At the present stage of Persian classical music life – i.e., a stage in which the most important scientific and theoretical challenge is to find ways to innovate in order to break free from the content stagnation and aesthetically static state of Qâjâr art tradition – initiating discussions on the theoretical foundations of Persian classical music, in general, and the technical details of the musical system of radif (or radifs), in particular, might not seem to be the best subject for research. This subject appears even less interesting when one remembers that there are as many theories, analyses and classifications as there are renowned scholars, prolific researchers and even interested students. Apart from the commonly agreed issues, a general comparison of the more prominent works shows that there is not much disagreement among authors regarding a large proportion of the problematic theoretical foundations; the disagreements in the perception of Persian music exist mainly due to unstandardized terms and a lack of unified theory. In fact, only a small proportion of the theoretical foundations are either truly disagreed upon or were not initially a part of discussions. This lack of inclusion was a result of excessive concentration on existing theories, which have failed to take such foundations into account. Perhaps, without actually sensing it, these general theoretical weaknesses are barring us from reaching a common understanding and a practical consensus on how to give a fresh breath to Persian classical music. When there still exist some aspects of the phenomenon, which are more or less unclear, the ways of modifying it will also remain unclear. This paper does not intend to critique different theories on dastgâhi music. Instead, through a comparative view of the concept of maqâm in two neighboring cultures and subsequent analysis of the musical structure of a particular example from Persian music, maqam-e Delkash, the attempt is made to share a personal, and slightly different, perception of the function of the dastgâhi music system with the theorists in the field. Furthermore, through presenting conceptual suggestions and clarifying the function of various musical features, the aim is to contribute, albeit to a limited extent, to the standardization and development of an ideal unified theory.

2. Maqâm versus Dastgâh

Apparently, some of the most fundamental terms or concepts of Persian classical music, such as dastgâh, maqâm, âvâz or gushe, still do not have a single, exact meaning. As well, the very basic issue of whether the radif system consists of seven or twelve dastgâhs continues to be doubted. There are also key questions left unanswered, such as “Why and based on what logic is Kord-e Bayât, which does not seem to have anything less than Afshâri, for example, not considered an âvâz along with the other five?” Although the details of the historical process of the old maqâmic system’s transformation into a newer dastgâhi system are to a great extent hidden to us, it seems that by possessing pre-dastgâhi musical examples and tracing the maqâm system in related musical cultures, understanding the essential similarities and differences between these two systems would not be so difficult for a contemporary researcher. Further, attempting to clarify the exact relationship between dastgâh and maqâm might be the key to finding logical answers to the aforementioned questions.

Even today, Persian oral musical culture does not seem to make a real distinction between dastgâh-e Homâyun and maqâm-e Homâyun, for example, and there are some works in the literature, which directly or indirectly, consider the two as equivalent. However, it is hard to doubt that most researchers in the field of Persian classical music know the dastgâh as a “multi-modal cycle” (cf. As’adi 2003: 46). Accepting this single characteristic will immediately lead to a slight distinction between the concept of dastgâh and the quintessential meaning of maqâm, as it is understood in Turkish and Arabic cultures. As we all know, ethnomusicological sources today define the concept of “mode” generally as a tonal entity which consists of a particular combination of elements, such as: 1) musical scale, 2) degree functions and their functional classifications, 3) ambitus, 4) movements and melodic progressions and tendencies, 5) typical melodies and the degree of their significance, 6) ethos, 7) ornamentation, 8) rhythmic structures, etc. Now let’s compare this definition of mode with the factors constituting the maqâm concept in one of the classical music traditions neighboring Iran. This is a tradition that has continuously preserved such a musical system for at least three or four centuries. The results from indigenous theories and ethnomusicological research on the musical practice of the Turkish-Ottoman tradition, such as the studies by Yekta (1921), Özkan (2007), Signell (1986), Feldman (1996) and Wright (2000) show that the identity of an individual Turkish maqâm, without modulation, is generally the result of interweaving of the five fundamental elements, namely, a scale, degrees functions, melodic progression, particular melody-types, and musical texture. It should be noted that Turkish or Western researchers have not tried to adjust the modern definition of mode to this Eastern tradition. Instead all of these characteristics, and even the less concrete issues such as melodic progression and musical texture, with quite similar local terminologies, have been indigenously theorized, classified and practically taught, constantly, at least from Cantemir’s time (18th century) until the present artistic tradition.

3. The Characteristics of Maqâm in Persian Classical Music

Presenting a comprehensive theory of maqâm in Persian classical music is beyond the framework of this study as an individual research article; however, the previously mentioned assumption that the Persian maqâm generally possesses the same constituent elements as its Turkish relative does need justification. In this section we briefly compare aspects of these five constituent elements of maqâm in Persian and Ottoman traditions, avoiding the obvious. This is done for two reasons: 1) to show that the essence of this phenomenon, maqâm, is the same in the two cultures, and 2) to use the theoretical system of Turkish music to clarify various ambiguities and focus on some neglected issues in the theoretical principles of Persian dastgâhi music.

3.1  Scale

Even without entering the detailed discussion of comparing the number and types of the employed tetrachords/pentachords and the issue of the interval nuances in the Persian and Ottoman traditions, there seems to be a consensus about one thing: the scale of each maqâm in the dastgâhi music, just like the scale of its Turkish counterpart, is made up of a tetrachord plus a pentachord or vice versa. In different maqâms, the structural tetrachord and pentachord can be homogeneous or heterogeneous. The fact that the central core of some Persian maqâms is sometimes heard as a single tetrachord or even a trichord seems to be the result of a sort of “laziness” in realization of the concerned melodic progression. In these cases, melodic clichés of the maqâms in the particular aesthetics of radif do not use the octave space rapidly. But, this is something that should not be attributed to the essence of maqâm in the Old tradition because in apparently Persian styles older than radif, even the very first stage of stabilization of each maqâm is generally done through expanding in a space of about one octave. The opening phrase of pishrow-e Shokufezâr by Hassan Jân (Kantemiroğlu 2001, vol. II: 53), a composer of Iranian origin, or the opening of the piece kâr dar Maqâm-e ‘Ajam ascribed to Abdulqâder Marâghi (Göyenç 2009), are good examples in this regard. Therefore, contrary to some assumptions, stabilizing the maqâm before its stages of development to the interval of an octave, and even using long passages and long melodic jumps, depending on how they are used, can be totally unrelated to the recent influences of Western music and an entirely traditional behavior.

Another point about the maqâm scale, which is implicit in Turkish theories and can be true for the Persian maqâm as well, is the distinction which should be made between the two concepts “scale” and “ambitus”. The octave scale of each maqâm forms the “minimum structure” and main foundation of sounds and intervals, i.e., musically said, the characteristic mode or çeşni (taste) of that maqâm, whereas the ambitus of each maqâm, depending on its unique character in different stages, can be developed to a great extent, going down starting from the lowest note of the primary scale or going up starting from the highest note of the scale, with the primary tetrachord-pentachord system either preserved or changed.

Naming the potential scale’s degrees in Persian classical music with the French names of the scale degrees (Do, Re, Mi, Fa, Sol, La, Si) and inventing half-breed expressions to refer to the playing positions of maqâms and dastgâh-s, such as Mâhur-e Do and Segâh-e La koron^[1], is one of the weaknesses of the current theoretical foundations of Persian music. This is especially the case when we know that in the past, in the Persian musical culture, some contrivances were thought to deal with such issues. The Systematist School named the scale’s degrees with Abjad letters based on a particular rule, and later this method was gradually replaced by a type or types of nominative degree systems. Eventually, as the solid documents by Tanburi Harutin show, in the first half of the 18^th century, the Persian court musicians named the principal degrees of an octave, respectively, from the lowest to the highest: Yegâh, Dogâh, Segâh, Châhârgâh, Panjgâh, Sheshgâh, Haftgâh, and Hashtgâh (cf. Popescu-Judetz 2002: 101, 131). The other degrees between the principal degrees in the Persian musical scale of that time might have had their own names which Harutin did not mention. But we know that in the same century, Cantemir referred to all degrees of the Ottoman musical scale with their specific names. Since there are a lot of similarities between the names of Cantemir’s “principal degrees” and those of the Persian scale, it is likely that at least some names of his intermediate degrees are the same as the Persian names of their 18th century Persian equivalents. The system Cantemir referred to is to some extent still in use in Turkish art music today. The writer believes that after stating the position of the dastgâh-s in relation to each other and with collective consensus, such a system can and should be revived in today’s Persian music. In such a system, each degree has a particular name, and additionally, it should be determined on which degree the main position of each dastgâh, known as its “râst-kuk”, is formed, for example, dastgâh-e Râst on Yegâh degree, Shur on Dogâh degree, Segâh on Segâh degree, etc. After this codification, other local technical terms can be used to refer to transposed forms of dastgâh-s and various modulations, for example, dastgâh-e Shur on Panjgâh degree or modulation to Esfâhân on Dogâh degree.

3.2  Degrees’ Functions

The second constituent element of the Persian maqâm, like its Ottoman version, is the various functions of the scale degrees, and obviously it is their magnetic or gravitational pull, attraction and their roles as starting points, suspense makers, stops and ending points which form various melodic progressions on the soulless frame of different scales. In the Persian musical culture there are five functions with a particular terminology, namely, shâhed (principal polarized tone; tonic), ist (stop), khâteme (final tone), moteghayyer and âghâz (starting tone). In the Turkish theories six functions are mentioned: âghâze or giriş (the starting tone), durâk (the first tone of the scale and the maqâm’s tonic), guçlu (the maqâm’s dominant), âsmâ kârâr (suspending degrees), yeden (the leading degree and the lower neighbor of durâk) and kârâr (the final tone). Comparing the two sets of functions and regarding the need for specific terminologies to explain some unnamed functions in the Persian musical analyses, it seems necessary for the Persian musical theory to employ a standard term equivalent to the Western dominant tone – for degrees such as C in Shur on G, G in Mâhur on C, F in Segâh on A koron, etc. – and a term equivalent to leading tone (which can be away from the tonic by any interval, not necessarily a semitone) – for degrees such as B before tonic in Mâhur on C, F before tonic in Navâ on G, B before tonic in Châhârgâh on C, etc.

3.3  Melodic Progression

The third constituent element of the Persian maqâm is the melodic progression, which is a vital issue not considered among Iranian theories in the sense that it is going to be explained here. To elaborate on the issue, let’s first become more familiar with the concept of melodic progression in the Ottoman-Turkish maqâm. In the many existing theories, the progression of each Turkish maqâm is unanimously identified based on two aspects: “the general melodic direction” and “the codified melodic progression”.

Each Turkish maqâm can only have one of the three general directions of “ascendant” (çikici), “ascendant-descendant” (çikici – inici) or “descendant” (inici). The ascendant maqâm starts in the low register of the scale, near the final degree of the maqâm, gradually develops upwards, and finally cadences in the beginning point. The ascendant-descendant maqâm begins about in the middle of the scale, near the dominant degree of the maqâm (which may be the third, fourth or fifth degree of the final tone), and after developing relatively upward finally cadences on the conclusive tone in bass. The descendent maqâm’s progression begins from the highest tonal areas of the scale, near the octave of the final, stays in that area, then gradually moves downwards and finally cadences on the final degree in bass.

It seems that before the elaboration of radif, individual Persian maqâms, implicitly and practically, also had such a characteristic criterion. Later, this very criterion provided an underlying but specific algorithm for the late design of the radif dastgâh-s. This descriptive classification seems to be true for the Persian system as well, and it thus can theorize all existing maqâms in the heart of dastgâhi system with respect to the melodic direction: all primary or main maqâms of the dastgâhs, like maqâm-e Shur in dastgâh-e Shur, maqâm-e Mâhur in dastgâh-e Mâhur and maqâm-e Segâh in dastgâh-e Segâh, are definitely ascendant maqâms. Ascendant-descendant maqâms are the intermediate or secondary maqâms of each dastgâh, such as Shahnâz, Delkash, Bidâd, Zâbol, Mokhâlef, Nahoft, Shekaste, Bayât-e Râje and Panjgâh. They follow the main maqâm and somehow begin in the middle of its scale, near its dominant degree. After developing, they cadence on the final of the main maqâm. It should also be mentioned that what we know as âvâz, such as âvâz-e Abu’atâ, âvâz-e Dashti, âvâz-e Bayât-e Kord, âvâz-e Bayât-e Tork, âvâz-e Afshâri and âvâz-e Esfâhân, is nothing but a maqâm which has been independently interpreted, perhaps due to its greater importance in comparison to those maqâms incorporated in the seven dastgâhs. All these types of maqam, i.e., âvâz-s, are also obviously ascendant-descendant ones. One might argue that âvâz is also “multi-modal” since, for example, Afshâri modulate to ‘Arâq, Dashti contains Owj, Bayât-e Tork contains Shekaste, Abu’atâ has Hejâz, etc. Firstly, even if such an argument is right, being “multi-modal” is of much less significance and is less felt in an âvâz compared to a dastgâh, and the number of modes generated in an âvâz is also less than a dastgâh’s. Generally, in an âvâz, a maximum number of two or three modal spaces are formed rather close to each other, whereas in a dastgâh, there may sometimes be more than six different and more or less contrasting maqâms, and the modulations in dastgâhs are on the whole considered “less smooth”. Secondly and more importantly, a distinction should be made between the melodic development in the upper limits of the maqâm and the modulation of a maqâm into another one. For example, the Turkish maqâm Huseyni, which is similar to Persian âvâz-e Dashti and âvâz-e Hoseyni, and the Turkish maqâm Beyâti, which is similar to Persian âvâz-e Abu’atâ do not permanently stay in the primary mode, but gradually form an ascension toward an apogee, like the apogee of gushe Owj for Persian Dashti. However, these ascending movements, which are not really revolutionary and can definitely be accompanied by some changes in the scale and modal centers, are generally regarded as melodic development and a part of the predetermined identity of the same maqâm rather than modulating to a new maqâm. The writer believes that, apart from examples such as the modulation to Shekaste in âvâz-e Bayât-e Tork, most of the modal changes within the structure of âvâz-s of Persian radif are intra-maqâm developments rather than modulating changes; therefore, we prefer to consider the current Persian âvâz-s as “sizable maqâms” rather than “small dastgâhs”. Apart from this, the last category of radif maqâms such as Hoseyni, Maqlub, ‘Arâq, Râk, Mansuri, Nowruz (in Homâyun and Râst-panjgâh), which are more or less formed in the Owj (apogee) of the dastgâh, can be considered as descendent maqâms. After the exposition of their primary cores in the apogee of the scale, they always cadence on the final degree of the dastgâh’s main maqâm.

But what is the second aspect of the concept of seyir, i.e., the codified melodic progression, in the Turkish theory? The codified melodic progression (seyir) is the map and the main track of melodic behaveiors in a maqâm at different stages of forming, developing and returning with respect to the function of the principal degrees of the scale (but without innovative modulations). The principles of melodic progression of each maqâm in the Ottoman tradition, contrary to what is sometimes thought, are not so flexible; they are generally fixed, but can be practiced in different ways and more freely in some other aspects (to be discussed). The Turkish sources describe this codified melodic progression in two methods: the first method, which can be traced back at least to Cantemir’s time (cf. Kantemiroglu 2001, vol. I: 48–111), is the verbal description in which the writer in text or the teacher in speech explains what degree a maqâm begins on, where it then moves, which degree it emphasizes, and which maqâm it touches, etc. The second method is modern and is about composing very short “music-models” which, in brief and in a few measures, introduce to the reader or listener all the stages of maqâm progression. As an example we can refer to around thirty progressions which Rauf Yekta suggested in his 1921 Lavignac article for identifying maqâms (cf. Yekta 1921: 2997-3010). For an Iranian musicologist it is obvious that all his radifi maqâms have a fixed, algorithmic and quintessential codified melodic progression and can and should be theorized in an instructionally practical way – contrary to Walter Feldman’s opinion, for example. Feldman implicitly considers the development of the codified melodic progression as an innovation and a simply Ottoman characteristic (Feldman 1996: 278). The concept of melodic progression should by no means be mistaken for or mixed with the melody-types of radif maqâms. The melodic progression is the formula, i.e., the algorithm, of forming a maqâm, whereas the melody-types are the materials that are included in this formula or algorithm and constitute music. We shall explore this relationship more concretely in the section that analyzes maqâm-e Delkash. Yet what can be put forward as a hypothesis is that from a musicological point of view, the scheme of constructing or codifying the radif involves a basically close idea to what is considered the new or “the second method” of teaching seyir-s in the Ottoman musical tradition, i.e., teaching and consolidating the concept of melodic progression through a “purposeful intense music-model”. The difference is that the radif is older than this Turkish method, the expressive form of its main part is a “taqsim-like” form with free rhythm, and more importantly, the magnificence and distinctive artistic quality of its construction can by no means be compared to the simple seyir-s as Yekta, for example, had proposed. When Cantemir points out that the Persian musicians teach their taqsim-s “combination by combination” (cf. Feldman 2007: 153), he can be referring to the radif, and this can indicate that this large collection, which has introduced and stabilized the progression of each and every maqâm in the form of the broader progression of dastgâh-s as individual artistic models, was either completely or partially shaped in the 18^th century.

3.4  Melody-Types

Each of the Turkish maqâms – contrary to what some Pan-Turkists in the field of Ottoman music claim – obviously employs completely recognizable variations of some melody-types or at least fixed or cliché motif-types. These melody or motif-types are particularly identifiable during the formation of the key points of maqâm progressions, like the starting points, expressing the exact mode, typical alterations and different cadences, specifically on the dominant degree (yârim kârâr) or on the first degree (tâm kârâr). Nevertheless, it is a fact that forming a maqâm in Ottoman style is to a great extent independent of “ready-made” or “fixed melody-types” in comparison to the current Persian style.

In fact, it seems that in forming the Turkish maqâm, after the innovative and compelling modulations – which are truly expected from “a competent musician” as qualitative criteria specifically while performing a taqsim – choosing or composing the musical material to melodize the progression, while respecting common aesthetic standards, is the second area which is to a great extent free and left to the personal taste of the improviser or composer. On the contrary, in the construction of the Persian radifi maqâm, the melody-types are as “ready-made” and “repetitive” as the melodic progression, and this is the reason these two phenomena are irritatingly blended in many Persian theories. With a bit of exaggeration, one can claim that in the “improvisations” and “compositions” of the current style of Persian classical music, there are not usually a lot of new materials or melodies; rather, there are an infinite number of variations of fixed materials adjusted to the different situations of the set progressions. On a large scale, this seems to be the most important difference in maqâm formation between the Persian and Turkish versions. It also appears to be the direct result of employing a phenomenon known as radif, not as a “progression-model” of the dastgâhs’ maqâms – which might have been the intention of its original designers – but as a sacred repertoire of the only tunes inherited from the past for being remade in the form of improvisation or composition based on it.

With regard to their dispersion rather than their physical character, the radif melody-types can be divided into three categories: those specific to a particular maqâm of a dastgâh or a particular independent maqâm, those specific to a dastgâh which are employed several times through the exposition of its maqâms, and those which move in the entire radif and can appear at any position.

As we analyze maqâm-e Delkash, some concrete examples of this categorization are seen. But a single point remains: the term melody-type is usually considered the same as the term “gushe” in the Persian theories. And this, the writer believes, is not right. Musical analyses can help us come to the conclusion that the division of “gushe-s”, being presented in a sequence within a dastgâh, is vague and has not been organized based on “a fixed qualitative and quantitative criterion”, either originally or by the interpreters. In the existing radif-s, a gushe can consist of a single melody-type and form a whole musical sentence or a part of it; it can contain several melody-types and again express a whole sentence or a part of it; or it can consist of several melody-types and not only one or more whole sentences but also a complete progression of a maqâm. Therefore, general categorizations, such as “rhythmic gushe”, “prosodic gushe” and “tahriri gushe”, though true in some cases, are in many cases only a part of what a gushe involves. For example, a gushe may begin with a rhythmic melody-type, immediately followed by a tahriri melody-type, and is still the same gushe. Therefore, a gushe comprises melody-types; and it is the melody-types that should be categorized first based on their forms. Through finding the rules and possibilities of their combinations in the context of different gushes, we can have the classification of “gushe-types” as well.

3.5  Musical Texture

In theory and practice of the Ottoman musical tradition each maqâm has its own main position, but can also be transposed to other levels independently. The maqâms, which are formed on a degree other than their main position, are known as shedd or transposed maqâms. Karl Signell calls the unique and particular identity and sound color of each maqâm in its main position the texture (tessitura) (cf. Signell 1986: 137–139). For acoustic reasons, such as changes in the sound quality or timbre of the instrument, changes in amplifying harmonics and, more importantly, a number of slight changes happening in the structure of intervals as a result of the instrument’s limitations in the process of transposition, the sound texture of each transposed form of a maqâm is different from the texture in its main position. This difference in Turkey has been considered so significant that it has gradually caused some of the transposed maqâms to gain an independent character and even a particular name of their own. For example, if maqâm Kurdi, whose first degree in its main position is on Dugâh degree, is lowered by a tone and formed from Râst degree, it will become Kurdili Hijâzkâr; or if maqâm Buselik, which is formed on Dugâh degree in its main position, is lowered by a fifth and formed on Yegâh degree, the maqâm will become Sultâni Yegâh (Signell 1986: 134-141). As previously mentioned, since there are few detailed and comprehensive theoretical works, such as Lost Scales by Mortezâ Hannâne (2004), in which the positional relationship between the Persian dastgâhs and issues such as Râst-kuk and Chap-kuk are taken into account, the discussion about transposing the dastgâhs and their maqâms, e.g., which position is the main position of this or that dastgâh and what is their transposed form, still has many ambiguities. Yet there is no doubt that the sound texture is as significant an element in forming each Persian maqâm, and generally each Persian dastgâh, as it is in the Turkish tradition. Additionally, Persian musicians are well aware of the difference in effectiveness and special spirit of a maqâm caused by performing in different positions. In today’s Persian musical culture, changing the position of a maqâm or a dastgâh does not change its name^[2], but the idea that transposition or at least some transpositions, like those of the Turkish tradition, do not practically make a completely different identity or character for the original maqâm or dastgâh, should be deeply doubted. Are Esfahân on C and Esfahân on F really the same maqâm with the same identity in the perception system of a Persian santur player? The writer’s suggestion is that after codifying and standardizing the main positions and the physical proportion of dastgâhs on the potential scale, the sound texture, which is so significant and noticeable for Persian musicians, should be recognized and classified as an element whose change would transform the identity of a maqâm and dastgâh. It is needless to point out that the change in only one of the aforementioned four constituent elements in a Persian or Ottoman maqâm is enough to change its identity and cause it to be regarded as a different maqâm, even though other elements remain unchanged.

4. Maqâm-e Delkash

After explaining the five constituents of a maqâm and in order to give a practical example of how it is formed and how it functions in dastgâhi music, here we analyze maqâm-e Delkash, one of the important maqâms of Persian music. Delkash, without having the title of “maqam”, is classified within dastgâh-e Mâhur progression. Here, we compare three instrumental versions of Delkash in Mirzâ ‘Abdollâh radif (During 1991), Âqâ Hoseyn Qoli radif (Pirniyâkân 2001) and Musâ Ma'rufi radif (Ma'rufi 1995). Our focus is mainly on describing the function and the concrete relationship between the two constituent elements of a maqâm, i.e., melodic progression and melody-types, based on the aforementioned concepts.

In our opinion, the large body of dastgâh-e Mâhur in all three radif-s is formed from seven woven together maqâms: the primary and principal maqâm is maqâm-e Mâhur and the six secondary maqâms which are formed relative to it, or referring to it, are maqâm-e Goshâyesh (or Âvâz or Dâd), maqâm-e Delkash, maqâm-e Shekaste, maqâm-e Hesâr-e Mâhur, maqâm-e ‘Arâq and maqâm-e Râk.

The musical scale of maqâm-e Delkash is made up of a Mâhur penthacord plus a Shur tetrachord on C (= tonic of Mâhur). But the tonic of the maqam-e Delkash is on the fifth degree of Mâhur’s tonic, i.e., G. In this maqâm the F degree is a suspended stop and the A koron/natural is a variable degree.

The upper ambitus of the maqam-e Delkash, in cases of the development of the basic core, can go higher by about a fifth from the highest note. The lower ambitus, which is particularly used at the cadence into maqâm-e Mâhur and the ending points of Delkash progression, can be expanded even by an octave lower than the tonic of Mâhur.

4.1  Position and Combination of gushe-s of maqam-e Delkash in three instrumental radif-s

With respect to the time of emergence and the order of arrangement, maqâm-e Delkash is the third modal domain in the ascendant progression of dastgâh-e Mâhur, after C modal domain (maqâm-e Mâhur) and D modal domain (maqâm-e Âvâz or Goshâyesh). This maqâm is presented in the form of three conjunct gushe-s in all three radif-s interpretations, and as we will see, it is always the combination of all these three gushe-s, and not just one, which fully demonstrates the direction and unique codified melodic progression of maqâm-e Delkash. The three constituent gushe-s of this maqâm in Mirzâ ‘Abdollâh radif are Delkash, Châhârmezrâb and Forud. The same names with the same order are also used for the three gushe-s of Âqâ Hoseyn Qoli radif. However, the third gushe of Ma'rufi radif is differently named and known as gushe Hâji Hasani.

One of the most artistic logics that the original and seemingly unknown “designers” of radif employed in linking the different internal maqâms of a dastgâh is that the new modal and structuring formulas and principles of the secondary maqâms of each dastgâh, which successively follow each other through its general progression, are always formed somehow on the basis of the earlier modal principles and are woven on them with the least friction. The qualitative thoroughness, formal homogeneity and aesthetic uniformity through the entire radif is obvious proof that the musicians who first presented such a repertoire have definitely done more than simply compiling it. Moreover, another credible aesthetic logic in the radif-s can be theorized: the emergence and stabilization of new principles of a secondary maqâm in a dastgâh never abolish the principles of the earlier primary maqâm and the secondary ones, but are added to them. The practical manifestation of this logic is particularly observable in the return from a secondary maqâm to a primary maqâm of a dastgâh, which occurs in two general ways: in one the return from a secondary maqâm of the dastgâh to the primary one is a direct return with no other secondary maqâm mediation, and in another the return is an indirect one with the mediation of the flavor of one or more secondary maqâms. In both cases, through the unifying returns of the progression in the dastgâh, the modal principles of the primary maqâm and the mediating secondary maqâm or maqâms remain identical to their earlier state when they were introduced and stabilized through the exposition of the ascendant progression of the dastgâh. The only difference is that the modal principles of each maqâm, when they are first presented in the ascendant progression of a dastgâh, are expressed elaborately and in detail, but during the returns or cadences only those parts of them with naturally more conclusive forms are mostly used individually and briefly.

Unknown designers of radif used some composition techniques to conjoin maqâm-e Mâhur and maqâm-e Delkash in the heart of dastgâh-e Mâhur. It should be noted that there is a relative homogeneity of the raw musical material used in maqâm-e Mâhur and maqâm-e Delkash. Also, the modal links between these two maqâms, or the way in which the latter is formed on the basis of the modal principles of the former with the least friction, are observable in the very basic selection of modal centers or polarized degrees of the latter. On the one hand, the tonic or the modal center of Delkash, that is G, is the fifth degree of the tonic in maqâm-e Mâhur, and on the other hand, in the principles of sentence structure of maqâm-e Mâhur, functions as the most important temporary stop. For these two significant reasons the melody-types adjustable to maqâm-e Mâhur frequently employ the G before and after the tonic. The temporary stop of maqâm-e Delkash, that is F, on the one hand, is the fourth of the tonic in Mâhur, and on the other hand, is one of the most functional and emphasized degrees, particularly through the development stages of maqâm Goshâyesh, the second maqâm of the dastgâh. Thus, both principal degrees which make the mode in Delkash have been stabilized and suspended again and again before the emergence of this maqâm in the pre- Delkash progression of dastgâh-e Mâhur, and therefore, sound completely familiar to the ear. Hence, in spite of the sudden appearance of the accidental A-koron in the beginning scale of Delkash, the shift of maqâm-e Mâhur into Delkash sounds like a relatively smooth modulation.

We do not clearly know whether the musical whole of what is known as Delkash today, apart from its name, was one of the standard modulations of old maqâm-e Mâhur or whether it was considered an independent maqâm in the pre-radif era. We also have no knowledge of whether the designers of radif found the fifth degree of the scale of Mâhur a better position for it compared to the other six dastgâhs, or it was the creators of radif who made such a maqâm for such a position in dastgâh-e Mâhur. But aside from the question of which of these possibilities is closer to reality, what is clear is that the general aesthetic filtering for modulations to be smooth, even in the dastgâhs, is to some extent also employed here, just like an extensive proportion of other modulations of the radif. The most important way of producing such an effect is avoiding very contrasted changes in the degrees’ functions and maintaining maximum similarity between the scales of the first and second maqâms. Of course, it is worth mentioning that weaving the maqâms together with minimum possible friction is not necessarily a value, and perhaps in another style juxtaposing the maqâms which are in contrast with each other would be more impressive and pleasurable. Therefore, one of the most artistic logics mentioned only emphasizes the fact that when a single unified aesthetic point of view is applied to almost 400 musical pieces, clearly we are not dealing with a process of random collection of melodies. Behind this material organization there has been a codified plan and a conscious scheme. Otherwise, the remaining works from the older Persian musical styles help us to determine that such a filter was never used so forcefully before radif, and sometimes even acting contrary to this logic had been considered an aesthetic criterion.

4.2  Codified melodic progression and direction of maqam-e Delkash

Based on the definition provided, maqâm-e Delkash is an ascendant-descendant maqâm, since it starts in the middle of the scale, on the dominant of its ending degree as well as that of the main maqâm of the dastgâh, and then, after developing in this range, descends towards the ending degree in bass.

The codified melodic progression of maqâm-e Delkash can be explained in two main stages: 1) Stabilization and development of the core of the maqâm, which is formed around the G tonic, and 2) cadence from this range to the primary maqâm of the dastgâh and its conclusive degree.

Comparing the melodic logics employed in the three interpretations under discussion shows that each musical sentence in the core of maqâm-e Delkash is formed by juxtaposing several “melodic blocks” each of which has a completely specific melodic function. By melodic block we are referring to an empty frame which should take in or carry a melody-type or musical material and shape and arrange it to fulfill its specific function. If these modal functions are considered as a classification criterion, four types of melodic blocks can be identified through the entire maqâm-e Delkash:

1. Type 1 Melodic Blocks: their function is to focus the musical material mainly on the tonic of Delkash, that is G, then repeatedly emphasize and eventually end on this very degree. While developing, these blocks use the upper G and Shur tetrachord, but in any case they end on the same degree, which is the tonic of Delkash.