Introducing Yourself to Indian Classical Music 12-The Saptaswaras in the South- the Carnatic notes
In the South the notes Ri (Re), Ga, Dha, and Ni can occupy one of three positions. Ma only occupies two positions, as in Hindustani music, either natural (Shuddha) or sharp (Prati Madhyama). These notes that can occupy more than one position are known as vikriti swaras.
Sa and Pa, are generally considered to remain constant and are known as prakriti swaras.
While in the North names are shortened, for example, Shadja (Sa) can become shortened to Shadj, in the South there is a tendency to lengthen them. So Shadja becomes Shadjam or even Shadjamam.
The names of the notes in the Carnatic system are as follows:
1.Shadja (Shadjam or Shadjamam)= Sa
2.Shuddha Rishabha/Rishabham=Ri (R1 )
3.Chatusruti Rishabha/Rishabham=Ri (R2)
4.Shatsruti Rishabha/Rishabham=Ri ( R3)
5.Shuddha Gandhara/Gandharam=Ga (G1 )
6.Sadharana Gandhara/Gandharam =Ga (G2 )
7.Antara Gandhara/Gandharam=Ga (G3 )
8.Shuddha Madhyama/Madhyamam =Ma (M1 )
9.Prati Madhyama/Madhyamam =Ma (M2 )
10.Panchama/Panchamam =Pa
11.Shuddha Dhaivatha/Dhaivatham =Dha (D1 )
12.Chatusruti Dhaivatha/Dhaivatham=Dha (D2 )
13.Shatsruti Dhaivatha/Dhaivatham =Dha (D3)
14.Shuddha Nishadha =Ni (N1 )
15.Kaisiki Nishadha/Nishadham =Ni (N2 )
16.Kakali Nishadha/Nishadham =Ni (N3 )
Thus the octave in Carnatic music is divided into 16, unlike the Hindustani system. However the melodic values of some of the Carnatic notes overlap as follows:
Ri 2 = Ga 1
Ri 3 = Ga 2
Dha 2 = Ni 1
Dha 3 = Ni 2
So why divide the octave (known as sthayi in the South) into 16, when one might as well have kept it as 12?
It’s because of a system of classification, developed by the musicologist Venkatamakhi, in the 17th century, for the derivation of the seventy-two melakarta scheme. This is a system of classification of ragas followed in Carnatic music, about which more later.
Sometimes the notes are shown as belonging to 12 positions or swarasthanas and the “overlapping” notes are indicated as follows:
1. Shadjamam=Sa
2. Shuddha Rishabham=Ri (R1)
3. Chatusruti Rishabham = Ri (R2)=Shuddha Gandharam
4. Sadharna Gandharam= Ga (G1)=Shatsruti Rishabham
5.Antara Gandharam= Ga (G2)
6.Shuddha Madhyamam= Ma (M1)
7. Prati Madhyamam=Ma (M2)
8. Panchamam=Pa
9. Shuddha Dhaivatham=Dha (D1)
10. Chatusruti Dhaivatham=Dha (D2)=Shuddha Nishadham
11. Kaisiki Nishadham=Ni (N1)=Shatsruti Dhaivatam
12. Kakali Nishadham=Ni (N2)
Note that the word “shuddha” is used for different notes in the Hindustani and Carnatic systems.
Both Hindustani and Carnatic music use microtones (refer to the previous posts for a discussion of microtones), so remember that the division of the octave into various notes, whether 12 or 16, is only a starting point in Indian classical music.
Note: I discussed microtones in Indian music using the names of the notes/tones in Hindustani music, because I thought it would be simpler-the names in the Carnatic system can be a bit confusing at first, which is why I waited until now to introduce them.
Don’t worry:
If, by any chance, you’re getting worried about all the note/tone names and positions, or thinking you’ll never remember them-don’t worry. It’s not necessary to know them to appreciate the music. All one needs for that is a willing ear.
It is enough to know that there are seven basic notes, of which five can admit to a lot of tonal variation and this tonal variation can be very subtle. In fact, one does not even need to know this to appreciate the music!
Extremely helpful. Thanks!
I read, bookmark and keep coming back.
Thank you for the assurance in the last two paragraphs!
Quote : “It’s because of a system of classification, developed by someone called Venkatamakhi, in the 17th century, for the derivation of the seventy-two melakarta scheme”….
“…someone called Venkatamakhi,”: i wonder whether you’ll dismiss Pandit Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande as “someone called Bhatkhande” when you discuss the Hindustani system of classification of raagas….
i do admire your series on Carnatic music, but, i guess its precisely this kind of a casual, offhand remark about a much revered icon of Carnatic music reveals the “comprehension gap” – or, is it a gulf? – between not only the the artists and the rasikas of the two schools but even serious scholars who blog on the subject!
Venkatamakhin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venkatamakhin
Venkatamakhin also known as Venkateshwara, was a prominent musicologist and composer of Carnatic music; renowned for his Chaturdandi Prakashika in which he explicates the melakarta system of classifying ragas.[1] Venkatamakhin composed geethams and prabandhas, as well as 24 ashtapadis in praise of Lord Thyagaraja of Tiruvarur. Venkatamakhin was the son of Govinda Dikshita, a Kannada brahmin from Mysore. Govinda Dikshita himself was a scholar and musicologist, as well as a minister in the kingdom of Thanjavur.[2] Venkatamakhin received his formal training under his elder brother, Yagnanarayana Dikshita.
Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnu_Narayan_Bhatkhande
Pandit Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande (August 10, 1860 – September 19, 1936) was an Indian musicologist who wrote the first modern treatise on (North Indian) Hindustani Classical Music, an art which had been propagated earlier for a few centuries mostly through oral traditions. During those earlier times, the art had undergone several changes, rendering the raga grammar documented in scant old texts outdated.[1]
Ragas used to be classified into Raga (male), Ragini (female), and Putra (children). Bhatkhande reclassified them into the currently used Thaat system. He noted that several ragas did not conform to their description in ancient Sanskrit texts. He explained the ragas in an easy-to-understand language and composed several bandishes which explained the grammar of the ragas. He borrowed the idea of lakshan geet from the Carnatic music scholar Venkatamakhin.
Madhavan,
I have changed the sentence, but I think you misunderstood. If I was talking about Bhatkhande I would have used the same terminology. Many people do not know who Venkatamakhi/Venkatmukhi/Venkatamakhin or Bhatkhande were. The intention here was just to introduce the name without going into detail, as that would be too much information in one post. Children’s history books (and even adult beginner guides) employ this kind of casual style sometimes, and pictorially depict great historical characters in caricature, but I don’t think disrespect is implied there.
In writing and speaking about Hindustani and Carnatic music, much time is spent using reverential words and making references to the divine. That is not the intention here, but neither is direspect.
This is a blog post, not a serious scholarly article, and does employ a casual style. However, casual does not equal disrespectful. The fact that I put Venkatamakhi’s name in bold, should, I think, have pointed to the fact, that he is important.
That there is a gulf between the rasikas, scholars and practitioners of two schools (though not necessarily between the forms of music themselves), I am well aware of, and something I have commented on more than once. By virtue of being a “north Indian” learning Carnatic music, I have had to listen to all kinds of nonsense from both North and South Indians. Neither group can comprehend why I am learning Carnatic music and both have set out to prove how their respective preferences are superior.
I object to your assumption that I am dismissing Venkatamakhi, and your assumption that I would treat Bhatkhande and the Hindustani system as superior, “i wonder whether you’ll dismiss Pandit Vishnu Narayan Bhatkhande as “someone called Bhatkhande” when you discuss the Hindustani system of classification of raagas….” with some anger and a great deal of hurt. In my mind, there is no gulf, as both systems of music are as essential to me as breathing (something that should have been obvious if you’ve read this blog).
hi,
I am saving all your post to read when I get good quite time. I am reading blog post in a hurry these days.
Sometimes simple words could be misundertood . When I wrote my last comment when you started this series, I meant to appreciate you for writing about Indian classical music but wrote as carnatic music. You comments pointed out that you write both carnatic and hindustani. Thats exactly I meant but hee hee with a two year old sitting on my lap I get to type as I think as fast I can : ).
I love this malayalam film song which gives a glimpse about sapathaswaram.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0a7PI6jXD74.
This song is sung by DR. K.J. Yesudoss and Ravindran master (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raveendran)
I am looking forward for more post on this series specially from hindustani side since I am learning a lot about hindustani singers from your posts.
Enjoy your summer.
CS
CS, thanks for the video link! Have a great summer too.
Thank you very much. this info is very useful