What Happened To Indian Music Theory Indo Occidentalism NA Jairazbhoy 2008

What Happened to Indian Music Theory? Indo-Occidentalism?
Author(s): Nazir Ali Jairazbhoy

Source: Ethnomusicology, Vol. 52, No. 3 (Fall, 2008), pp. 349-377
Published by: University of Illinois Press on behalf of Society for Ethnomusicology
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20174604 .
Accessed: 20/06/2014 18:19
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 [email protected].
University of Illinois Press and Society for Ethnomusicology are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to Ethnomusicology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 18:19:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Vol. 52, No. 3 Ethnomusicology Fall 2008
What Happened to Indian Music Theory?

Indo-Occidentalism?
Nazir Ali Jairazbhoy / University of California, Los Angeles
treatises on Indian music have been composed in the literary

Sanskrit
Technical language fornearly two thousand years. At the end of the eigh
teenth century, however, a new element entered into the discourse of Indian
music, namely, a radical change in the language of communication. Tradi
tional Sanskritmusical treatiseswere superseded by new writings in English,
Persian, Urdu, and the vernaculars, Bengali, Marathi, Hindi, and Gujarati, some
based on translations of early Sanskrit treatises, others taking into consider
ation contemporary performance practice. SirWilliam Jones was the first to
herald the shift into English in his "On theMusical Modes of the Hindoos,"1
deriving his information from Sanskrit sources. He found that Indian music
was based on twenty-two srutis (microtonal units) in the octave, and that
Indian scales consisted of 7 notes, with three sizes of intervals consisting
of 4, 3, and 2 srutis. However, he also said,'! tried in vain to discover any
difference in practice between the Indian scale and that of our own" (Jones
[1793] 1965:141).
Captain Augustus Willard, writing about fiftyyears later,based his writ
ings largely on contemporary practice. In his "ATreatise on the Music of
Hindoostan," written in 1834, he stated, "The number of tones (in Indian
music) is the same as in themodern music of Europe, but the subdivisions
are more in the manner of the ancient enharmonic genus of the Greeks"
(Willard [1834] 1965:39), and later proceeded to describe the twenty-two

srutis and the three different sized tones (ibid.:43-44).
Both these positions supported the view that the Indian octave was not to
be equated with theWestern system of twelve tempered, equidistant semitones
that had been devised and adopted inWestern Europe in the seventeenth
century, to facilitate the transpositional propensities of, among others, Johann
Sebastian Bach, which he artfully demonstrated in his The Well-Tempered
? 2008 by the Society for Ethnomusicology

350 Ethnomusicology, Fall 2008
Clavier (completed in 1722). This compromising of the "pure,"untempered

intervals of just intonation did not sitwell with some aesthetes in theWest
who to this day continue to hanker for early music performed in its original
intonation. They also prefer musical instruments that can easily be tuned to
un-tempered intervals (such as the clavichord inpreference to the piano) and
which are also capable of producing subtle intonational ornaments by vary
ing finger pressure on the keys.2 Isacoff (quoted in Bakhle 2005:15) points
out that (equal) temperament was viewed by such aesthetes "as an attack on
nature, divinity and Grecian antiquity."3
These aesthetes were clearly an insignificantminority in Europe; however,
in the second half of the nineteenth century, their views were strengthened
by new writings on different tunings, such as Alexander Ellis' On theMusical
Scales of Various Nations (1885), as well as the contributions of Sourindro
MohunTagore (1965) and Victor-Charles Manillon (see Jairazbhoy 1990).
Tagore sent large numbers of Indian musical instruments tomuseums in the
West with copies and translations of Sanskrit treatises that included descrip
tions of Indian tunings that these aesthetes regarded as being supportive of
their objection to the temperament of pure intervals. In particular, theywere
attracted to the three different sizes of intervals of ancient Indian music that
they believed paralleled the three interval sizes of just intonation: themajor
whole tone,minor whole tone, and semitone. They thus concluded that the
Indian intervalswere the same, notwithstanding the factwhich they seem to
have ignored: that the major third consonance, essential to the establishment
of the intonation was not as a consonance in the

just system, recognized
Indian system as described in the hallowed Sanskrit treatise,N?tya Sastra,
whose authorship is ascribed to Bharata-Muni ([2nd c. A.D.] 1961).
Whether or not writers such as SirWilliam Jones and Captain Willard
belonged among these aesthetes is open to conjecture; however, thiswas
one of the fashionable modes of thought in England with which theymust
have been familiar. Jones' monograph seems to revel in the notion of the
srutis bywhich intervalswere measured in Sanskrit treatises and the theory
described in Sanskrit treatises. It is not difficult to imagine, ifone were to
wear stereotypical glasses (as did many Western writers), SirWilliam Jones
in India wearing white shorts, a sola topee, and sporting a shooting stick,
encountering aMuslim musician and saying: "What,you don't know Sanskrit?
And you don't know about srutis? I don't believe this.How can you possibly
sing proper Indian music?" I can also imagine his utter astonishment when
he discovered that the hereditary Khansahib not only did not know Sanskrit
but was completely non-literate and had learned music only by rote!
Then one could also imagine Captain Willard inhis smart jodhpurs nearly
a century later, twirling his moustaches as he proclaimed that Indian musi
cians were the "most immoral set of men on earth" ([1834] 1965:29), grossly

Jairazbhoy: Indo-Occidentalism? 351
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
by Jairazbhoy and Stone (1963) proving that srutiwas no longer a structural

unit inNorth Indian music, but the evidence remained virtually ignored by
some scholars for decades. Even the following much more extensive analysis
of intonation by Mark Levy (1982) that came to the same conclusions was
basically ignored as some scholars continued to spend energy, time and money
to prove otherwise. In fact the impact of these srutiw?l?s carried virtually into
the present century as some important Dutch, American, and French scholars
continued their computer search in India for the elusive microtonal srutis that
had dominated Indian music research in the twentieth century.5To this day,
however, references to consistent and intentional use ofmicrotones are still
occasionally found in the literature (e.g., Raja 2005:131). Bor, in the The Raga
Guide uses transcriptions based on the twelve semitones, yet he still states:
"Flat notes can be lowered by approximately 20 cents, and are then called
ati komal (very flat). Similarly, the augmented fourth can become tivratar
(very sharp). Such microtonal variations are usually referred to as shrutis"
(1999:vii).
While recent writings on Indian music occasionally continue tomention
the sruti basis of the Indian octave, indigenous Sanskrit literature since the
seventeenth century,while paying lip service to srutis, generally described
ragas6 in terms of 12 semitones. Ahobala in Sang?ta P?rij?ta for instance,
names 19 vikrit or altered notes, yet uses 12 in describing his ragas
only
(Bhatkhande 1934:27). Locana in Raga
Tara?gin? also describes r?gas in
terms of 12 (in Jairazbhoy [1971] 1995:92), and Pundarika Vitthala (ibid.) in
Sadr?gacondroday? mentions 14 notes in the octave, but locates only 12
frets on his vtn?, explaining that the frets for the other notes would be too
close to adjacent frets; either note played on the same fretwould be quite
acceptable as "the difference of one srutiwill not make much difference to
the general effect of the r?ga" (as quoted in Bhatkhande [1930-1931] :48).
Indo-Persian treatises from the seventeenth century (e.g., K?milkh?nTs Ris?le
dar 'amal-i bin) are also based on twelve semitone scales referred to as th?ts
(Brown 2003-2004:9).
This evidence was generally ignored by Indo-Orientalist srutiproponents
who derived theirnotions from earlier sources, theN?tya Sastra (second cen
turyA.D.?) (Ramakrishna Kavi 1956-64) and the thirteenth century Sang?ta
Ratn?kara. Much of the fixation on srutiswas fueled by the fact thatmusicians
frequently pointed out that a particular note in a specific rag was intoned
flatter than in other r?gs. This was seen as supportive of the notion of the
use of srutis in contemporary Indian music. What it suggests to this author,
however, is that they recognized a general intonational norm for r?gs as a
whole, which certain intervals in particular rag contexts were seen to
against

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.
Perhaps the two strongest arguments against the theories of continuity

from the time of theN?tya Sastra to the present are, (1) the absence of a
Sanskrit term for the drone, which is ubiquitous in the music of today yet
nowhere evidenced in theN?tya Sastra, and (2) the fact that the concept of
r?g(a)s equally ubiquitous todaywas not existent in those early times. The j?tis
which are presumed to be the antecedents of r?gas were serially conceived
and began on different notes of the scale. Had they been accompanied by
drones, theywould have required constant retuning of the drone instrument
each time the music modulated from one serial mode to another.

Even the evidence of musical instruments attests to the absence of a

drone in the early period, since sculptures and bas reliefs from before the
beginning of the Christian era, including such sites as Sanchi, Bharhut, Bodh
gaya, Gandhara, and extending into the Gupta period inMathura, Gwalior,
and even Amaravati in South India, show no instrument that could have been
used as a drone. The most prominent instrument represented in these reliefs,
the bow harp, has long since disappeared from the classical scene.
In spite of all the evidence given above, srutis are still thought by some
scholars and musicians to reflect continuity with the hoary past. Precise
intonation of intervalswas intangible and difficult to verify (or reject) until
recent advances in the electronic measurement of musical tones. Yet, sru
tis continued to hold sway in theirminds, notwithstanding the empirical

evidence that showed the variability of intonation exhibited by the leading
performers of North India which undermined all attempts to establish an
intonational standard based on srutis.
Underlying all thiswas the notion that immeasurable harm had been
perpetrated on Hindu music and culture by Muslim invaders,who had some
how convincingly introduced an alien twelve semitone system that forced
Hindu musicians to give up their hallowed twenty-two sruti based system.
However, none of the neighboring Muslim cultures is based on such a twelve
semitone system, and whatever evidence we have suggests that theMuslims
were thoroughly charmed by the indigenous Indian musical system (Jairaz
bhoy [1971 ] 1995:17, fn 2) and evidently adopted itwholeheartedly, perhaps
adding new r?gs, genres and styles of presentation, but with no intention of
destroying the Hindu past of Indian music.
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
In defense of the tuning of the harmonium two points should be taken

into consideration. Firstly,the tempering of fifthsby two cents (from 702 to
700) requires the counting of beats which I have never seen done in India;
and secondly, singers generally have favorite tonal ranges (i.e.,F to f) inwhich
they like to sing and get their harmoniums tuned accurately for just those
ranges. This means that the tuning would not be perfect for some of the
other ranges, but since transposition is uncommon in Indian music, itwould
not matter, and thus there is no need for tempering intervals as therewas in
seventeenth century Europe.
Itwas not only the alleged tempering of the harmonium's intervals that
was criticized, but also the fact that the harmonium could produce only steady
tones and could not replicate the subtle ornaments and slides characteristic
of vocal and most instrumental music.10 Itwas thus not considered suitable
for accompanying vocalists. By this same token, however, sympathetic strings,
drone strings of instruments and even harmonics of the tamb?r? strings,
all ofwhich only produce steady tones, should also have been banned?not
to mention the immensely solo instrument, sant?r, a hammered
popular
dulcimer, and the plucked dulcimer surmandal used in some ghar?n?s
(musical traditions associated with a "house") for vocal accompaniment.
This is obviously a false proposition because it does not take into account
the resultant effect of the sliding ornaments against the steady tones, which
would tend to enhance the feelings of tension and release inherent in the
slides and their resolution.
Guru Sisya Parampara

While the concentration on srutiswas amajor factor in the stultification
ofmusic theory based on observed phenomena, the indigeneous guru-sisya
parampara (tradition) or ust?d-sh?gird teacher-student method of training
young musicians had an equally detrimental impact on the development of
music theory throughout the region.While there is no denying the efficacy
of this system for impartingmusic skills, especially in an oral music culture,
it is,by itsvery nature, inimical to empirical objectivity, as it involves a deep
personal and sacrosanct relationship with a single teacher. This relationship
has its parallel in the Muslim Sufi"experience, that ofp?r-mur?d, which is
best understood by the adage,"It is better to follow your teacher even ifyou
know he iswrong than to follow your own path even ifyou know you are

right."The S?f? poet Jal?lud'din Rumi's statement is even more forbidding

for scholarship: "Mysteries are not to be solved. The eye goes blind when it
only wants to see why" (Barks' translation in Iyer 2003:197).
We quote these here, not as a criticism of Sufism whose intents and
purposes differ greatly from ours, but to point out that this attitude negates
the joys of discovery in the physical world?a basic pursuit of science. The
mystic's "no questioning" path has led in Indian music to the crystallization
of different streams ofmusical thought and expressions exemplified by the
ghar?n?s (houses ofmusic traditions). In fact,however, many musicians have
not adhered completely to these adages and have accepted more than one
teacher, sometimes from different ghar?n?s, thus leading to awatering down
of ghar?n? exclusivity. Nevertheless, the underlying unquestioning attitude
completely eliminates the need for the interrogative,"Why?";"Why do par
ticular phenomena occur?" becomes antithetical and even redundant, as the
standard S?f? and Indian musician's answer would be, "Because my teacher
says so, and before that, his teacher said so..."
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
tional guru-sisya methods. He discarded the notion of srutiswith comments

such as, "I can see no reason
why we should get involved in these minute
intervals" (Bhatkhande 1920-1937, IV:428), and "That iswhy wise people do
not like to exert themselves unduly with the trouble of trying to ascertain
theminute intervals"(ibid.:584). He then proceeded to develop his theories
based on a twelve semitone octave as had been used by Sanskrit writers, such
as Ahobala, Locana, and others since the sixteenth century. Bhatkhande un
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.
Returning to Bhatkhande's research, one of his major contributions to

music theorywas his conviction thatmost of the North Indian r?gs seemed
to fit into just ten heptatonic scale types, th?ts. The notion of th?tswas men
tioned in Persian language sources several centuries earlier and theword is
also mentioned byWillard ([1834] 1965:64). However, Bhatkhande limited
the th?ts to just ten, saying thatmost of the North Indian r?gs could be ac
commodated in these ten. Scholars have found faultwith this since there are
r?gswhich have scales other than these ten. Elsewhere I have pointed out,
however, that r?gswith scales other than the ten th?ts are mostly "isolates,"
i.e., while the ten th?ts each have more than one r?ga in their scales?ranging
from seven inTori That to forty-two inK?fi That as given by Bhatkhande?the
isolate r?gs generally stand alone in their scales (Jairazbhoy [1971] 1995:53).
Since then, research has shown that Bhatkhande's ten th?tsmay also have
more cognitive meaning than the other possible scales (Vaughn 1993). One
can also argue that the ten th?ts have a very high proportion of consonances
in relation to the other scales.
In view of this it seems reasonable to regard Bhatkhande's ten th?ts as
constituting the main tonal corpus of present day North Indian classical
music.12
In Search of Terminology and the Tritone
Another consequence inhibiting the development of theory caused by

the Indo-Occidental preoccupation with srutiswas the curtailment of Indian
terminology for expressing musical intervals in terms of the twelve basic
semitones or ardhasvars which underlie the that system. An Indian music

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,
literature, and needs little attention other than an acknowledgment of its

theoretical availability" (DeLone 1971:77). Nevertheless, itwas intellectually
and theoretically necessary to complete the system ofmodes, which like the
ancient j?tis began on different notes of the heptatonic scales.
But is there any evidence to suggest that this tritone/diminished fifth
phenomenon was regarded as a diabolus or devilish interval in ancient In
dia?
Iwould answer in the affirmative. In theN?tya Sastra, the j?tis are as
cribed specific moods/emotions (rasas) to fitparticular dramatic occasions.
The j?ti based on sa (Sadj?) is associated with the rasas of heroism (v?ra)
and/or wonderment (adbhutd), the j?ti on riwith anger (raudra), and ga
and ni j?tiswith compassion (karuna). The j?ti based on ma is associated
with laughter (h?sy?) and that on pa with love (sring?r?). But what about
the j?ti based on dha? Its rasa is described by thewords bibhatsa (disgust)

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
(dim. 5th) (aug. 4th)
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
(dim. 5th) (aug. 4th)
Can there be any other reason why thismode had such negative associations
while all the other j?tis had agreeable implications?
Origin of the Ten Th?ts

Bhatkhande did not attempt to trace the origins and history of the ten
th?ts even though he may have known that his definition of that require
ments would many more scales.14 Questions such as why these
encompass
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

of it in the j?ti system and it isnot referred to specifically by Sanskritwriters.17

As Powers (1992:24) states,"Such r?gas eventually have to be explained away
somehow, in all theories that claim an 'unbroken link' between constructs in
theN?tya Sastra or Sang?ta Ratn?kara and modern Indian music."
One possibility suggested byWilliam Jones ([1793] 1965:94) is that the
Indian r?ga Hijeja (Hej?z) was imported into India from Persia, but the scale
he gives for it is that of Kaly?n That, the F mode. This scale could well be
incorrect as the commonly known Arabic tetrachord,Hij?z, does, in fact,have
an augmented second scale step: C Dl> E F (sa rel>ga ma) (Marcus 2002:37).
In North India thismodal nucleus was associated with the rag Bhairav (see
Jairazbhoy [1971] 1995.:94,fn l).In South India,too,the r?ga Hejuji is known
and although it too has a similar lower tetrachord today, it is said to be an
ancient mela and pan (an ancient Tamil mode) (Sambamoorthy 1959:227 and
1960:41). By 1600, at least, this scale Bhairav,sa re\>gamapa dha\>ni (cf., C
Dl? E F G At B ) (also called Gaur? in the North and M?yam?lavagaula in the
South) was firmly established; in the North Indian treatise Ragatarangin?
(late fifteenth century?) more than twenty r?gas were ascribed to it, while in
South India,M?yam?lavagaula was so well established that Purandara D?sa
(1484-1564), regarded as the founder of South Indian classical music, used
this scale as the basis of his teaching method and it still remains the basis of
teaching today.
It does seem farfetched, however, that an imported scale-type using this
alien interval could have, so to speak, taken the country storm and seen
by
the creation of so many r?gas in a relatively short time, unless this augmented
second interval had some structural justification in relation to the diatonic

j?tis of the earlier period. Unfortunately, many of the treatises in this 'middle'
period describe r?gas and theirwives, ragin?s, in romantic terms fromwhich
we cannot discern any technical features of the r?gas?not even their scales.
We thus have to resort to other forms of evidence.
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

grew haphazardly?that iswithout any underlying intellectual scheme?they

suggest other interesting connections and links between r?gs.
For example, in the family of Kaly?n r?gs (most ofwhich are inKaly?n
That similar to the old j?ti,G?ndh?ri, the F mode, having a sharp fourth
and other major intervals [suddh]), the one scalar deviant is the rag P?riy?
Kaly?n,18 which differs only in that the second, re, is flat. This creates a non
diatonic three semitone interval between the flat second and the third (re\>
and ga):
P?ny? Kaly?n (M?rv? That)
SB G Mi P D N S
(?U E Fjt G A Be)
semitones 13 2 2112
That Kaly?n is given as its familyname is a strong indication that itmust

have evolved fromKaly?n (Fmode) to this non-diatonic scale, but as towhen
thismight have happened still remains to be explored. Later we will suggest
a possible systematic explanation for this.
A second example is the Rag Tor? (Tod?). Numerous treatises from the
fifteenth to the eighteenth century, both North Indian and South Indian, give
Tori's scale as being in the old diatonic series equivalent to Bhairv? That or
the South Indian Hanumatod? with four flats, equivalent to the E mode (Phry
gian) and the old j?ti?rsabhi. This r?ga is still inHanumatod? m?la in South
India today,but by the end of the eighteenth century ithad evidently begun
to evolve inNorth India and probably reached its present scale type in the
nineteenth century (Jairazbhoy [1971] 1995:97). The most well-known Tor?
of today, called M?ya- k?Tor? or sometimes justTor? (or Suddh Tor?), is in yet
another non-diatonic scale with two augmented seconds, between gal' (B>)
and mai (Ft) and dha?> (At) and ni (B):
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

362 Ethnomusicology Fall 2008
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
despite the difference in scale-type" (1970:19). From this he concludes that

pitch relationships are only one factor among many and that "very crucial
similarities-identities, in structural-expressive terms?are denied outright by
simplistic scale-type analysis" (Powers 1970:46).
Powers does not, however, offer any as to why rag scales
explanation
should change, and why these changes should have no impact on other
melodic features. In fact, he states, "It is pointless to ask why they change
..." (Powers 1970:45) and further, "It seems probable that there is no sin
gle mechanism formelodic change in Indian music, or even for scale-type
change," although he does suggest that a "kind of acoustic symmetry"may
have been an influential factor,but without explaining this further.He mini
mizes the importance of scale, and states in conclusion,"in terms of the total
musical realities ... measurable however are
pitch-relationships, important,
only one factor among many" (ibid.:46).

While Powers does not hazard any theory to explain the scalar evolution
of r?gs,Manuel (1981) applies himself directly to this question in his article,
"The Evolution of Todi Raag-s in Indian Music." Drawing from a remarkable
variety of sources that include those in Sanskrit, Hindi, and English as well
as field recordings of Rajasthani non-classical musicians, he finds that the
Tor? r?gs do not all derive from a common genetic source and that most
have apparently undergone considerable change in the last three centuries.
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
including the "hypothetical" MargTor? That (ibid.:97).

In connection with evolution, Powers' principal argument is that "me
lodic contour and the like?seem to be more
characteristics?emphasis,
persistent than scale-type" (1970:16, my emphasis) and compares North and

South Indian Tod? r?gs to show that although the North Indian version has
evolved in terms of scale, the two still have melodic features in common.
Since what he means by "melodic characteristics" is left rather vague as he
uses the expression "and the like,"his analyses call for closer scrutiny. The
first point he makes is that both share the same register from dha to dha,
with dha and ga as being the emphasized notes. The South Indian Tod? which
had the same scale as seventeenth century North Indian Tor? is shown below
with its intervals in semitones:

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
Because of this similarity it is not surprising that present day North

Indian Tor? exhibits some melodic features in common with the older Tor?,
that is, the register from dha\> to dha?> and the emphasized notes being dhab>

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
ni re\> ni dha\> and dha\> mal ga\> re\> sa

(B Dt B At) (At F# B Dt C)
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
Thus nine of Bhatkhande's ten th?ts seem to be structurallyconnected, and

with the addition of the "hypothetical" that,M?rgTor?, have been presented as
a systematic Circle of Th?ts (Jairazbhoy [1971] 1995:59). This Circle of Th?ts
has sometimes been criticized by scholars, but more often virtually ignored by
them. The two criticisms sometimes mentioned (e.g.,Wade 1973) have been,
(a) that itwas necessary to propose a non-existent that (scale) to complete
the Circle of Th?ts, thus implying that the proposed Circle is arbitrary,and (b)

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
Circle of Thats with That Signatures
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
it, as an ordered series of musical intervals, is just a secondary aspect of rag
and whether ituses major or minor intervals is of little importance. We pro

pose to give evidence that intervals are indeed a crucial factor in the shaping
of r?gs and that th?ts can best be seen as a substructure or skeleton on which
r?gs aremolded, each with itsown accoutrements in the form of emphasized
notes, frequently omitted notes, accidentals, characteristic motifs, and other
features like special ornaments, prominent register,and the like.
Power of the Tritone
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
interval"22), still continues to have a fundamental on the classical

impact
music of today.

Consider, for instance, the case of r?gs ascribed either to Kaly?n or Bi

l?val That (such as Ham?r, Gaur S?rang, Ked?r, C?ndni Ked?r, Maluh? Ked?r,
K?mod, Ch?y?nat, Sy?m Kaly?n,Yaman Kaly?n, Laksm? Kaly?n, Durg? Kaly?n,
Yamani-Bil?val, Bih?g, and M?r? Bih?g) which all share the common feature
of using both ma natural and mai (F and Ff).23 In addition, according to some
musicians, many of these r?gs also use both ni natural and ni flat (B and Bl>).24
It is notable that several other r?gs (e.g., Bh?p?li, Desk?r, and Jet Kaly?n)
omit just these two notes, ma and ni, while their other notes are all suddh
or natural. Similarly,the rag Suddh Kaly?n is basically pentatonic, themai and
ni only occurring occasionally as grace notes (kansvar) in the descending
line. It is especially remarkable that none of these r?gs (or for thatmatter any
r?gs in either Kaly?n or Bil?val Th?ts) use any other accidentals, and these
r?gs exhibit no hint of r? (D\>),ga?>(B>), or dhal> (Al>)!
These r?gswith the two fourth degrees have been described by several
scholars, including Bhatkhande and OmkarnathThakur, while Powers (1992)
has compared their versions in great detail (over 11 tightlypacked pages)
with his own comments. Their intent has been to illustrate how each of
these r?gs can be differentiated from the others in performance. In spite of
the elaborate discussions, none of them have asked why somany r?gs should
exhibit the same features, a question that calls for a theoretical explanation.
An answer to this question becomes evident when one looks at the intervals
of Bil?val That:
Bil?val That
Tritone
I-1
S R G M P D N S
(C D E F G A B C)
The interval between thema and ni is the problematic tritone, an aug

mented fourth consisting of six ardhsvaras or semitones, while all other
4ths and 5ths in this scale are perfect, consisting of five and seven ardhasvars
respectively. It is obviously this tritonewhich is in some way responsible for
the twomas and nis in these r?gs. Since musicians are not consciously aware
of the tritone between ma and ni, and there is no conceptual or linguistic
term for the interval, the accidentals mat or nil>are evidently introduced sub
consciously in response to this scalar imperfection, in order to temporarily
produce the perfect fourth interval, either mat to ni, or ma to nil.
The occurrence of these two mas and nis creates the classificatory di
lemma so often pointed out by scholars who use this type of phenomenon

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
This tritone can be resolved by lowering themat, thus creating Bil?val,

but the other alternative, that of raising the sa to sat (C toQ) is by definition
not permitted in Indian music, and in any case, the drone would prevent the
sa (C) from shifting itsposition.
There is,however, a second possibility: that of lowering the re to r? (D
to I>) to simulate the saf. Such an alteration is known as an enharmonic com
promise and is found both inWestern music aswell as South Indian music. In
Western music, the Circle of Keys could not possibly be completed without
it as three keys, called the enharmonic keys, necessitate dual nomenclature:
the key of 7 sharps is equated with the key of 5 flats, the key of 6 sharps with
the key of 6 flats, and the key of 5 sharps with that of 7 flats. In these three,
enharmonic notes such as Cf and Dl> are equated with each other and are
played at the same pitch.25 Similarly in South Indian music, for instance, the
natural form of the re (D) called catussruti ri (D^) or its enharmonic equiva
lent suddh ga (EH>) is regarded as being at the same pitch. This enharmonic
equivalence applies to three other pairs in South Indian music as well.
Itmay appear that r? substituting for sat would be unlikely, yet under
certain circumstances, this substitution need not seem like an enharmonic
compromise. For instance, in the Rag Yaman (Yaman Kaly?n)?arguably the
most prominent r?ga of Kaly?n That?phrases inwhich sa and pa are omit
ted are not uncommon (see, for instance, Moutal 1991:54):
N R G Mi D N R (S) NDMiGRNQNRS
(BD EFfABDC BAFfEDBABDC)
The following diagram shows the sequence ni re ga mat dha ni with
their fifthsabove in the line below. Seen in thisway the only pair of notes
with an imperfect relationship (compared vertically) is that of mat in its
relation to the re:

Yaman Phrases without Sa and Pa
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,
s?rangt player on his LP recording (Narayan n.d.):
"dha ni rel> ga dha ? dha re\> ni ni

mai mai ga dha r?> sa"
A ? A
(ABDtE FU F# EDtBABDtC)
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

3 70 Ethnomusicology, Fall 2008
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
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
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.

Jairazbhoy: Indo-Occidentalism? 3 71
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
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.

Powers (1970) has presented a different theorywhich suggests thatmelodic

features are not influenced by scale and that they remain constant in spite
of scalar changes and the passing of time. The two views are succinctly de
scribed byWiddess (1995:34-35). Ifboth arguments are sustained then the
two theories need to be reconciled. In this paper I have suggested a begin
ning in this direction.
Elsewhere ([1971] 1995:102) I have suggested that scale change can
take place in a subtle and unobtrusive manner so that such scale changes in
a ragmight not be noticeable in a single generation. It is easy to imagine that
certain melodic features might well persevere despite such imperceptible
change, at least until asymmetries resulting from that scalar change once
again begin to assert their influence. Future research is needed to illuminate
such issues.
Musictheory is concerned with establishing general propositions that

can be applied to explaining particular musical phenomena. It is not just
the collection and analysis of musical data but the theoretical formulations
that go toward the comprehension of the underlying processes that shape
musical phenomena. There are undoubtedly many who believe thatmusic
is beyond rational explanation, yet there are others, for example, Schenker
and the seventeenth century Enlightenment philosophers, who believed the
opposite: thatmusic can ultimately be explained in terms of a completely
logical system. Perhaps the true answer may lie somewhere in between; still,
some rational are patently obvious, as shown in the
explanations examples
given in this paper regarding the connection between rag, that, and evolu
tion.Much more remains to be explored in this area and the research should
eventually narrow in to studies of individual r?gs. Such studies must take into
account the evidence of scalar intervals, an area that has long been neglected
with an extraordinary persistence that is perpetuated in recent writings,
including the major encyclopedias, such as The Garland Encyclopedia of
World Music (Arnold 2000) and The New Grove Dictionary ofMusic and
Musicians. The former,while acknowledging Bhatkhande's ten th?ts, then
belittles their importance with "the corpus of ragas is so vast and disparate
that to relate it to ten framework scales inevitably creates a host of anomalies
and ambiguities" (Ruckert and Widdess 2000:28), with no mention whatever
of the Circle of Th?ts, evolution of r?gs or the function of intervals in this
process. The resistance to the consideration of these issues is irrational and
can perhaps be entertained as another case of Indo-Occidentalism. This
resistance also carries over to the recent edition of The New Grove which
has a useful short discussion ofmy theories by Richard Widdess (2001), but
still fails tomention the Circle of Th?ts, thus ignoring what I feel is a valu
able theoretical framework for the evolution of r?gs both in terms of scale
as well as their deep structure?by which I refer to melodic features that

include emphasized notes, transilience, register of emphasis, oblique motion,

characteristic phrases, accidentals, and the like.
Indo-Occidentalists are motivated by the desire to find links between
today's music and that of the past, which I believe to be a commendable
goal. Inasmuch as my research has also sought to seek such historical links,
I, too, am an Indo-Occidentalist. But, unlike most Indo-Occidentalists I also
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
sicological Society 12(3-4) :14- 30.

Marcus, Scott. 2002. "A Case Study of Maq?m Bayyat?." Garland Encyclopedia of World Music,
Vol. 6: The Middle East, edited by Virginia Danielson, Scott Marcus, and Dwight Reynolds,
33-44. New York: Routledge.
Moutal, Patrick. 1991. A Comparative Study of Selected Hindustani R?ga-s Based on Contem
porary Practice. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
Nayar, Sobhana. 1989. Bhatkhande's Contribution toMusic. Bombay: Popular Prakashan Pvt.
Ltd.
Pandither, M. Abraham. [1917] 1984. Karunamirtha Sagaram on Srutis: A Treatise on Music
or Isai-Tamil New Delhi: Asian Educational Services.
Pingle,Bhavanrav. [1894] 1962. A History of Indian Music, with Particular Reference to Theory
and Practice. Calcutta: Susil Gupta (India) Private Ltd.
Powers, Harold. 1970. "An Historical and Comparative Approach to the Classification of Ragas."
Selected Reports in Ethnomusicology 1(3): 1-78. Los Angeles: UCLA Institute for Ethno
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.


What Happened To Indian Music Theory Indo Occidentalism NA Jairazbhoy 2008

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

What Happened To Indian Music Theory Indo Occidentalism NA Jairazbhoy 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What Happened to Indian Music Theory? Indo-Occidentalism?

Author(s): Nazir Ali Jairazbhoy

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 18:19:32 PM