Re: Re[2]: Dating the melodies used in Psalms, cantillation,

[richard_wolpoe <richard_wolpoe...>]

re: megillo trope
Yes. As far as I know al lthe German baed kehillos of Wash. Heights do not use 
trop for Ss-Ruth-Koheles... 

re: emes trop
        I cannnot deny nor confirm the actual history fo the trop.  I am jsut 
pointing out that Iyov contains 2 different systems.  My simple (simplistic?) 
understanding is that when the mode is "tehillim" like the emes is used (e.g. 
Mishle and the most of Iyov)

        Now this above theory has to take into account Shmuel and other points 
of tanahc (ezra, Diveri Hayomim, Yeshaya) that use Tehillim like passages 
wouthou emes trop.  Nu go figure.

        And I strongly suspect that none of the cantillation meoldies refelct 
the original melodies taht wer in the beis hamikdosh.  I base this on several 
reasons:

1) the melodies sound VERY local.  yemenite trop does not sound like German 
Trop.
2) There probably was a conscous effort to avoid reproducing certina beis 
hamikdosh melodies  - remember sihu lonu mishir Tsiyon?  I suspect that a smilar
thing happened follwiing churban bayis sheine. (NO I have no evidence, jsut 
intuition.)

On the otehr hand, the system of trop is highly consistent as far as elucidating
the phrasing of Tanach.  Any coscienscious baal koreh will sense immeidately how
to phrase any of the 24 books knowing just the rudements of the rules and a bit 
of ivrei.

EG Ani Hashem elokeichem is occasionally translated as I YHYH, am your God.  
it's beautiful, but unfaithful.  the meircho tipcho clearly points to I am YHYH,
your God.  Now any darshan will override trop to make a drosho work.  But in the
real of Peshat, they should behave according to the rules.  ein mikro yotsei 
midei negninoso <poetic license>

Regards,
Rich Wolpoe

______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Dating the melodies used in Psalms, cantillation,
Author:  <jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org> at Tcpgate
Date:    7/1/98 2:19 PM


>
>The German communities do NOT use trope for Ruth-Kohelet-Shir HaShirim).
>The Roedelheim Machzor specifically prints them witout the trope.
>
>There's a lot more on this.  I believe Heidenheim attempted to relate
>the EMES (Iyov Mishl Tehillim) to the corresponding trope for the other
>21 books.  There are parallel passages in Tehillim and Shmuel that can
>help decode this relationship.  And as we know, the beginning of Iyov
>uses the standard Trop, not the Emes trop.  I don't know how that goes
>along with the understanding that the trops come from different schools.
>

Thank you for the additional interesting info!  Is there any other
source we can use to corroborate the Roedelheim Machzor on this?

One clarification:  my comment about "the trope come from different
schools" is based on this:  there were three different attempts to
establish vowels and cantillation marks during the 800's to 900's.
One attempt put too many marks above the letters, and it was hard
to read/chant.  There was a similar type of problem with another
version which was being developed at a similar time.  The only one
which received universal acceptance was the Tiberian system of Ben
Asher and family, because it was the easiest to read and chant.  It
reminds me of the Beta/VHS dispute in video tape; since I am typing
at a Mac I hope the parallel doesn't also extend too far into the
Mac/Windows conflict.  Seriously, for more info, read the article
on the "Masorah" in the extra volume at the end of the Encyclopedia
Judaica - it will tell you more than you ever wanted to know!  The
issue of which system of trope succeeded is not involved with the
issue of a separate "EMeT" trope; all three competing systems seem
to have had a separate "EMeT" trope, if I remember correctly.

                                                            Neil S.