178

MALKHAZ ERKVANIDZE

ON GEORGIAN SCALE SYSTEM

Our aim is to study the scale system of Old Georgian professional (ecclesiastic)
and folk music. This is the first practical attempt to acoustically measure the Geor-
gian sound system and identify its regularities. The problem is hard and compli-
cated. In order to solve it, it is important to have practical and theoretical knowledge
of the subject, as well as to have access to a sound technical basis and an acoustic
laboratory. We first touched upon this problem 12 years ago and were mostly con-
cerned about the shortage of technical equipment. All acoustic measurement was
carried out by ear, and as a result a piano was tuned according to the Georgian
scale system. While tuning the piano we referred to the old (1914) audio-recording
of a chant performed by acclaimed experts of Gurian (west Georgian) chant: Samuel
Chavleishvili, Besarion Intskirveli and Varlam Simonishvili. It appeared that their per-
formance of the heirmos “Thou, that enlightened us” contains a great mystery: the
most stable forms of Georgian scale systems are best preserved in the performance
of famous chanters and folksong performers. It was hard to imagine that the ancient
sound arrangement, three ways of tetrachord interconnecting and the whole scale
system, proceeding from one falling tetrachord would be so purely preserved.
Today the problem of technical equipment is still mostly unsolved, although
computers greatly facilitated our research and the work proceeded much easier
than 12 years ago. The specimens we performed on the specially tuned piano were
tested by computer and to our great delight the acoustic measurement carried out
by us turned out to be correct.
My initial interest in Georgian scale systems was aroused by the difficulties I
came across while attempting to translate the old recordings and to put them on a
contemporary transcription system. Few ethnomusicologists use arrows over the
notes (e.g. E has an upward arrow over it indicating the actual pitch is a bit higher
than E). But there are 100 cents between E and F. In this case the arrow is not
justified as it is unable to define the precise pitch, and the differences can be quite
great (within 100 cents).
A country with such a highly developed singing culture as Georgia could hardly
fail to use a comprehensive scale system. Observations suggest that the Georgian
scale system was intended for Georgian polyphonic singing which is built on perfect
intervals. Here, the fifth and the fourth do not change so no augmented or diminished
fifths and fourths are used (although there are different versions of fifths and fourths,
see later). It appears that the most stable interval is the octave. The octave is al-
ways perfect, and the remaining intervals: the second, third, fourth, fifth, seventh are
each of three kinds. The modulations characteristic of Georgian polyphony are also
of three kinds as well as the Georgian three-part pattern. This is not mere chance
and has a definite symbolic meaning.
Guided by Ioane Petritsi’s (XI c.) valuable works Kakhi Rosebashvili offers some very
interesting surmises while comparing the old Greek mode system with that of Georgi-
an (Rosebashvili, 1988). He names different means of interconnecting two or three
tetrachords. The difference between the tetrachord named by him and the one fixed
 179

by us is the following: he forms a falling Dorian tetrachord and Hypodorian scale, and
we chiefly consider the falling Phrygian tetrachord as a coordinating tetrachord (the
names of tetrachords and modes are given according to the names of old Greek
falling scales. (Holopov, 1974:30). By using the fourth and fifth for connecting two homo-
geneous tetrachords two different scales were received, and from them by means of tone
alteration a multitude of tones was created. See the examples 1, 2 in the appendix.
A 3500 year-old three-finger-hole pipe (Salamuri) made of bone that was found
in Mtskheta, corroborates our surmise about a falling Phrygian tetrachord being
basic and coordinating. The pipe, provided it is inclined at different angles, produces
seven different tetrachords or 10 sounds, which, in our opinion, bears the sound
system traits and is a fore-runner of Petritsi’s and is at least ahead of the Greek
system emergence by 1000 years.
Nodar Mamisashvili, a composer and scholar, testified that producing different
sounds by a pipe provided it is inclined in different directions is a well-known phe-
nomenon in physical acoustics and it only occurs in a natural arrangement.
In Georgian ecclesiastic (professional) and folk music the specimens are dis-
tinctly correlated from the structural viewpoint, we suggest to distinguish elemen-
tary, intermediate and complex structures. The specimens which are entirely given
in one scale we classify as elementary. The specimens are qualified as belonging to
the intermediate type of structures if two or three scales alternate with each other in
them on the same tonal centre (also called scale modulation), and complex ones
comprising structures where apart from scale modulations tonal (pitch) modulations
also occur (changing of tonal centre). The latter is of two types: tonal modulation by
a tone higher and a pitch modulation, or dynamic modulation by approximately 1/4-
1/6 tone higher. I will discuss each of them separately (except for the elementary
structures).
The specimen under review is a Gurian song “Tsamokruli” performed by the
Chavleishvili-Chkhikvishvili-Simonishvili trio. For the sake of visual effect all the ex-
amples are given in the same F-HypoPhrygian scale. The example 3 shows that three
scales replace each another in succession (old Greek scale names are used, but we
should keep in mind that Georgian and Greek tetrachords are divided in different
ways). The scale and tonal modulations in the Georgian system occur as a rule by
one step alteration. The scale modulation may occur above and below by means of
two or more scales replacing each other, while the pitch (tone) modulation occurs
only above.
See the example 4 “Thou that enlightened”, sung by the Chavleishvili-Intskirveli-
Simonishvili” trio. The tonal modulation of F HypoPhrygian from E HypoLydian; G -
HypoPhrygian to F HypoLydian. This church song is of great interest. During the tonal
modulation seven signs change in the scale system. The F and G HypoPhrygian scales
have only one sound in common - the sound G. Hence, as I have already mentioned,
tonal modulation is possible only by one tone higher by means of the common
sound F. Complexity of modulation lies in the difficulty of replacing seven sounds in
a polyphonic chant having a complex structural composition. Its implementation in
a simple homophonic specimen is, of course, much easier.
In my opinion Prince Ioane (1768-1830) in “Kalmasoba” had this type of modu-
lation in mind when he discussed the frets of stringed instruments (Ioane Batonishvili,
180 Malkhaz Erkvanidze

1984: 396). It is regrettable that ancient instruments have not survived up to this day
(e.g. “Ebani”) but the structure of the old stringed instruments is embodied in various
stringed and wind instruments such as: “Panduri”, “Chonguri” (long neck lutes), “Changi”
(primitive lyre), “Salamuri” (flute), “Lartchemi” (pan-pipes) and others. Chonguri which
does not have frets was accorded in a different way by old singers. In the Chonguri
second tuning (fa, la, do, mi) the upper quint was partly diminished. See the exam-
ple 5. An expert in Georgian traditional singing, the late Benia Mikadze, privately
confided to me: “Sonny, in the middle (i.e. the upper fifth) we pinch it a little”.
We offer an instance of pitch (dynamic or emotional) modulation illustrated by
the Svan “Lile”. See the example 6. A pitch (tone) modulation is present here when
the whole structure moves upward a bit at the end of the stanza.
The dynamic or emotional modulation itself can be of two sub-types:
(1) when the construction (as in the case of “Lile”) goes abruptly upward by 1/
6-1/4 of a tone (or even more). This is mostly characteristic of Svan songs.
2) when the whole construction gradually slides up. Such phenomenon in tra-
ditional singing occurs all over Georgia, especially in harvest songs. Emotional mo-
dulation is alien to chanting. Here emotions should not be displayed. It is an internal
and concealed phenomenon.
Now I shall discuss the Georgian scale system and intervals between sounds.
The scale-type tuning fork helped us to measure the intervals. The work proved to be
very time-consuming. Following lengthy observations we came up with a scale sys-
tem which was achieved by connecting three homogeneous, falling Phrygian tetra-
chords. See the example 7. The tetrachord is divided into two equal parts and one
different part. This kind of tetrachord division is intended for polyphony. According to
our theory this is a true picture of Ioane Petritsi’s sound order. In the theory of music
this way of tying up tetrachords is called the minor perfect system. As is seen from the
example the Georgian scales are of downward direction (Rosebashvili, 1988). They
have reached us in this form.
Taking all this into account and proceeding from the idea of polyphony, we
cannot agree with the widely accepted opinion in Georgian musicology which sug-
gests that it is a bass part that represents the tonal centre of a song, defining the
scale. The bass often holds the supporting sound (drone) for a long time (especially
in Kartli-Kakhetian songs) which in no way points to its mode-defining function in
the construction. The bass in all cases proceeds from the upper part and follows it.
The term poly-scale is alien to Georgian polyphony and its scale system.
Now we offer the accepted sound-order differences of tonal modulation. In both
cases we proceed from the lower F. See the example 8. Here, as we have mentioned,
the common sound is only G. All the others undergo a change. During modulation
seven signs change. So, we are following with full-tone steps, second between F
and G there are six different sounds. The same will happen between other sounds.
Any study of the old Georgian scale arrangement should be thorough. The phe-
nomena researched in the present work deal with basic sound arrangement and not
particularly the Georgian one. In regional styles of Georgian traditional music the diffe-
rence occurs in the scale arrangement too. In my opinion, the old Georgian sound arran-
gement may be compared with the ancient Georgian language. The difference existing
from the point of view of abundance between the old Georgian and the new Georgian
On Georgian Scale System 181

languages which is full of foreign words may resemble the difference between the old
Georgian sound arrangement and the new one used by new Georgian professional
music. Along with all that, it possesses a special emotional charge and its revival will
assist in awakening the national spirit.

Here are the intervals, characteristic of Georgian scale system,

compared with neutral, Pythagorean and tempered systems:

Intervals Natural Pythagorean Tempered Georgian

order order order order

minor second – – 100 c –

major second 204 c 204 c 200 c –
second – – – 154; 172; 204
minor third 316 c 294 c 300 c –
major third 386 c 408 c 400 c –
third – – – 326; 344; 376
fourth 498 c 498 c 500 c 498; 530; 548
fifth 702 c 702 c 700 c 652; 670; 702
minor sixth 804 c 804 c 800 c –
major sixth 884 c 906 c 900 c –
sixth – – – 824; 856; 874
minor seventh 980 c 1008 c 1000 c –
major seventh 1088 c 1110 c 1110 c –
seventh – – – 996;1046; 1028
octave 1,200 c 1,200 c 1,200 c 1,200 c

Translated by MARINA KUBANEISHVILI

References

Arakishvili (Arakchiev), Dimitri. (1905). Short Essey on the Development of Georgian (Kartli-Kakhetian)
Folk Song. Moscow: K. Menshov Press. (In Russian)
Batonishvili, Ioane. (1984). (Written during the 1813-1828). Kalmasoba. In: Guram Gverdtsiteli, Nodar
Ebralidze and Revaz Tvaradze. Georgian Prose, Vol. 6. (pp. 7-577) Tbilisi: Sabchota Sakartvelo. (In
Georgian)
Kholopov, Iury. (1974). Scales of Ancient Greece. In: Iury Keldish (Ed. in Chief). Musical Encyclope-
dia (pp. 306-307). Moscow: Soviet Encyclopedia. (In Russian)
Rosebashvili, Kakhi. (1988). On Determination of Scale in Georgian Traditional Songs. In: Tsurtsumia,
Rusudan (Ed. in Chief). Questions of Polyphony of Georgian Music Collection of Research Articles
(pp. 30-41). Tbilisi: Tbilisi State Conservatoire. (In Georgian)
Umikashvili, Petre. (1878). Few remarks on Putting Georgian Church-Songs on Contemporary Nota-
tion. Newspaper Iveria, 44. (In Georgian)
 malxaz erqvaniZe. danarTi
182 Malkhaz Erkvanidze. APPENDIX

magaliTi 1.
EXAMPLE 1.

hipofrigiuli kilo frigiuli kilo

HypoPhrygian scale Phrygian scale
kvartuli wriT kvinturi wriT
by fourth circle by fifth circle

magaliTi 2.
EXAMPLE 2.

hipolidiuri kilo doriuli kilo

HypoLydian scale Dorian scale

magaliTi 3.
EXAMPLE 3.

`wamokruli~. asr. s. CavleiSvili, b. inwkirveli da v. simoniSvili.

“Tsamokruli” performed by S.Chavleishvili, S. Chkhishvili, V. Simonishvili.

kilouri modulacia fa hipofrigiulis sol kilodan fa hipofrigiulis

gavliT mi bemol hipolidiurSi
Scale modulation from G scale of F HypoPhrygian; via F HypoPhrygian to Es HypoLydian.
malxaz erqvaniZe. danarTi
Malkhaz Erkvanidze. APPENDIX 183

magaliTi 4.
EXAMPLE 4.

`Sen romelman gananTlen~.

asr. s. CavleiSvili, b. inwkirveli da v. simoniSvili.
“Shen romelman ganantlen”.
performed by S.Chavleishvili, B. Intskirveli, V. Simonishvili.
tonaluri modulacia fa hipofrigiulis mi bemol hipolidiuridan sol
hipofrigiulis fa hipolidiurSi
Tonal modulation from F HypoLydian of F HypoPhrygian to G HypoPhrygian of F HypoLydian.
 malxaz erqvaniZe. danarTi
184 Malkhaz Erkvanidze. APPENDIX

magaliTi 5 .
EXAMPLE 5.

magaliTi 6.
EXAMPLE 6.
`lile~. asr. sof. latalis gundi
“Lile”. performed by the choir from the village Latali
malxaz erqvaniZe. danarTi
Malkhaz Erkvanidze. APPENDIX 185

magaliTi 7.
EXAMPLE 7.

magaliTi 8.
EXAMPLE 8.

fa hipofrigiuli sol hipofrigiuli

F HypoPhrygian G HypoPhrygian