ'a-i saz Ü söz. British Library MS Sloane 3114 (published in facsimile in Elcin, 1976).Google Scholar
Allāh Wīrdī, M. H. 1949. falsafat al-mÜsīqā al-šarqiyya. Damascus.Google Scholar
Arel, H. S. 1968: Türk musikisi nazariyati dersleri. Istanbul: İleri Turk Konservatuan Yayinlan.Google Scholar
Belviranh, A. K. 1975. MÛsikî rehberi: dînî MÛsikî. Konya: Nedve Yayinlan.Google Scholar
Berner, A. 1937. Studien zur arabischen Musik auf Grund der gegenwärtigen Theorie und Praxis in Ägypten. (Schriftenreihe des Staatlichen Instituts für deutsche Musikforschung, 2.) Leipzig: Fr. Kistner & C. F. W. Siegel.Google Scholar
Demetrius, Cantemir. edvar. kitāb-i ‘ilm ül-müsīḳī ‘alā vech ül-ḥurūfat. Türkiyat Enstitüsü MS Y.2768.Google Scholar
Cantemir, Demetnus. edvar notations: appended to the edvar, but with separate pagination.Google Scholar
Cantemir, Demetrius. forthcoming: The collection of notations, part 1: text. Transcribed andannotated by Wright, O. (SOAS Musicology Series, vol. 1.) London: SOAS.Google Scholar
D'Erlanger, R. 1939: La musique arabe, vol. 4. Paris: Geuthner.Google Scholar
D'Erlanger, R. 1949: La musique arabe, vol. 5. Paris: Geuthner.Google Scholar
D'Erlanger, R. 1959: La musique arabe, vol. 6. Paris: Geuthner.Google Scholar
During, J. 1984. La musique iranienne: tradition et évolution. (Institut Français d'Iranologie de Téhéran: Bibliothèque iranienne, no. 29.) Paris: Recherche sur les civilizations.Google Scholar
During, J. 1988. La musique traditionelle de l'Azerbayjan et la science des muqams. Baden-Baden & Bouxwiller: Editions Valentin Koerner.Google Scholar
Elçin, S. 1976. Ali Ufkî: hayati, eserkri ve mecmÛa-i sâz ü söz. (Kültür Bakanliği: Türk musikieserleri no. 1.) Istanbul: Millî Eğitim Basimevi.Google Scholar
Ezgi, S 1933. Nazarî ve amelî türk musikisi, vol. 1. Istanbul: Millî Mecmua Matbaasi.Google Scholar
Ezgi, S 1940. Nazarî ve amelî türk musikisi, vol. 4. Istanbul: Hüsnütabiat Basimevi.Google Scholar
Farmer, H. G. 1940. The sources of Arabian music. Bearsden.Google Scholar
Guettat, M 1980. La musique classique du Maghreb. (La bibliotheque arabe). Paris: Sindbad.Google Scholar
Post, Ḥāfiẓ. [güfte mecmuasi]. MS Topkapi R. 1724.Google Scholar
Haṣim, Bey. 1864. [edvar]. Istanbul.Google Scholar
Heper, S 1974. Mevlevî âyinleri. [Konya].Google Scholar
al-Ḫula‘ī, K 1905. kitāb al-mūsīqā al-šarqiyya. Cairo.Google Scholar
Kurr, Ibnġāyat al-maṠlūb fī ‘lim al-angām wa-'l-ḍurūb. British Library MS Or 9247.Google Scholar
Karadeniz M. E. n.d. ( =? 1982). Türk mÛsikîsinin nazariye ve esaslan. (Türkiye İş Bankasi KültürYayinlan.) Ankara.Google Scholar
Kāẓim, A 1310/18921893. mūsīkī iṣṭilāḥāti. Istanbul.Google Scholar
al-Mahdi, n.d.: maqāmāt al-mūsīqā al-‘arabiyya. Tunis.Google Scholar
‘Abd al-Qādir al-Marāġī. jāmi‘ al-alḥān. Bodleian Library MS Marsh 282.Google Scholar
‘Abd al-Qādir al-Marāġī. maqāṣid al-alḥdn. ed. Taqī, Bīniš(majmū‘a-i mutūn-i fārsī). Tehran, 1966.Google Scholar
Mevlevî âyinleri. A, Rifat, Yekta, , Ahmet, ZSuphî [Ezgi], , Cemil, M (ed.), Türk musikisi klâsiklerinden, vols. 6 (1934)-18 (1939). (İstanbul Belediye Konservatuvan neṣriyati.)Istanbul.Google Scholar
Nettl, B with Foltin, B. Jr 1972. Daramad of chahargah: a study in the performance practiceof Persian music. (Detroit Monographs in Musicology, no. 2.) Detroit: Information Coordinators.Google Scholar
E, Neubauer 1969: ‘Musik zur Mongolenzeit in Iran und den angrenzenden Landern’, Der Islam, XLV, 233–60.Google Scholar
Özkan, İ. H. 1984. Türk mÛsikîsi nazariyati ve usÛlleri. Istanbul: Ötüken Neśriyat.Google Scholar
Öztuna, Y 1969. Türk musikisi ansiklopedisi, 1. Istanbul: Millî Egitim Basimevi.Google Scholar
Öztuna, Y 1986. Haci ÂrifBey. (Kültür ve Turizm Bakanliǧi Yayinlan: 698 türk büyükleri dizisi: 24.) Ankara: Afsaroglu.Google Scholar
Öztuna, Y 1987. Türk musikisi: leknik ve tarih. (Türkpetrol Vâkfi lale mecmuasi.) Istanbul: Kent Basimevi.Google Scholar
Ṣaff al-Dīn al-Urmawī. kitāb al-adwār, MS Nuruosmaniye 3653, published in facsimile in Publications of the Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science, Series C, vol. 6, 1984. Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
al-šajara ḏāt al-akmām. British Library MS Or. 1535.Google Scholar
Seidel, H. P. 19731974. ‘Die Notenschrift des Hamparsum Limonciyan: ein Schlüssel’, Mitteilungen der deutschen Gesellschaft för Musik des Orients, XII, 72123.Google Scholar
Shiloah, A 1979. The theory of music in Arabic writings (c. 900–1900) (Répertoire international des sources musicales, B X). Munich: Henle.Google Scholar
Signell, K 1977. Makam: modal practice in Turkish art music. (Asian Music Publications, series D, monographs, no. 4.) Seattle: Asian Music Publications, repr. 1986. New York: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
Bey, Tamburi Cemil. 1321/1903. rehber-i mūsiḳī. Istanbul.Google Scholar
Arutin, TamburistRukovodstvo po vostochnoi muzike (tr. Tagmizyan, N. K). Erevan, 1968.Google Scholar
Touma, H. H 1977. La musique arabe. (Collection de l'lnstitut International d'Etudes Comparatives de la Musique publiée sous le patronage du Conseil International de la Musique.) Paris: Buchet/Castel.Google Scholar
Tura, Y 1988. Türk mÛsikîsinin mes'eleleri. Istanbul: Pan Yayincihk.Google Scholar
ÖnkanE., B. E., B., and H. 1984: Türk sanat musikisinde makamlar. (1000 yillik türk sanat musikisi, 2.) (Genel Kültür Yayinlan: müzik'dizisi 2). [Istanbul].Google Scholar
al-Jundī, Utmān b.Muḥammad. rawḍ al-masarrāt fīi ‘ilm al-naġamāt. Leeds University MS 154.Google Scholar
Uzdilek, S. M. 1977. Him ve mûsikî türk mûsikîsi üzerindeincelemeler. Istanbul.Google Scholar
Wright, O. 1978. The modal system of Arab and Persian music A.D. 1250–1300. (London Oriental Series, vol. 28.) Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Wright, O. 1988. ‘Aspects of historical change in the Turkish classical repertoire ’, in Widdess, D. R (ed.), Musica Asiatica, 5. Cambridge: CUP, 1108.Google Scholar
Wright, O. forthcoming. Words without songs: a musicological study of an Ottoman song-text collection and its precursors. (SOAS Musicology Series, vol. 3.) London: SOAS.Google Scholar
Bey, Rauf Yek ta. 1922: ‘La musique turque’, Encyclopedie de la musique (Lavignac), 1. Paris. 2945–3064.Google Scholar
Bey, Rauf Yekta. 1986. Türk musikisi (tr. of the above). Istanbul: Pan Yayincihk.Google Scholar
Yilmaz, Z. 1983: Türk musikisi dersleri. Istanbul: Milli Egitim Basimevi.Google Scholar
5
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Çargâh in Turkish classical music: history versus theory
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Çargâh in Turkish classical music: history versus theory
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Çargâh in Turkish classical music: history versus theory
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *